Grand ZllurionJ peeks behi nd the curtai n of Pl anned Pmenthood exposi ng the l i es that

have made i t a “respectabl e” i nsti tuti on.
–R. C. Sproul , Presi dent, Li goni er Mi nktri es
I n the course of my research, I have found that the aborti on i ndustq+s ver y exi stence
depends on secrecy, decepti on, and dktorti on of i nformati on. For thi s very reason, I
strongl y recommend George Grant’s book, Grand I llusions, because i t provi des much
needed i nformati on that I ’m sure Pl anned Parenthood woul d rather no one knew!
– Frank E. Peretti , Author
Grant’s sol i d i nvesti gati ve journal km uncovers the myth of “choi ce” and the fraud that
i s Pl anned Parenthood. Thi s book demands a response.
– Mi chael Card, Recordi ng Arti st & Author
For those who care about fami l y and chi i dren, thk book i s a must. Pl anned Parenthood
i s a radi cal extremi st group funded wi th mi l hons of your tax dol l ars. Read thi s book!
Prepare to get educated about Pl anned Parenthood.
–Donal d E. Wi l dmon, Presi dent, Ameri can Fami l y Associ ati on.
I n Grand Zl l u.swns, George Grant speaks wi th the voi ce of reason and the voi ce of passi on.
Thk book i s a masterpi ece of meti cul ous reseaxch brought to l i fe by cl ear, vi vi d wri ti ng.
I t has punch! I bel i eve God has cal l ed George Grant to be a watchman at our gate.
–Patri ck Morl ey, Busi nessman, Author, Speaker
For more than forty years I have read the l i terature of Pl anned Parenthood, and i n the
l ast twenty years I have seen thei r operati ons i n ei ghty-four countri es. They are the
most wi cked organi zati on on earth, destroyi ng our youth, our faml i es, church, and so-
ci ety. That i s why George Grant’s Grand Zllurwn.r is must readi ng for anyone i nterested
i n the wel fare of the fami l y, the church and soci ety.
– Rev. Paul Marx, Presi dent, Human Li fe I nternati onal
George Grant i s ri ght- thk i s a wax. A war of words. Chui ce means categori cal sel fi sh-
ness. Fetus means a mass of dkposabl e ti ssue. And educati on means l earni ng how to l i ve
and act i n shamel ess i mmoral l y whi l e sufferi ng no consequences. What a grand i l l usi on.
When are we goi ng to wake up?
– Beverl y LaHaye, Presi dent, Concerned Women for Ameri ca
As a l egi sl ator, I have found Grand I lluswns to be an i nval uabl e resource. As a busi ness-
man, I have found i t a trusted gui de. As a parent, I have found i t a profound encour-
agement. And = a Chri sti an> I have found i t a powerful i nspi rati on. Very si tnPI Y)
Grand I llusions i s a cl assi c.
– Rep. Loui s Woodfl Jenki i s, Loui si ana House of Representati ves
~facts can make a di fference, thi s book shoul d put an end to the debate about the so-
ci al val ue of Pl anned Parenthood. George Grant makes a damni ng case agai nst thi s
benefi cent-soundi ng organi zati on whi ch i s, i ndeed, a cancer i n Ameri can soci ety.
Conni e Marshner, Commentator, Focus on The Fami l y, “Weekend”
When I read thi s book, I envi si oned Pl anned Parenthood as a l arge, I umq-i ous ocean
l i ner crui si ng the open seas. I saw the l eadershi p of Pl anned Parenthcmd on the deck,
smug and defi ant, smi l i ng and wavi ng to passi ng boats, confi dent that thei r shi p coul d
never be sunk. They fel t an i mpact, heard an expl osi on, but conti nued smi l i ng and
wavi ng, arrogantl y sel f-assured that i t was a mi nor probl em. Meanwhi l e; bel ow the
surface, the l ower decks were fi l l i ng wi th water, the engi ne room was on fi re, and the
shi p was i rreparabl y damaged-doomed to si nk. I t had been hi t by one bri l l i antl y
desi gned and perfectl y ai med torpedo - Grand I llusions. Read i t, prai se the Lord, and
pass the ammuni ti on.
– Randal l A. Terry, Host, Ranahl Tq Lioe
Pl anned Parenthood has enjoyed one of the l ongest fme ri des i n pol i ti cal hi story. Now,
George Grant, i n the tradi ti on of sol i d i nvesti gati ve reporti ng, punches thei r ti cket, ex-
posi ng the organi zati on’s agenda as anythi ng but the beni gn, responsi bl e movement i t
has portrayed i tsel f to be.
–Cal Thomas, Col umni st, Los Angel es Tr ees Syndi cate
George Grant i s a propheti c fi gure whose wi sdom and i nsi ght shi ne Me a kacon through
the contemporary fog of our cuhm, cal l i ng a generati on, drunk on the myth of Pl anned
Parenthood, back to sobri ety i n the truth of Gcd’s Word. Whi l e many have @i ed, de-
bated, and defended the truth, George Grant cal l s us to demonstrate i t. May the shocki ng
real i ty of Grand Mruwni di sturb us out of our compl acency to heed Grants cal l .
