Pro-life groups adjust tactics in challenging electoral panorama
Voting booths on Election Day. / Credit: vesperstock/Shutterstock Ann Arbor, Michigan, Sep 16, 2024 / 07:00 am (CNA).
The aggressive advocacy of abortion by Democratic Party candidates up and down the ballot this year, coupled with abortion ballot measures in 10 states, is causing pro-life groups across the political spectrum to adjust their tactics as well as expand collaborative efforts.
At the state level throughout the country, “there are things that we are excited about and others that are very troubling,” said Americans United for Life (AUL) Chief Executive Officer John Mize in an interview with CNA.
“What we find most troubling are the ballot initiatives that are very deceptive by pro-abortion forces that have caused utter confusion in a vast swath of the American public,” Mize indicated.
In view of the current electoral panorama, Mize said his nonpartisan organization is stepping up its partnerships with other groups as part of their common objective to defend preborn lives and defeat pro-abortion measures. For example, he said, AUL has expanded its collaborative efforts with organizations such as CareNet, Heartbeat, Lifeline, and the Vitae Foundation.
Given the magnitude of the challenge the pro-life movement faces this year, National Right to Life (NRL) spokesperson Laura Echevarría said her group also welcomes increased collaborative efforts.
“We tend to be very accepting of other groups that want to work with us on issues. And we look at that commonality and we don’t get into other issues,” Echevarría observed.
On the left, Democrats for Life and Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU) are two groups that align with most aspects of the Democratic Party’s policy agenda yet are vociferously challenging its pro-abortion stance.
PAUU executive director Caroline Taylor Smith, a Catholic who also volunteers for Democrats for Life, told CNA her pro-life principles are compatible with progressivism. She criticized both the Democratic and Republican parties for their respective stances on abortion.
“I am very left-leaning and progressive and agree with every progressive value except for abortion. I condemn the idea that progressives have to support child-killing. My worldview is that I’m against violence and oppression against all people. I support liberation for all people. Embryos are preborn people that should be free from violence,” she said.
Smith said that an example of PAAU’s pro-life commitment was set by PAAU activist Lauren Handy, 30, who was convicted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act for occupying the Surgi-Clinic abortuary in Washington, D.C. Handy, who identifies as a “queer Catholic,” is now serving a four-year sentence.
Allied organizations identified by PAUU’s Smith also include Pro-Life San Francisco and Rehumanize International.
Despite their common goals, Mize acknowledged, the groups take different approaches. For example, Mize said he is skeptical about “overly aggressive tactics” such as displaying photos of aborted babies or screaming over bullhorns at women. Such tactics, he said, “add to the trauma that a woman feels when she is making a very difficult and complex decision. There’s a better way. And that is to be incremental and focused on providing alternative options to women.”
In addition, while Mize said ALU is not opposed to PAAU’s work, he said ALU is “more apt to partner with an organization like Democrats for Life, who share a lot of the same values we do in terms of the appropriate process to advance the pro-life cause.” There are also organizations like Secular Pro-Life, Mize added.
“Unfortunately, this has become far too political and it’s really not,” Mize maintains. “It’s a moral issue that isn’t defined by the politics of the party. It’s defined by the morality and character of the person.”
Echevarría and Mize agreed that the challenges for all pro-life organizations are only multiplying. Intense political battles, both said, lie in state legislatures and ballot initiatives that threaten to overturn hard-fought limitations on abortion, such as requirements for parental notification and consent.
