[Editor’s note. Last summer NRLC’s Andrew Bair published a story titled, “To abortion advocates, distributing fetal models is now ‘extreme.’” Ms. Terzo’s post expands on that by looking at similar reactions.]
The story was about the angry pro-choice response to a pro-life group distributing fetal models, like the one above, at a fair. According to Andrew Blair, the writer of the article:
“Samantha Gordon, director of public affairs for NARAL Pro-Choice America, told ABC News, ‘Watching the anti-choice movement attempt to engage the public by using extreme and unsettling tactics is nothing new.’”
Life-size models of unborn babies are powerful visual aids that can be held, touched and experienced in more ways than a simple two-dimensional drawing or picture. They have been displayed and distributed by pro-life organizations for many years. Children are often drawn to the doll like models, and it is a good opportunity to educate them. Such models are valuable pro-life tools.
But Samantha Gordon of NARAL Pro-Choice America was not the only one who expressed horror at being confronted with such models.
In 2003, Republican delegate Richard Black mailed models of unborn babies to politicians on both sides of the abortion debate. The models came with a card saying:
“This is the size and shape of an actual first-trimester baby. Abortionists kill most babies at this stage of development.”
The models depicted a developing child with little arms and legs, complete with fingers and toes, as is consistent with a first-trimester unborn baby at or around 10 weeks.
According to an article in The Virginian-Pilot [“Republican sends Senate members plastic fetus doll,” by Justin Bergman February 5, 2003]
“Senate Minority Leader Richard Saslaw of Fairfax County said [it] was one of the most inappropriate things he has seen in his 23 years in the Senate.
“’Quite frankly, the people who saw this were pretty repulsed by it,’ he said.”
What exactly is repulsive about the models? If you dressed them in baby clothes, they would be indistinguishable from children’s dolls that could be bought at Walmart or a toy store. What is repulsive, perhaps, is the prickling of the consciences of the pro-choicers who see them.
When politicians vote to promote the killing of unborn babies, or block laws that would protect them, coming face to face with what their victims look like can be “repulsive” to them. It is not hard to see why Senate Minority Leader Richard Saslaw finds the dolls “repulsive,” any more than it is hard to imagine why Samantha Gordon, who has dedicated her career to facilitating the deaths of unborn children, finds them “unsettling.”
Another lawmaker, Sen. Leslie Byrne, D-Fairfax County, said:
“It shocked me …It hurts the decorum of the General Assembly.”
Ah, decorum. Who would want to impose on the decorum of the general assembly with a little bit of reality?
Models of unborn babies are a powerful pro-life tool, and while the hearts of hardened, diehard pro-choicers are unlikely to be moved by them, they can be a powerful visual aid to help others see the reality of what abortion destroys.
Daniel Miller is responsible for nearly all of National Right to Life News' political writing.
With the election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency, Daniel Miller developed a deep obsession with U.S. politics that has never let go of the political scientist. Whether it's the election of Joe Biden, the midterm elections in Congress, the abortion rights debate in the Supreme Court or the mudslinging in the primaries - Daniel Miller is happy to stay up late for you.
Daniel was born and raised in New York. After living in China, working for a news agency and another stint at a major news network, he now lives in Arizona with his two daughters.