– Steve Camp, Recor &ng Ardst & Author
Geor ge Grant chroni cl es ,the Phumed Parenthood agenda of enti ci ng our ~outb i nto
‘safe sex” i n order to feed the cash regi sters of the l argest unregul ated l egal i qdustry i n
the worl d – the aborti on cl i ni cs. Harbored under the decepti on of ‘non-profi t: Pl anned
Parenthood conti nues to profi teer unchecked wi th our publ i c school system. As a former
aborti on provi der, I can attest to the accuracy of facts and recommend every truth.-seeki ng
ci ti zen read Grand I llmion.r.
–Carol Everett, Presi dent, Ll feNetwork
I n every generati on, i ndi vi dual s have ri sen to the chal l enge of speaki ng authori tati vel y
and pro-acti vel y to the cri ti cal i ssue of the day. I n our generati on, George Grant must
be numbered among them. Over the years George has consi stentl y demonstrated the
abi l i ty to research and communi cate troth, effecti vel y combati ng the grand i l l usi ons
perpetuated by groups rangi ng from Pl anned Parenthood to the pr omoteh of the
aborti on pi l l RU-486. Because hi s arguments are i mpeccabl e and hi s concl usi ons
commandi ng, I regul arl y use hi m as pri mary resource for creati ve thi nki ng and re-
dempti ve acti on.
–Davi d J. Gyertson, Ph. D., Presi dent, Regent Uni versi ty
We have wai ted a l ong ti me for a documented, i n-depth expos6 such as thi s.
–J. C. Wi l l ke, M. D., Presi dent, Li fe I ssues I nsti tute
Thousands of devastated post-aborti on women have seen, too l ate, beyond the i l l usi on
to the del usi on. Thank God for George Grant, who speaks the truth, the whol e truth,
and nothi i g but the truth regardi ng the powerful but perverse aborti on movement.
– Pam Koerbel , Di rector, Post Aborti on Mi ni stri es
George Grant’s Grand I llu.rwns presents an ai r-ti ght hi stori cal case agai nst the good i n-
tenti ons of Margaret Sanger and her associ ates when they founded Pl anned Parent-
hood. Thei r raci st, Darwi ni an strategy was adopted as publ i c pol i cy i n Nazi Germany,
l eadi ng to a publ i c rel ati ons bl ackout of the past on the part of todays Pl anned Parent-
hood movement. Thi s i s the offense of Grand I l l usi ons i n thei r eyes: the book has pene-
trated thi s cal cul ati ng, systemati c hi stori cal bl ackout.
– Gary North, Ph. D., Hi stori an and Economi st
Pro-l i fe peopl e around the worl d owe a debt of grati tude to George Grant for reveal i ng
the real i ty behi nd the publ i c facade of Pl anned Parenthood. Grand Zl l uri ons shoul d be a
key resource for everyone who works i n or supports the pro-l i fe movement.
–Col l een Parro, Di rector, Republ i can Nati onal Coal i ti on for Li fe
A few peopl e i n l i fe have i mportant thi ngs to say, but bore you to death sayi ng them.
Many other fol ks are el oquent, but have nothhg to tel l you. I n thi s book of George
Grant’s – as al ways i s the case wi th hi s wri ti ng– you get the best of both worl ds.
–Joel Bel z, Publ i sher, Wwld Magazi ne
Soci ety has i ndoctri nated today’s Chri sti an to bel i eve that i t i s i mpol i te to bri ng the
l essons we l earn i n church on Sunday back to the communi ty wi th us on Monday.
Pl anned Parenthood has been a pri mary benefi ci ary of that brai nwashi ng, and our
chi l dren have been the vi cti ms. Grand I hsi otu peel s back the gl ossy cover-up and chal -
l enges us to recl ai m the moral educati on of our fami l i es to the ul ti mate benefi t of the
very soci ety whi ch has si l enced us for so l ong.
– Mrs. Mary Ann Dacey, Executi ve Di rector,
Nati onal Organi zati on of Epi scopal i ans For Li fe (NOEL)
You don’t real l y know the depths of the depravi ty of Pl anned Parenthood unl ess you
have read George Grant’s Grand I llzMwns. Many peopl e have wri tten about thi s evi l em-
pi re, but no one has done a better job of reveal i ng the nature of Pl anned Parenthood.
– Bi l l Pri ce, Presi dent, Texans Uni ted For Li fe
Often l ost i n the emoti onal debate over aborti on i s the i ssue of federaJ fundi ng of pro-
aborti on groups l i ke Pl anned Parenthood. After readi ng Grand I Uusiom, even sup-
porters of the “ri ght to choose” shoul d bel i eve i n l etti ng taxpayers choose not to have
thei r money underwri te Pl anned Parenthood’s woul d-be soci al engi neers.
– Doug Bandow, Col umni st, Copl ey News Ser vi ce
T%mned Parenthood” i s such a soothi i g phrase – unti l you di scover that the pl qnners
and the parents are two di l kmt sets of peopl e. George Grant abl y exposes the chi l l i ng
agenda our tax money i s subsi di zi ng.
–Joseph Sobran, l %s Nai i onal Rsvizw
Words l i ke soci al pl anni ng and soci al engi neeri ng are especi al l y fri ghteni ng to the
el derl y, the poor, and those wi th di sabi l i ti es. And el i mi nati ng the ‘defecti ve” di d not
di sappear after post-war Germany – George Grant demonstrates that Pl anned Parent-
hood i s pl ayi ng a cruci al rol e i n presemi ng that perni ci ous soci al pol i cy. Anyone wi th a
di sabi l i ty or over the age of 65, beware!
