Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, March 12, 1992 TAG: 9203120449
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ANNE B. KINCAID
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
I AM HERE today speaking against this bill, not to debate abortion or to ask that protesters blocking access to abortion clinics be spared punishment.
Abortion is legal. The people who are momentarily keeping others and their unborn babies from entering the clinic are breaking the law, and that incurs punishment.
I just want you to know who these lawbreakers are; what motivates them; who this bill affects.
Please put aside for a moment whether you agree or disagree with the message that is the target of this bill.
History tells its story: What is happening here is not without precedent. Throughout history similar human-rights struggles have existed, dividing a nation. There was equally the division as there is today in the mid-1800s over whether a certain class of humans should have basic human rights - they were denied personhood and full protection under the law because of the color of their skin.
It was legal to view that human being as personal property, a non-person, who could be bought, sold, or killed by his "owner." Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court itself had ruled that these human beings were not "persons" and were without rights of their own.
Who were the "lawbreakers"? People with compassion for this black human being. They were the lawbreakers, risking punishment daily and repeatedly in their "Operation Rescue" - the underground railroad.
Slavery was legal. Protecting and saving lives of slaves by rescuing them was illegal.
In Europe in the '30s and '40s, it was legal to view a class of humans as sub-human, parasites, people unworthy of protection.
Who were the "lawbreakers"? People with compassion for the Jewish human being. They were the lawbreakers, risking punishment daily and repeatedly in their "Operation Rescue" - the attics, crawl spaces, hiding places.
Termination facilities for the unwanted "subhumans" were legal. Protecting and saving lives of Jewish people by hiding and rescuing them was illegal.
It is legal today to view another class of humans (unborn human children) as non-persons, personal property, parasites, unwanted and unworthy of protection.
Who are the "lawbreakers" that this bill punishes? People with compassion, who believe what civilized nations have believed for thousands of years, that the unborn are human beings, made in the very image of God. They are the "lawbreakers," risking punishment daily, weekly, and repeatedly in their "Operation Rescue" - blocking abortion-clinic entrances.
Abortion is legal. Protecting and saving lives of the unborn by rescuing them is illegal!
Who are these people?
The "lawbreakers" in the 1800s, the '40s, and now the '90s all have the same compassion and motivation: to protect . . . to harbor . . . to save.
They share the same disdain for discrimination, once based on skin color, then religion or race, and now in the case of the defenseless unborn, their size and where they reside.
The people today, the "lawbreakers," laying down their lives, their wealth, their own liberties, are fully aware that what they are doing in blocking clinics is illegal.
They expect punishment: They pay their fines, they go to jail, they do punitive community service willingly and without complaint - they take the consequences of their actions.
They are being punished, they are going to jail for their illegal protest. The question before you today: Is this activity a felony? These people with compassion are not terrorists, not violent, not armed. They would never use means that would injure or harm women coming to a clinic, for these women are with child.
Del. Byrne refers to their activity as a "reign of terror" by "violent anti-choice cult extremists." Such overly exaggerated rhetoric sensationalizes and totally misrepresents the real people whom this bill will punish.
Of course, if the peaceful method of protest - blocking clinics - ever demonstrates any form of assault or violence, then the existing laws provide for felony convictions - and rightly so!
In other words, the laws now work. If it's not broken, what are we trying to fix? More importantly, why? Making this activity a felony is a blatant attempt to squelch one political message. This is a non-content-neutral bill. It sets a dangerous new precedent.
Anne B. Kincaid of Richmond is a lobbyist for the Family Foundation, a statewide organization.
by CNB