A very scary Christmas.

I’m sure it was just lovely for two Planned Parenthood clinics in Albuquerque to be attacked on Christmas Day. One office’s roof was set afire and the other’s windows were broken into.
This is just weeks after a fire at another abortion clinic. There’s an ongoing investigation; let’s hope they find the culprits.
Check out Cecile Richards’ statement.

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

25 Comments

  1. ticky
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

    I got cheap birth control at one of the two PPs, and lived across the street from the other one for years.
    This makes me sick. Even more so is how the attacks are not front page news here in the city.
    Oh, Albuquerque. You could do better.

  2. Alias_Grace
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    This is crazy. At least it sounds like the attacks were ineffective, but still – the psychological effect on the women who need PP’s services and the people who work in those clinics is terrible.

  3. John in Nashville
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

    This is an act of domestic terrorism, pure and simple. Let’s watch, listen and see whether the president or any candidates for that office deign to comment.

  4. Meri
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    I live in NM, but am at my parents’ (not NM) for the holidays, so this is the first place I’ve heard the story. It’s somewhat frightening to know that whatever anti-choice group this is is escalating its violence. I hope that the perpetrators are caught before they can do something worse.

  5. Jovan1984
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

    John in Nashville, you took the words right out of my mouth.
    I hop that at least the White House condemns this terrorist act.
    A refusal to condemn the attacks on Planned Parenthood means that you support these terroristic acts.

  6. Kmari1222
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    I’m ashamed to live here. I saw a thirty second clip on the local news. and ticky, you’re right, how is this NOT on the front page? or even a major story?
    for christs sake, we have major stories on LIPO and new fuckin weight loss methods. what the hell. something is totally screwed up there.

  7. Posted December 27, 2007 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

    Another NM resident chiming in to say that the local news just assured me that this was entirely unconnected to the fire that gutted Dr. Curtis Boyd’s clinic at the beginning of this month. EVERYONE RELAX, it’s not like it’s the work of a committed terrorist organization dedicated to limiting the rights of American citizens. I mean, ’cause that would be newsworthy.
    You should see some of the noteworthy anti-choice coverage I dug up after the incident at Dr. Boyd’s. But who needs to dig it up when the local news tell me to not make weird, false connections and worry instead about the OMG PORNO FESTIVAL!!11 recently hosted by Albuquerque’s only independent theater and the feminist sex store in town. ‘Cause, you know. Priorities.

  8. Regan
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 10:01 pm | Permalink

    I just don’t understand how people can do things like that. How did none of them stop to think that what they did was wrong and illegal?
    How are women going to feel safe in those clinics with threat of another attack?

  9. Regan
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

    I just cannot understand how somebody could do something like that. Do they honestly not see that what they are doing is illegal and wrong?
    How are women supposed to feel safe going to a clinic that some nut is going to light on fire?

  10. Webbess
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

    “How are women supposed to feel safe going to a clinic that some nut is going to light on fire?”
    That’s the point Regan. That’s the point of terrorism, to terrorize. They’re trying to scare the patients and the doctors.
    I’m curious, how often do “mainstream” anti-abortion groups condemn these acts? Do they ever?

  11. Posted December 27, 2007 at 11:14 pm | Permalink

    I’m sure the war on Christofascism will be declared any day now.

  12. John in Nashville
    Posted December 27, 2007 at 11:37 pm | Permalink

    The New Mexico television news website linked in Vanessa’s article is reporting that two men have been arrested and charged with the December 6 fire at the other abortion clinic. One of the two reportedly told his roommate that he set the fire because his former girlfriend was scheduled to have an abortion at the clinic.
    I wish that the media would insist that candidates for federal office (especially the Republican presidential candidates) plainly state their views, not only on violence against abortion providers, but on federal policy toward all forms of birth control. Some media personnel will ask about whether Roe v. Wade should be overruled or abandoned, but I cannot recall any candidate for elective office being asked about whether (s)he regards Griswold v. Conneciticut as having been correctly decided.