–Joni Eareckson Tda, Chri sti an I nsti tute on Di sabi l i ty
Gmn~s book gi ves excel l ent documentati on about Pl anned Paenthood’s hi dden “pl an” for
Bl ack Gencci de. These shocki ng facts wi l l especi al l y sti r bl acks, Jews, and other mi nori ti es
to real i ze that our very survi val depends upon us taki ng a stand for ri ghteousness.
–Rev. Dr. E. Jean Thompson, Founder and Presi dent,
I nternati onal Bl ack Women’s Network
A careful readi ng of Grand Zllu.sioru will reveal the tragi c pl ans and..xdi ci es of Pl anned
Parenthood. I t i s but symptomati c of a grave probl em i n our soci ety today. However, i t
i s not tb probl em. The real probl em i s an i mpotent and apatheti c church. I t i s the task
of the church to throw the searchl i ght of truth upon evi l and expose i t. Sadl y, for years,
we have not done so. I t i s my prayer that thk book wi l l open the door of understandi ng
concerni ng thi s organi zati on and bri ng to an end the “free ri de” we have gi ven them.
–Dr. James Draper, Presi dent, The Bapti st Sunday School Board
George Grant has done i t agai n. He has wri tten a compel l i ng and deci si ve anal ysi s of
one of our most di tl kul t soci al di l emmas — and he has done i t wi th styl e and grace. Thi s
book i s certai nl y must readi ng for every concerned Chri sti an today.
–D. James Kennedy, Ph. D., Seni or Mi ni ster, Coral Ri dge Presbyteri an Church
Thi s book i s fi l l ed wi th the fi re of the Lord as i t l i ves i n George Grant. Hi s expos~ of
Pl anned Parenthood i s the ki nd of h~tori cal l y i nformed wri ti ng whi ch our ti mes de-
mand. Our churches and our l eaders desperatel y need to be prepared for the storms
ahead. Thi s book wi l l i nform and chal l enge, feedi ng a Godl y vi si on for the church’s
gl ori ous future.
– Rev. Don Fi nto, Bel mont Church, Nashvi l l e, Tennessee
There are two great hol ocausts i n our day: that of 35,000 peopl e dyi ng every day of
hunger, and that of pre-born chi i dren dyi ng i n the Uni ted States and around the worl d
from aborti on. No one has done more to expose the decei tful ness of Pl anned Parent-
hood’s contri buti on to thi s genoci de of the pre-bom than George Grant i n hi s book
Grand I &siom.
– Darrow Mi l l er, Executi ve Vi ce Presi dent, Food for the Hungry
Karl Marx sai d, ‘Destroy the heri tage of a peopl e and they can easi l y be persuaded.’
George Grant has shown that si nce i ts i ncepti on, Pl anned Parenthood has been bent on
severi ng the spi ri tual heri tage of Aneri can fami l i es, the anchor chai n of our soci ety. He
has caught Pl anned Parenthood wi th i ts hand i n the cooki e jar of Ameri can phdan-
thropy, Thanks to Mr. Grant, the Nati onal Legal Foundati on has the r efer ence sour ce
to hel p cl ose the l i d on the cooki e jar, combat Pl anned Parenthood’s strategi es, and en-
sure that Ameri ca’s spi ri tual anchor wi l l hol d.
– Dr. Robert K. Skol rood, Executi ve Di rector &
General Counsel , The Nati onal Legal Foundati on
As a cl ergyman i n a mai nl i ne denomi nati on, I was shocked to fi nd out so many di s-
turbhg, wel l documented facts about Pl anned Parenthood whi ch were contrary to al l
that we have been l ed to bel i eve. George Grant has succeeded i n not onl y exposi ng the
bl g busi ness of Pl anned Parenthood but al so i n gi vi ng sound advi ce on how to combat
thi s “anti -choi ce” juggernaut.
– Rev. Roger Gri st, St. John’s Epi scopal Church
George Grant’s Grand I llusiozr i s one of the most outstandi ng studi es of the true and hi d-
den agenda of Pl anned Parenthood. I t i s must readi ng for al l those who are concerned
wi th protecti ng unborn l i fe.
– Ral ph E. Reed, Jr., Executi ve Di rector, Chri sti an Coal i ti on
Grand I llusions is good because i t shatters the i l l usi on that has been crafti l y crafted by
those wi th an anti -fami l y agenda. But Grand I llusions is grand because i t stretches us to
thi i k and act Bi bl i cal l y. George Grant exposes the enemy’s l i e, exal ts God’s truth, and
exhorts the Chri sti an to acti on.
– Susan Hunt, Consul tant to Wbnm i n th Church, Presbyteri an Church i n Ameri ca
Beware of thi s book! George Grant’s comprehensi ve research, gut-wrenchhg anec-
dotes, and forcefi d reasoni ng combi ne to serve up a stunni ngl y compel l i ng book. Grand
Zl l uri ons wi l l i nform and anger you regardi ng Pl anned Parenthood’s hi story, operati ng
methods, and objecti ves — and just may make you i nto an acti vi st! Al l thi s wi th Grant’s
predi ctabl y trenchant l ogi c and el evati ng styl e.
– Cal vi n W. Edwards, Executi ve Vi ce-Presi dent, Wal k Thru the Bi bl e Mi ni stri es
I wi sh that every mother and father who are consi deri ng an aborti on coul d read thi s
book before they make that fi nal deci si on. Grand I llwion exposes the real truth and
trauma that women go through and l i ve wi th for years.
