Secular Pro-Life
  • Home
  • About
    • Meet The Team
    • Mission and Vision
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Stances
      • Abortion
      • Religion
      • Contraception
      • The Rape Exception
    • Terms and Conditions
      • Opt-out preferences
  • Content
    • Index
    • Blog
    • Presentations
      • A Secular Case Against Abortion
      • Building Bridges
      • Deconstructing Three Pro-Choice Myths
      • Overlooked Findings of the Turnaway Study
    • Research
      • Abortion Law and Abortion Rates
      • Abortion Law and Pregnancy Rates
      • Later Abortion
      • Embryonic Hearts
    • Collections
      • Becoming Pro-Life
      • They can hear you
      • Parents can hear you
      • Our children’s heartbeats
      • Ask An Atheist
      • LGBTQ and Pro-Life
      • Fixed that meme for you
      • For the biology textbook tells me so
    • Print Materials
      • 100 Pro-Life Sign Ideas
      • Overview of SPL
      • 3 Reasons to tell people you’re pro-life
      • How to talk (not fight) about abortion
      • Bridges PRC Curriculum
      • Fetal Remains Disposition Protocol
      • FAQ handout
      • Presentations overview card
    • Store
  • Contact
  • Get Involved
    • Why support SPL?
    • Donor Opportunities
    • Volunteer Opportunities
    • Volunteer Survey
    • More Surveys
      • Why do you support SPL?
      • Best and Worst Abortion Arguments
      • “Ask An Atheist” Interview
      • Non-Traditional Pro-Life Survey
      • LGBT Pro-Life Survey
      • Parents experiences with prenatal screening
      • Your experiences with adoption
      • Your experiences with processing abortion
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

The clarity of the pro-life position

February 28, 2017/0 Comments/in Uncategorized /by Kelsey Hazzard



[Today’s guest post by Lucy Watson is part of our paid blogging program.]

Read the following statements. There’ll be a pop quiz afterward:
“I think it’s safe to say that the entire abortion industry is based on a lie.”
“I’m dedicated to spreading the truth about preserving the dignity of all human life.”
“We live in a society today where these children can be wanted children. Even if you don’t want to keep this child after you’ve had it, there are plenty of young couples out there who want children.”

Who made these statements? (This is a secular pro-life blog. Stick with me for a minute.)
A. Michelle Bachmann
B. Phyllis Schlafly
C. Mother Teresa

The answer is … none of the above. I know — that wasn’t one of the choices. If it had been, you’d have figured it out immediately, and what fun would that be? The correct answer is Norma McCorvey. You may know her better as Jane. Jane Roe. As in Roe v. Wade. The plaintiff in this landmark case died last Saturday at the age of 69.

Norma led a rough life marred by abandonment (her father), alcoholism (her mother and herself), physical and sexual abuse (family members and her husband), and run-ins with the law. The child whom she sought to abort when lawyers Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington were looking for a test case to challenge Texas’s anti-abortion law was actually her 3rd child; she had already given birth to 2, one of whom she raised and the other whom she placed for adoption. Roe v. Wade took 3 years to reach the Supreme Court, during which time Norma did not have an abortion but instead gave birth to her 3rd child and placed her for adoption. After that, Norma spent 20 years working at an abortion clinic.

And then “Jane Roe” changed her mind about abortion. Here’s what happened when she saw a poster depicting the stages of fetal development:

The progression was so obvious; the eyes were so sweet. It hurt my heart just looking at them. I ran outside and finally it dawned on me. ‘Norma,’ I said to myself, ‘They’re right.’ I’d worked with pregnant women for years. I’d been through 3 pregnancies and deliveries myself. I should’ve known. Yet something in that poster made me lose my breath. I kept seeing the picture of that tiny 10-week-old embryo, and I said to myself, ‘That’s a baby!’ It’s as if blinders just fell off my eyes and I suddenly understood the truth – ‘That’s a baby!’ I felt crushed under the truth of this realization. I had to face up to the awful reality. Abortion wasn’t about ‘products of conception.’ It wasn’t about ‘missed periods.’ It was about children being killed in their mother’s wombs. All those years I was wrong. Signing that affidavit [in Roe], I was wrong. Working in an abortion clinic, I was wrong. No more of this 1st trimester, 2nd trimester, 3rd trimester stuff. Abortion, at any point, was wrong. It was so clear. Painfully clear.

The truth changes minds, hearts, lives. Pro-life advocate Dr. Alveda King (niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.), who had 2 abortions and attempted a 3rd, knows this. Former abortionists Drs. Anthony Levatino and Yvonne Moore know it. Former abortion clinic workers Carol Everett and Abby Johnson know it. The late judge Robert Bork knew it (he initially opposed Roe on legal grounds; his later opposition was on the basis of research on fetal pain).The late Dr. Bernard Nathanson — “the abortion doctor who changed his mind” — knew it. And Norma McCorvey, once at the center of it all, finally knew it, too.

Where are those who converted the other way? Where are those who believed in the inalienable right to life and the humanity of the unborn but then decided it really was just a “mass of dependent protoplasm,” after all? Where are those who decided someone had it backwards? — that it was really a choice, not a child? Is it even possible to un-believe that the unborn deserve protection and have a right to live? There are politicians who have changed their position on abortion, going from pro-life to pro-choice-to-abort. But politicians being, well, political, one never knows if their previous pro-life stance was authentic, if their current pro-choice stance is the real deal, or if in fact they have any conviction at all about it.

The people who converted from pro-choice to pro-life are not muzzled by any such ambiguity. They know what is true and real and right — because, in the words of Norma McCorvey, it is so clear.

Related Posts

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://secularprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/SecularProlife2.png 0 0 Kelsey Hazzard https://secularprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/SecularProlife2.png Kelsey Hazzard2017-02-28 12:27:002021-11-08 12:21:00The clarity of the pro-life position
0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow via Email

* indicates required

Categories

  • Ableism
  • Abortion pills
  • Administrative
  • Adoption & Foster Care
  • Biology
  • Bodily Rights
  • Dialogue strategy
  • en español
  • Later Abortion
  • Legislation, laws, & court cases
  • Miscarriage & Pregnancy Loss
  • Personhood
  • Philosophy
  • Pro-Life Demographics
  • Rape Exception
  • Religion
  • Research
  • Speeches, Discussions, Presentations
  • SPL Emails
  • They Can Hear You
  • Top SPL Articles
  • Top SPL Graphics
  • Uncategorized
  • We Asked You Answered
  • Year In Review
  • Your Stories

Archive

It’s crucial that we demonstrate that anyone can–and everyone should–oppose abortion. Thanks to you, we are working to change minds, transform our culture, and protect our prenatal children. Every donation supports our ability to provide nonsectarian, nonpartisan arguments against abortion. Read more details here. Please donate today.

DONATE
SUBSCRIBE
© Copyright 2025 Secular Pro-Life. All rights reserved. Website Design by TandarichGroup

Related Posts

Join us in Orlando for the Pro-Life Women’s Conference Tomorrow is Pro-Life Chalk Day!
Scroll to top
Manage Consent

To provide the best experience, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.

Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}

Subscribe for Livestream Updates and More

* indicates required

Interests

Want to receive our email newsletter?

We’d be happy to keep in touch. Subscribe for access to our newsletter and other updates.