  13. Liza
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 12:45 am | Permalink

    If someone torched a church it would be a hate crime. Yet this is nothing to people. I think this is not only domestic terrorism, but a hate crime. Let’s process it as such.

  14. oenophile
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 1:53 am | Permalink

    The link to the statement currently is directed towards a donation page for Planned Parenthood.
    I am glad that they at least chose to do this on a day that the clinics are not open – thankfully, no one is hurt. Property can be replaced; people can’t be.

    I just cannot understand how somebody could do something like that. Do they honestly not see that what they are doing is illegal and wrong?
    How are women supposed to feel safe going to a clinic that some nut is going to light on fire?

    To answer the rhetorical questions:
    1. Illegal, yes; wrong, probably not. That is the point of civil disobedience. I’m sure they see abortion as legal but horribly wrong.
    Jim Crow was legal but immoral; it was fought with illegal but not immoral means. That is how you make your point to get the laws changed to better align the moral with the legal. (I’m not talking about religious morality; more of a secular, human morality about what most sane people recognise as right and wrong.)

  15. A male
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 2:10 am | Permalink

    Pardon my lack of education, but I thought civil disobedience was supposed to be nonviolent. Also, not meant to inspire terror in their opponents.
    Yes, indeed, in addition to recognizing organizations that promote or support domestic terror as terrorist organizations, these political acts should also be recognized as hate crimes.
    I am glad some progress is being made by police on the earlier case. That man’s reasoning is despicable enough, despite not promoting some group’s cause. I hope he did not harm his former girlfriend to get that information out of her.

  16. JenLovesPonies
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 2:28 am | Permalink

    oenophile, are you really coming to a feminist website to compare burning a clinic roof (and therefore causing women to be unable to get the medical attention they need) to fighting Jim Crow laws? Really, are you really going there?
    Today I went to a clinic that provides abortions. I was there for other, equally important reasons, but that didn’t stop the protesters from trying to make me uncomfortable with a giant graphic sign, and with a lone protestor staring at my car and glaring at me from justslightlyoff the clinic land. These two idiots were making me very incomfortable, which was just fantastic because I was already nervous about my appointment and my job and a million other things. I briefly considered hitting them with my car, because I hate them and view their work to be immoral, and quite frankly those motherfuckers were upsetting and violating my right to medical care. And hey, its not immoral if no one dies, right? Just a peaceful protest that wouldn’t kill them, but might make a statement to other protestors to stay the fuck away from my clinic.
    Except… I didn’t hit them with my car, and they are free to go back tomorrow without fear. Unlike those women who need to go to those Planned Parenthoods in Albuquerque.

  17. A male
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 3:26 am | Permalink

    I believe part of the pro-life movement “putting their money where there mouth is” should include providing clinics funding for round the clock armed security, or any other measures clinics deem necessary. Off duty law enforcement would be ideal, as they could also handle simple harassment and violation of privacy complaints, as well as cite noise violations. Preventing attacks on and harassment of clinics, staff and visitors should be in the best interests of pro-life groups, to rid them of their terrorist label, and gain them more support. I guess they don’t see this.

  18. Jovan1984
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    I’m glad that police arrest someone in these cases.
    And yes I agree, Cognress needs to be in full session right now and pass a law defining attacks on Planned Parenthood clinics as hate crimes, because the crime is motivated by gender. Imagine how much video and ink there would be if a hospital like Aiken Regional Medical Centers was attacked and firebombed.
    These people who attacked PP are terrorists and every pro-life group should be deemed a terrorist organization.
    And speaking of anti-choice terrorists, vern Simon of Evans, Ga. is at it again.

  19. Posted December 28, 2007 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    yes, the Planned Parenthood link in the post says that all donations made to Planned Parenthood thru 12/31 will be matched. go now!