- Luci Freed, Executi ve Di rector, Nashvi l l e Cri si s Pregnancy Center
Perhaps a better name for Pl anned Parenthood woul d be Pl anned Decepti on. George
Grant reveal s the shocki ng truth about the true agenda of Pl anned Parenthood. I chal -
l enge every Ameri can to read thk book and l et these wel l -documented facts reveal the
greatest brai nwashi ng job that has ever been done on Ameri can soci ety.
– Nancy Al corn, Presi dent, Mercy Mi ni stri es of Ameri ca
George Grant i s masterful i n exposi ng the facade of Pl anned Parenthood. Grand M&m
tel l s i t l i ke i t i s and educates the publ i c about the nati on’s number one aborti on provi der.
–Thomas A. Gl essner, J. D., Past Presi dent, The Chri sti an Acti on Counci l
Thi s i s an i nfuri ati ng book, and i t i s hi gh ti me Ameri cans were i nfunated~ Pl anned
Parenthood woul dn’t recei ve another ni ckel from the taxpayers– i ndeed, woul dn’t l ast
another day — i f voters knew what George Grant reveal s i n Gmnd Zllusims.
– Davi d A. Noebel , Ph. D., Summi t Mi ni stri es
Grand I lltuions i s undoubtedl y the most authori tati ve book avai l abl e anywhere on one of
the most powerful and perni ci ous organi zati ons i n the worl d. Pl anned Pare~thood not
onl y undermi nes and usurps parental authori ty, but i t al so defi l es and deni grates the
mi nds of our chi l dren. For that reason, I woul d wi sh that every parent woul d have the
opportuni ty to read thi s careful l y documented book.
– Mercedes Wi l son, Fami l y of the Ameri cas
George Granfs Graad I llusions unmasks both the el i ti st, raci st past of Pl anned Parent-
hood and i ts horri fi c anti -fami l y, anti -l i fe present. I f every Ameri can woul d take the
ti me to acquai nt themsel ves wi th the facts contai ned i n thi s book, the questi bns of any
publ i c fundi ng for Pl anned Parenthood woul d be over.
– Dr. Ri chard Land, Presi dent, The Chri sti an Li fe Commi ssi on
George Grants di sti ncti vel y Chri sti an anal ysi s of the percepti ons and real i ti es of Pl anned
Parenthood found i n Grand Zl l ti ns provi des the church wi th the ammuni ti on that
ought to move i t from compl acency to acti on i n the battl e bei ng waged for the l i ves of
our chi l dren.
– Patri ci a P. Bai nbri dge, Executi ve Di rector, Li fe Deci si ons I nternati onal
George Grant has wri tten the best expostf of Pl anned Paenthood i n pri nt. Pl anned
Parenthood i s one of Ameri cas nasty l i ttl e secrets. Grant has fl ung open the shutters l etti ng
the l i ght of day i l l umi nate one of the greatest con-jobs of thi s century. That Pl anned
Parenthood enjoys any respectabi l i ty at al l , i n our soci ety, i s a sad commentary on our
ti mes. Grand Zl l uswm hel ps to expose for al l to see an organi zati on that, from i ts raci st-
eugeni c i ncepti on, shoul d have found no support i n the Free Worl d.
– Fmnk Schaeffer, Author and Speaker
I n thi s updated edi ti on, George Grant shows how Pl anned Parenthood conti nues to
spread i ts pro-death phi l osophy across the nati on. He shows us why i t i s more i mPor-
tant than ever that we l aunch a concerted effort to dethrone Pl anned Parenthood and
have i t vi ewed as the controversi al , anti -fami l y and anti -God organi zati on i t i s.
Every parent who cares about thei r chi l dren and the future of thei r nati on shoul d
read thi s book.
–Ji m Sedl ak, Nati onal Di rector, Stop Pl anned Parenthood, I nc.
Thk book i s fi l l ed wi th such perti nent i nformati on about Pl armed Parenthood that readers
wi l l be astounded. The research i s i mpeccabl e, i n depth, and absol utel y surpri si ng.
–Charl es A. Provan, M.D.
Grand I lluswm i s the book for anyone who thhks, or knows anyone who thi nks, that
Pl anned Parenthood i s a fi ne, hi gh-mi nded organi zati on. I n thi s awaxd-wi nni ng book,
George Grant traces not onl y the hi story of Pl anned Parenthood, but goes behi nd the
scenes to show you i n person the wreckage i t i s causi ng i n young women’s l i ves ri ght now.
– Mary Pri de, Author and Speaker
Pl anned Parenthood i s gui l ty of moral cri mes so ghastl y they are scarcel y bel i evabl e.
That’s why the gri ppi ng case presented i n Grand Zllusionr i s must readi ng. The horri fy-
i ng facts behi nd the aborti on and sex educati on i ndustry si mpl y must be exposeci , and
George Grant does the job i n spel l -bi ndi ng fashi on.
– Marl i n Maddoux, Host, Point of Vtiw
Grand I llwions i s by far the best expos6 of Pl anned Parenthood ever wri tten. Everyone
shoul d read thi s book. Everyone shoul d use i t. The onl y way for truth to tri umph i s i f
the i l l usi on i s shattered. And thi s book shatters the i l l usi on.
–Joseph M. Schei dl er, Di rector, Pro-Li fe Acti on League
Pl anned Parenthood has spent mi l l i ons to erect a fal se publ i c rel ati ons front. Hundreds
of journal i sts have cooperated. Not George Grant. Wi th passi on and accuracy, he
courageousl y knocks down the screen to reveal what everyone who cares about l i fe
shoul d kIIOW.
