The voice of the liberal, pro-feminist anti-abortionists is lost' in the debate

As the abortion debate heats up in response to legal and political maneuvering, media coverage is again -- or should I say still -- presenting stories in terms of "liberal" pro-choicers and "conservative" (or even "right-wing") pro-lifers.

Lost on the mainstream media is the fact that there exists a large number of liberal, even leftist, pro-feminist activists and organizations opposed to non-therapeutic abortion.

In fact, so inexcusably poor has media coverage been, the existence of a large, well-organized leftist pro-life movement probably would be a surprise to many activists on both sides of the issue.

The reasons for the slanted coverage are all-too-human: Abortion is an issue which instills great passion; few of us outside Clarence Thomas have not formed an opinion on abortion, and this includes reporters.

According to an in-depth newspaper investigative series in 1990, the vast majority -- more than 80 percent -- of newspaper, television and radio reporters favor legalized abortion. With an almost equal number considering themselves "liberal" or "leftist," it is natural that reporters' perceptions of the abortion issue are likely to be skewed toward their own experiences.

But while the establishment left, such as it is represented by the Democratic Party and its allies, imposes abortion loyalty oaths and litmus tests, groups such as Feminists for Life (FFL), the Pro-Life Association of Gays and Lesbians, the Seamless Garment Network, and individuals such as author Ken Kesey and syndicated columnist Nat Hentoff, continue to speak out against abortion from an authentically leftist viewpoint.

This leftist opposition is based on stripping away the euphemisms and recognizing abortion as an act of violence, the taking of a life. As such, it is compatible with a philosophy which holds sacred all life, as manifested in the growing environmentalist and animal-rights movements of the left.

Pro-life leftists believe that a legally sanctioned killing, whether it be the execution of an adult criminal or an unwanted fetus, violates the tenets of liberation and freedom.

Leftist opposition to abortion recognizes that whenever the value of human life is lowered, there invariably are repercussions throughout society. The growing violence in our society, the increasing number of hate crimes, the wave of intolerance of gays and lesbians, and the seeming antipathy of many toward environmental concerns go hand in hand with society's devaluation of unborn human life.

If the media's silence on leftist pro-life activity and thought is a crime of omission, the establishment left's efforts are not so benign.

While many were shocked at the support of the American Civil Liberties Union of police abuse of pro-life protesters, numerous efforts by other supposedly liberal/leftist organizations to squelch dissent went mostly unnoticed: At a "Take Back the Night" anti-crime rally in Rochester, N.Y., last October, the National Organization for Women told the local chapter of the Feminists for Life (FFL) that it could not be a co-sponsor because of FFL's opposition to abortion. FFL marched anyway, 60 women strong.

Last year, the Minnesota Peace and Justice Coalition, in a closed meeting, expelled a local chapter of the Seamless Garment Network (which opposes all violence, including the death penalty, war, poverty and euthanasia).

Recently the liberal/left publication The Reader refused to run an ad from the FFL. The advertisement, which quoted early feminist opposition to abortion by leaders such as Matilda Gage, was refused on the grounds that "henceforth, advertising must reflect editorial views."

In all the above cases, the common tactic of the establishment left is to claim that pro-life leftists are not true leftists. In other words, they are excommunicated as heretics. What should be truly disturbing to all of us is this dogmatic approach shared by most members of the establishment left: One is a liberal or leftist based (at least partly) on one's position on abortion.

A truly intellectual approach would, of course, be the obverse: As a leftist, how does my value system prepare me to deal with the question of abortion?

Without such a non-dogmatic approach, we are susceptible to sociological schizophrenia, condemning the violence of rape, domestic violence, militarism and capital punishment on one hand while denying the violent nature of abortion on the other.

In the end, it is the establishment left which is resorting to the tactics of extremism: applying dogmatic loyalty test, employing exclusivity by branding all dissidents as disloyal or heretical, and using intimidation tactics to silence the opposition.

It is difficult to find anything much progressive about that.

Copyright 1992 The San Diego Union-Tribune