The pro-life prince charming has arrived.

You have got to see this.
Jill at Feministe uncovered one of the eeriest (and most hilarious) anti-choice projects I’ve encountered, and it’s called “Grooms for Life.â€? It essentially pairs single pregnant women with anti-choice bachelors who are willing to marry them and be their baby’s daddy. After all, women wouldn’t have abortions if men were willing to marry them! My favorite line:

“female pro-lifers and married men could spend their time recruiting bachelors to their cause so that the screaming demonstrators outside abortion clinics would soon be replaced by swains in bow ties, holding rings and serenading the pregnant women.�

Not too creepy.
The one thing I do give these crazies props for is the upfront “we don’t care who you marry� attitude that only exposes them for who they really are.

and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Kris
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    Wouldn’t it make more sense to line up prospective adoptive parents who would be willing to pay all costs for prenatal care and the birth? That might make the difference for women who don’t want to abort but feel they can’t afford to carry the baby, just to give them one more choice.
    …oh, wait, that presupposes that they want to make sense.

  2. azgoddess
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    this is an interesting approach to a complicated problem.
    i have a few questions for the ‘genius’ that thought this one up – what’s to guarantee that the grooms are really for life? what’s to guarantee that the relationship will be a healthy enough one to not totally screw up the child(ren)? (serial killers and mass murders come to mind right now)
    i prefer the universal belief that the soul enters the body with ‘the breath of life’ (at birth)- try googling that term and you will see what i mean

  3. Amy Guth
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

    Great blog. Keep up the great work.

  4. Kyra
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    Heeeere pedophile, pedophile, pedophile!

  5. Posted June 30, 2006 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

    figure out the quality of the men they could get to do this and just try not to feel a little pity.

  6. Sylke
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    Yes, I see lots of ex-cons lining up in tuxes to “woo” the expecting ladies. How romantic.
    It makes on understand the lure of the knitting needle.

  7. EG
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

    Right. Because if I found out that I was unexpectedly pregnant, the only thing that could make my date worse would be being harrassed by a bunch of right-wing “suitors.” Thanks.

  8. EG
    Posted June 30, 2006 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    Sorry, Freudian slip there. That should have been “the only thing that could make my day worse.”

  9. dpmaine
    Posted July 1, 2006 at 1:33 am | Permalink

    I think that “uncovered” is a strong word. It looks from the article that is is just a fantasy proposal from some author out there.
    The group doesn’t exist, correct?

  10. Posted July 1, 2006 at 6:15 am | Permalink

    If it weren’t for the faunt aura of prostitution, of being a “kept” woman, then I’d have no serious problem with this. It beats trying to destroy women’s lives the old fashioned way, which is what the anti- movement is generally in the business of doing.

  11. EG
    Posted July 1, 2006 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

    But that aura of prostitution is exactly what this whole idea is about–otherwise, the groups would be raising money to give to the women directly, or agitating for social change that would provide women with a living wage, etc. But it’s about keeping power–and money is power–out of the hands of women. It’s about destroying women’s lives the real old-fashioned way: by pushing them to marry strange men who don’t care about them at all, but see them only as a means to an end. The only “nice” thing about this idea is that no sane woman would actually marry a stranger who only wants to marry her to prevent her from having an abortion…right?
    You know what else is vile about this idea? It completely overlooks the fact that many women who have abortions are already married, or are single and have life plans that would, regardless of marital status, be destroyed by being forced to endure pregnancy and childbirth. It’s like a policy based on right-wing ideology about who has abortions and why, rather than on the real world.

  12. YFB
    Posted July 3, 2006 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    i can’t help but laugh at this line:
    “Additionally, most women are pro-choice and, therefore, will have no incentive to abandon their current practice (whether celibacy, lesbianism, or contraception) in hopes of marrying a pro-lifer.”
    as though lesbianism is a practice that one could just “abandon” — please!

  13. AndYnot?
    Posted July 6, 2006 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    Was it George Carlin or Steve Martin or Andrew Dice Clay who once made a joke about going to abortion clinics to meet women?
    Must have been onto something, I guess…

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

170 queries. 0.739 seconds