– Marvi n Ol asky, Ph. D., Professor of Journal i sm, The Uni versi ty of Texas
I am horri fi ed to read the extensi ve documentati on about the anti -fami l y strategi es of
Pl anned Parenthood. Not before I read thi s book was I aware of the abundance of
amoral i nformati on bei ng di stri buted to our ki ds at taxpayer’s expense. I t i s hard to
bel i eve what i s at the very heart of the mul ti -bi l l i on dol l ar Pl anned Parenthood move-
ment. You need to read Grand I lh.rion.r for yoursel f — the documented facts speak l oudl y.
–Josh McDowel l , Author/Youth Communi cator
Grand Zl l uswn.r k a dramati c and chal l engi ng wake-up cal l to compl acent Chri sti ans. As
an attorney who has fought on the defendi ng si de agai nst Pl anned Parenthood’s wel l
bankrol l ed l awsui ts, I am pai nful l y aware of thei r efforts to suppress pro-l i fe speech,
protest, or aborti on regul ati on.
– Pai ge Comstock Cunni ngham, Attorney
George Grant exposes how U.S. tax dol l ars have been used under Democrat and
Republ i can presi dents to subsi di ze the Dr. Mengel es of the pro-aborti on movement.
– Howard Phi l l i ps, Presi dent, The Conservati ve Caucus
I
Fmal l Y, a book that reveal s Pl anned Parenthood’s agenda of bl ack genoci de. What a
practi cal handbook for exposi ng thi s mul ti -mi l l i on d~l l ar fraud.
-
– Andrea Shel don, Tradi ti onal Val ues Coal i ti on
Many compari sons have been made between the aborti on hol ocaust of the past twenty
years and the Nazi hol ocaust earl i er thi s century. As brutal as the extermi nati on of the
Jews was, the 40 mi l l i on murders by l egal i zed aborti on si nce 1972 has proved to be an
even greater bl i ght on our nati on. Pl anned Parenthood has been at the forefront of the
chi l d-ki l l i ng i ndustry and i n Grand Mi.siom George Grant abl y exposes thei r compl i ci ty.
– Larry Pratt, Presi dent, Commi ttee to Protect the Fami l y.
Grand I llu.rwnJ has peel ed back the facade of decepti on fi -om Pl anned Parenthood more
cl earl y than any other book.
– Geor ge McNerl i n, Morni ngstar Radi o Network
A much needed expos6 of Pl anned Parentheecl by an expert researcher and hi stori an.
– Dr. Samuel L. Bl umenfel d, Edi tor, The Blunwnfeld Edudion Letta
Thi s work i s typi cal George Grant. I t i s both comprehensi ve and entertai ni ng. The
most val uabl e resource i n fi ghti ng the number one nemesi s of the babi es.
–Paul deParri e, Edi tor, The Advocate
Grand ZUui onr i s by far the best documented and researched expos6 of the strategy and
tacti cs of Pl anned Parenthood yet publ i shed. I t seeks to i nfdtrate the nati on’s school s
wi th “heal th cl i ni cs” whi ch Grant shows are, i n fact, used by Pl anned Parenthood as a
means of i ndoctri nati ng students i n sexual permi ssi veness by the free di stri buti on of
condoms and pi l l s, and then by referri ng the gi rl s who become pregnant to one of thei r
own cl i ni cs whkh provi de aborti ons. For these reasons, al l parents concerned wi th the
heal th and moral behavi or of thei r hi gh-school age chddren shoul d read thi s book and
put a stop to Pl anned Parenthood’s evi l machi nati ons.
– Rev. E. L. Hebden Tayl or, Rector, St. Al bans Angl i can Church
A few years ago George Grant dared to wri te thi s book about Pl anned Parenthood. As
he has made cl ear, there i s nothi ng ‘l eft-wi ng” about Pl anned Parenthood. I ts popu-
l ari ty among the busi ness cl asses of Ameri ca i s a matter for concern and prayer, and
mi kes me wonder why conservati ve Chri sti ans conti nue to l ook to the busi ness cl ass for
l eadershi p. Thi s i s a hi ghl y appropri ate ti me to bri ng thi s book out agai n. We l earn
from Grant two thi ngs: (1) that no si ngl e i ssue l i ke “pro-l i fe” wi l l be enough to deal wi th
thi s compl ex monster, and (2) that the Body of Chrkt’s answer wi l l have to come ul ti -
mately through servi ce — to the cri si s-pregnant women, to the “unwanted” chi l dren,
and, before that, to the young peopl e who want to know about the meani ng of human
reproducti on. Above al , the edi l i ce whi ch took generati ons to bui l d wi l l not di sappear
overni ght. Servi ce, prayer, and ti me wi l l eventual l y conquer i t.
– Howard Ahmanson, Fi el dstead & Company
George Grant pays Pl anned Pmenthood the hi ghest compl i ment: he takes them seri ousl y
by attendi ng very cl osel y to thei r hktoty, thei r bel i efs, and thei r acti ons. He then un-
covers, through comprehensi ve research, the tragi c and soberi ng pol i ti cal resul ts of
thei r si ni ster agenda. Thi s i s a vi tal and reveal i ng book about an urgent topi c that far
too many peopl e know so l i ttl e about.