  20. oenophile
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

    These people who attacked PP are terrorists and every pro-life group should be deemed a terrorist organization.
    Way to demean terrorism, you turd.
    Seriously. Pro-lifers are terrorists? Those who want to stop people from dismembering human beings are terrorists? Maybe pro-choice groups – and abortionists – would fit that label, as their raison d’etre is killing people, but not those who respect the sanctity of life, whether or not it is convenient.
    The pro-choice position comes down to respecting life when convenient, which upends civilisation. We respect each other and our laws not when it is convenient, for if that were the case there would be no society, but when it is not convenient.
    Jen – you have no right to be comfortable nor free from other people’s opinions. If you are going there for other reasons, why not inform the people of that? “Hey, I’m a woman without the resources to go elsewhere for my gynaecological care, so back off.” Make them look bad, but don’t call them terrorists. If your ideas are worthwhile, they will win in the battle.

  21. A male
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

    “Pro-lifers are terrorists?”
    The ones who promote criminal acts, such as posting names, faces and addresses of doctors, then crossing off faces when they are murdered; or the ones who carry out murder and attempted murder with the assistance of others?
    Why yes, they are terrorists. Let’s try what I like to do, a thought experiment of role reversal. What would you call it if feminists openly and unapologetically shot prominent right to lifers such as Republican politicians, with the aid of other feminists and with the backing of “churches” of feminism (Ms. Magazine?), while a feminist website crossed their names off a wanted list? All in the name of countless women who would die and be maimed from illegal abortions, of course – they are saving women’s lives and sparing their loved ones from tragedy and psychological trauma! What if feminists set fire to and vandalized pro-life churches? The public and pro-lifers would be even more incensed against feminism, no?
    I do not believe you will comprehend this. You will certainly not see the hypocrisy, “Turd.”
    “their raison d’etre is killing people”
    I have yet to see legal support of this concept of “killing people,” or even support in the Bible. Be so kind as to point it out to us.

  22. Kmari1222
    Posted December 28, 2007 at 11:11 pm | Permalink

    um..
    correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve never heard of pro-choicers setting fire to clinics or killing people because they didn’t get an abortion.
    I hear a lot more cases of these pro ‘lifers’ who burn down clinics, harass women, and murder doctors.
    That says something to me.

  23. Regan
    Posted December 29, 2007 at 12:59 am | Permalink

    Yeah…obviously nobody thinks that every pro-lifer is a terrorist. I know quite a few who have never used scare tactics, have never threatened to use violence, or have never actually resorted to violence. However, those who do any of the aforementioned things really are terrorists. How can setting a roof on fire to incite fear not be terrorism?
    And oenophile, civil disobedience is supposed to be non-violent. Nobody ever said it was patriotic or okay to burn down buildings because you don’t like what happens in them. That to me is wrong.
    Thankfully, nobody was in the building so nobody was harmed (but what if there was somebody in there for whatever reason?!). However, I will never understand how somebody could think this was okay. I understand the pro-life argument, and while I don’t agree with it or respect it politically, I can at least respect it personally. But when somebody takes anything too far, it is a very bad thing. I can’t believe that you would justify this kind of violence.
    And just a question, and you don’t have to answer, but I do feel it is extremely relevant because women’s health care is a very private and sensitive (at least for me) issue: Are you a man?

  24. sgzax
    Posted December 29, 2007 at 3:11 am | Permalink

    Every sentence in oenophile’s post is a misrepresentation or a flat-out lie, which is pretty much par for the course on the anti-choice side. They lie to others, they lie to themselves. You can’t reason with them, and they won’t use their brains for much more than rationalizing their own bad logic. Why must we keep fighting with liars and charlatans for basic rights? It’s horrifying and frustrating at the same time. Like drowning in quicksand.

  25. Posted January 2, 2008 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

    oenophile’s whole load of poo is almost a spoof of an ignorant pro-lifer. i understand why some people are pro-life, but those are the ones who at least recognize that women getting abortions are not killers. if men had to carry babies, there would be abortion clinics like starbucks. because when it comes to having the actual choice in front of you, there really is a lot more to think of than some inflexible dogmatic rhetoric.
    anyway, it’s just so insane that these (presumably christian) people woke up on christmas day and decided to spend it endangering their whole community. i hope they pay every nickel and dime for restoration and then some.

Feministing In Your Inbox

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

188 queries. 0.953 seconds