Rachel Maddow and Frank Schaeffer on Anti-Choice Terrorism

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

via Jill.

Join the Conversation


    I’m devastated that the clinic was shut down. WTF. There really should be a law passed to make it ILLEGAL to harrass abortion providers.

  • http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/violence/FACE_act.html spiral.of.life

    There is to some degree- the FACE Act:
    Problem is, it only covers the more physical/extreme stuff, and the people willing to go to that level seem to think themselves justified or as martyrs.

  • spiral.of.life
  • spiral.of.life

    Oops. Link:
    FACE Act

  • MLEmac28

    Well, stalking, vandalism, etc. are already illegal. Protesting an abortion clinic, while deplorable to many of us, is protected under the first amendment.

  • kushyhoney

    Well, it’s all a matter of degree. At some point it does become harassment at the very least. No one has the right to not be offended. We do have rights when there is a legitimate threat to our life or property. Stay strong.

  • http://www.barf.org/ Sabina Kneisly

    Look, I know this clip is making it’s way around the web, but Franky/Frank Schaeffer is doing some rewriting of his personal history.
    In the clip, he says,
    “…dropped out mid 80’s”
    he elaborates later,
    “by the time I was getting out, in the mid 80’s and my last involvement, ah, with the pro-life movement in any sense in 1990 or so…”
    both of which are simply outright lies.
    In 1992, he spoke at one of the rallies during the “Missionaries to the Preborn’s” “siege” of Milwaukee. (Which included daytime ‘field trainings’/attempted shutdowns at area clinics and nighttime rallies/trainings.)
    My partner and I obtained a videotape copy of his ’92 remarks and have transcribed some of the pertinent portions (see our page at- http://www.barf.org/articles/0018/), including his explanation of how the compulsory pregnancy advocacy movement relies upon what he termed “a lunatic fringe,” or “a fanatical cutting edge” in order to be taken seriously.
    He went so far as to admit that the only reason any of the other forms of “work” they do matter is because they have a core of people willing to break the law (“willing to be arrested”.) To quote him from the tape-
    “And the fact that we get a hearing, the fact that anyone is interested in this issue, the fact that any newspaper or television coverage even by a biased media exists at all is because we are blessed in this movement to have a lunatic fringe. We are blessed in this movement to have a fanatical cutting edge like a flying wedge in an old football formation out ahead of the rest of us who not only keep the country’s attention pinned on this issue, uncomfortable, like a worm squirming on a hook, that is about the sense of it, but nevertheless, pinned on this issue.
    And the fact that those of us who find other ways of expressing our pro-life convictions, whether it is speaking, or writing, or making films, or picketing, or writing letters or running for office, or donating money, or volunteering for a crisis pregnancy hotline, our work only makes sense because of the people willing to be arrested, and I’ll tell you why. Because if abortion truly is murder, and no one is willing to get arrested to stop it, it gives the lie to our claim. If abortion is truly the taking of human life, and no one is willing to go out in the heat of the day and act as if that is more than an intellectual proposition, and actually behave as each one of us would confronted with the murder of a loved one who we knew, then our claims that this is a serious pivotal issue around which the fate of our nation will revolve sounds very hollow indeed.”
    Also see our article written about Schaeffer from 1998, “The extremist in Rutherford’s closet” (http://www.barf.org/articles/0015/) in which we pointed out that even in 1995, Schaeffer was still working with the Rutherford Institute.
    An interview with Schaeffer by John Whitehead (of the Rutherford Institute) appeared in the April 7th (2009) edition of “Oldspeak”-
    Also see my partner, Mike Doughney’s Daily Kos diary from last week, entitled “Frank Schaeffer is still an anti-abortion wingnut” http://www.barf.org/articles/0106/.
    Despite this latest media blitz running on the ‘changed’ meme, it’s critical to note, he is still opposed to abortion, and wants it more tightly regulated than under Roe.
    Frank Schaeffer is no friend to those supportive of genuine abortion access.
    This is merely an attempt at personal re-branding/remarketing.