– Mi chael Cromarti e, Research Fel l ow, Ethi cs and Publ i c Pol i cy Center
When peopl e want i nformati on on Pl anned Parenthood, the fi rst pl ace I send them i s to
Grand I llruions by George Grant. I t i s sti l l the best pl ace to document the hktory and i n-
fl uence of Pl anned Parenthood i n our soci ety. Grant stri ps the veneer off thei r cul ti -
vated publ i c i mage and exposes Pl anned Parenthood for what i t i s.
– Kerby Anderson, Presi dent, Probe Mi ni stri es
The so-cal l ed warri or for women’s ri ghts – Pl anned Parenthood’s founder Margaret
Sanger– i s hoi st by her own petard, wi th her very words, rooted i n hatred and bi gotry,
expl odi ng i n the fi l se face of her fraudul ent reputati on. The re-wri ters of hi story won’t
appreci ate George Grant% thoughtfi d schol arshi p and careful documentati on — but the
truth onl y hurts when i t shoul d.
– Wi l l i am P. Hoar, Wash@ton Edhor, Th.s New Atian
George Grant compasses the growth of the Pl anned Parenthood movement, from Ms.
Sanger’s eugeni cs to i ts current status as the worl d’s bi ggest aborti on provi der. He gets
to the heart of the matter, and i n so doi ng speaks for the mi l l i ons of beati ng hearts sacri -
fi ced to the Mol ech worshi p that i s Pl anned Parenthood.
– R. C. Sproul , Jr., Edkor, TtileTdk
Pi ty the target of a George Grant book or arti cl e. Thi s unl ucky one’s eve-g weakness
wi l l be rel entl essl y probed and exposed. Hi s character and i ntel l ect wi l l be studi ousl y
measured agai nst Grant’s el oquent and constructi ve i nsi ghts i nto conservati ve stan-
dards and tradi ti on.
– Tom Atwood, The Heri tage Foundati on
Thank God for such a di l i gent researcher and abl e wri ter as George Grant. Hi s docu-
mentati on al l ows the depl orabl e record of Pl anned Parenthood to speak for i ts shamefi d
sel f. Every ci ti zen of Ameri ca shoul d read the record presented here.
– Senator Ed Gl assgow, Presi dent, South Dakota Chrkti an Coal i ti on
Grand I llusions exposes the decei t and hypocri sy of the pro-aborti on movement through
the words and hktory of thei r l eaders. I t’s must readi ng for anyone who wants to know
the truth about aborti on.
–John Wi mber, Vi neyard Chri sti an Fel l owshi p of Anahei m
Research, detai l , accuracy. Three obvi ous di sti ncti ons of George Granfs Gwdd Zl l usi bns.
How can a society pass more l aws to protect ani mal s, but conti nue by the mi nute to ki l l
i ts own unborn? Exposi ng Pl anned Parenthood as a scam shoul d be our goal . Today . . .
and everyday . . . unti l it is total l y aborted!
– Davi d T. Cl ydesdal e, Musi c Composer & Conductor
George Grant has added yet another i mportant and i ncreasi ngl y needed work to sub-
stanti ve pro-l i fe l i terature. As the author of a recentl y publ i shed book on Pl anned
Parenthood, I wel come the updated, expanded versi on of Grand ZUmionr. I t i ncl udes
addi ti onal materi al to arm the acti vi st wi th i nformati on to fi ght the evi l of Pl anned
Parenthood,
–Dougl as R. Scott, Author, Bad Choixs: A Look I nsi& PkannsdPartnthood
Because George Grant i s a superb hi stori an as wel l as rel entl ess reporter, Grand ZUwiom
reveals the truth that few know about Pl anned Parenthcmd’s ori gi ns — that i ts founder,
Margaret Sanger, was a vehementl y anti -Chri sti an, anti -marri age, anti -capi tal i st ad-
mi rer of Nazi Gerrna+ “race puri fi cati on” program. Even more surpri si ng, Grant
documents how SangePs radi cal i sm, under a thi i veneer, still gui des Pl anned Parent-
hood today.
–Charl es Hul l Wol fe, Hi stori an, Coral Ri dge Mi ni stri es
I f George Grant’s book Grand Zhswns i s not qui te Uncl e Tom’s Cabi n, i t may
nonethel ess have the same gal vani zi ng effect on the pro-l i fe movement as Stowe’s book
had on the anti sl avery movement – but wi thout her wi l d sensati onal i sm.
– Gary Whi tby, Chtitianig T&y
George’s wri ti ng al ways yi el ds a doubl e edged sword . . . through the power of l an-
guage and factual i nformati on, Add prayer and acti on to that , , . who can stand?
–Ted Gerk, Kel owna Ri ght to Li fe
We al l know that evi l doers fl ouri sh and prosper i n darkness! George Grant% &and I llu-
sions pl aces the spotl i ght of ri ghteous scruti ny upon the works of those i nvol ved i n the
evi l of Pl anned Parenthood.’
–John Cl emens, News Di rector, USA Radi o Network
George Grant has done an excel l ent job of catal ogi ng the del eteri ous medi cal effects of
aborti on– especi al l y RU-486.
– Dougl as G. Kay, Presi dent, Nati onal I nsti tute for Heal thcare Research
When I read the wri ti ngs of George Grant, I am struck by hi s anoi nted abi l i ty to
anal yze and di scern hi s subjects. Hi s depth of knowl edge and cl ari ty of thought wi l l
i mpact your l i fe and sharpen your vi ews.
–James Robi son, Presi dent and Founder, LI FE Outreach I nternati onal
GRAND ILLUSIONS
GRAND ILLUSIONS
The Legacy of Pl anned Parenthood
George Grant
Newl y Revi sed
Second Edi ti on
Adroi t Press
Frankl i n, Tennessee
01988, 1992 by Geor ge Gr ant
Al l ri ghts reserved. Second edi ti on.
No part of thi s publ i cati on may be reproduced, stored i n a
retri eval system, or transmi tted i n any form by any means,
el ectr oni c, mechani cal , photocopy, r ecor di ng, or other wi se,
wi thout the pri or wri tten permi ssi on of the publ i sher, except
for bri ef quotati ons i n cri ti cal revi ews or arti cl es.
Unl ess otherwi se noted, al l Scri pture quotati ons ar e ei ther the
author’s own, or are from the New Ki ng James Versi on of the
Bi bl e, copyr i ghted 1984 by Thomas Nel son, I nc., Nashvi l l e,
Tennessee.
Adroi t Press, Publ i sher
Post Offi ce Box 680365, Frankl i n, Tennessee 37068-0365.
Pri nted i n the Uni ted States of Ameri ca.
First edition:
Fi rst pri nti ng, Jul y, 1988
Second pr i nti ng, November , 1988
Thi r d pr i nti ng, August, 1989
Four th pr i nti ng, Januar y, 1990
Fi fth pr i nti ng, September , 1990
Si xth pr i nti ng, November , 1990
%cond edition: ‘
Fi r st pr i nti ng, November , 1992
Li brary of Congress Catal ogi ng-i n-Publ i cati on Data
Grant, George, 1954-
Grand i l l usi ons.
I ncl udes i ndex.
1. Bi rth control – Uni ted States – Soci eti es, etc.
2. Bi rth control – Rel i gi ous aspects–Chri sti ani ty.
3. Pr o-choi ce movement – Uni ted States.
4. Pro-l i fe movement – Uni ted States. I . Ti tl e.
HQ776.5.U5G69 1988 363.9’6’0973 88-14333
I SBN O-9633469-2-X
To Uz and Jai r
Beyond our Grasp
But not Beyond God’s
Deus Vul t
CONTENTS
Acknowl edgments /x i
Preface to the Second Edi ti on: Grand Evasi ons /xv
I ntroducti on: Ad Vi tum /1
PART I : THE I LLUSI ON
1. I N THE HEAT OF THE FI GHT / 11
Facing the Anomaly/ I n the Belly of the Beast/ Hell's
Ballad / I nsomnia's Clarity
2. ALL THAT GLI TTERS /23
The Pro-Choice I llusion / The Charity I llusion / The Private
Funding I llusion / The Birth Control I llusion/ The STD
I llusion / The Sex Education I llusion / The Abortion I llusion /
The I nnovation I llusion / The Population I llusion / The Big Lie
PART I I : THE LEGACY
3. BAD SEED: THE HI STORI CAL LEGACY /45
Growing Up Wrong/ The Winter of Her Discontent/
The Woman Rebel / Sex Education/ Planned Parenthood
I s Conceived/ TheContinuing Legacy
4. BACK-ALLEY BUTCHERS: THE MEDI CAL LEGACY /67
The Medical Risks of Abortion/ The Medical Risks of Birth Control/
Medicine and the Lost Legacy / Sexual Balance
5. A RACE OF THOROUGHBREDS:
THE RACI AL LEGACY /91
White Supremacy / The Planned Parenthood Connection / Racism
and Birth Control Cl i ni cs / Racism and Abortion / Racism and
Sterilization / Scientific Racism / The Theology of Racism
6. SELLI NG SEX: THE EDUCATI ONAL SCANDAL /107
The Shocking Betrayal / The Business of Revolution / Defining
the Terms / Backwards Deal/ Brazen Lips
vii
. . .
GRAND ILLUSI ONS
7. ROBBER BARONS: THE FI NANCI AL SCANDAL /131
Soaki ng the Taxpayer / Highway Robbery Made Easy/ If at First You
Don't Succeed. . . Sue / At Mammnon's Shrine/ Money Laundering:
Establishment / Planned Parenthood and Parents: Expansion/
Through the Back Door: Recruitment / TheDay Draws Nigh
8. STRANGE BEDFELLOWS:
THE I NSTI TUTI ONAL SCANDAL /149
Looking a Gift Home in the Mouth/ Program Sweepstakes/
The United Way / The March of Dimes/ Corporate Philanthropy/
Family Foundations/ Unholy Alliances
9. THE CAMERA BLI NKED: THE MEDI A LEGACY /165
Why Don’t We Know?/ TheSeven Deadly Sinners: CBS, RCA,
Cap Cities, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Gannett,
Time-Life / On the Offensive/ R U-Kidding?/ News and Truth/
The Press as a Moral Force/ TheCloak of Conspiracy
10. TO THE UTTERMOST:
THE I NTERNATI ONAL LEGACY /189
Evangelistic Zeal / A New World Order/ Colonizing the Globe/
The Commission Reversed
11. A DI VI NE TRAGEDY THE RELI GI OUS LEGACY / 207
I n the Beginning/ The Betrayal/ The Balak Strategy / Reaping
the Whirlwind / Achan in the Camp
PART I I I : THE TRUTH
12. SLAYI NG DRAGONS:
THE CHARACTER TO CONFRONT /229
The Light of Day/ Alertness / Stedfastness / Courage /
Strength / Love/ Character in Context
13. I DOLS FOR DESTRUCTI ON:
A STRATEGY FOR PROPHETS AND PRI ESTS /255
Church and State / The Prophetic Church/ The Priestly Task / TheSchools /
The Media / Local Governments/ TheLegislature/ The Courts/ The
Bureaucracy / Paying the Pi per / Tearing Down the High Places
14. ALTARS FOR CONSTRUCTI ON:
AN AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE /291
The Brass Treks / Almsgiving / Prayer/ Fasting/ Where
the Rubber Meets the Road
Contents ix
15. THI S TOO SHALL PASS: GOOD PROVI DENCE /313
PART I V: RESOURCES
Appendi x A: The Fai thful Wi tness: Making a Presentati on /317
Appendi x B: Pro-Li fe Acti vi sm: A Soci al Gospel ? /321
Appendi x C: Sel ect Bi bl i ographi c Resources /329
End Notes /345
I ndex /399
A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S
HUMANUM AMAREST
per angmta ad augustal
If you ask me why I put Latin in my writing it is because I have to show that it is
connected with the Universal Fountain and with the European Culture, and with
all that heresy combats. 2
Hilaire Belloc “
I suspect that those who have read some of my other books
wi l l be a l i ttl e surpri sed by thi s one. I am a l i ttl e surpri sed by i t
mysel f.
The great l i terary cri ti c Northrup Frye once remarked that
“the wri tten word i s far more powerful than si mpl y a remi nder:
i t recreates the past i n the present, and gi ves us, not the fami l i ar
remembered thi ng, but the gl i tteri ng i ntensi ty of a summoned
up passi on.” Thi s book, as i t has been transformed from research
and remembrance i nto text, has been l i ke that for me. I t has sur-
pri sed me wi th i ts fervi d fervor.
Certai nl y, there are advantages afforded by that ki nd of pas-
si on. Urgency, duty, and sacri fi ce al l make for better wri ti ng.
And for qui cker wri ti ng. But they can al so devol ve that wri ti ng
i nto the tangenti al ravi ngs of the fantasti c.
Fortunatel y, there were several peopl e who gi rded me round
about al l through the process of wri ti ng and rewri ti ng. They kept
the fi res of passi on stoked. But they al so l ent me the bal ance, sta-
bi l i ty, and securi ty necessary to check my ever-i ncreasi ng al acri ty.
Robert Ruff, Marvi n Ol asky, Joe Schei dl er, James Jordan,
Conni e Marshner, Suzanne Marti n, Davi d Shepherd, Lynn
Hawl ey, Greg Mead, Kathe Sal azar, Kemper Crabb, and Mi chael
Hyatt were i ndi spensi bl e counsel ors and edi tors al l through the
xl ”
Xt”i GRAND ILLUSI ONS
process of wri ti ng and researchi ng the fi rst edi ti on. After i t was
determi ned that a revi sed edi ti on woul d be necessary, many
more fri ends set asi de thei r val uabl e ti me to contri bute ~hei r ex-
perti se, research, and constructi ve cri ti ci sm: Ken Pachal ,
Ei l een Li chwi arz, Mercedes Wi l son, Dougl as Scott, Patri ci a
Bai nbri dge, Ann Schei dl er, Cheryl Eckstei n, Ji m Sedl ak,
Magal y Ll aWno, and Jerry Horn. To al l these I am profoundl y
gr ateful .
My sharp-eyed edi tors, Li nda and Jerry Bowyer spotted
every errant jot and ti ttl e and encouraged me every step al ong
the way. Thei r ti rel ess effort, keen i nsi ght, and abi di ng fri end-
shi p are deepl y appreci ated.
The soundtrack for the second edi ti on was abl y provi ded by
Charl i e Peacock, Wol fgang Mozart, Susan Ashton, Out of the
Grey, Steve Camp, Fel i x Mendel ssohn, Mi chael Card, and Joze
Bani c whi l e the mi dni ght musi ngs were suppl i ed by Marti n
Gi l bert, Paul Johnson, John Judi s, Carrol l Qui gl ey, Joseph
Sobran, and R. Emmett Tyrrel l .
A number of accompl i shed journal i sts l i ke Joel Bel z, Ni ck
Ri cher, Cal Thomas, Kerby Anderson, Wi l l i am Hoar, and
Marvi n Ol asky have hel ped me hone my wri ti ng ski l l s. Practi c-
i ng physi ci ans l i ke Ed Payne, Robert Dotson, and Hi l ton Terrel l
hel ped to sharpen my thi nki ng. And several pastors and mi ni s-
ters around the country have been unswervi ng i n thei r personal
and spi ri tual support: James Bachmann, Bob Coy, Dal e Smi th,
Davi d Hal l , Tom Cl ark, Gordon Wal ker, Peter Lei thart, and
Don Fi nto.
Al l the stori es and vi gnettes i n thi s book are true. I n some,
names have been changed, i n others edi tori al l i berti es have been
taken to combi ne certai n events for purposes of cl ari ty or i l l us-
trati on. But i n al l i nstances, the events and conversati ons
accuratel y refl ect factual si tuati ons.
Many thanks are due to the hundreds of women I have tal ked
wi th and i ntervi ewed over the years. I owe a speci al debt of
grati tude to the women of the Cri si s Pregnancy Center of
Houston, of the HELP Servi ces Women’s Center i n Humbl e,
and of the many Women Expl oi ted By Aborti on chapters
around the country. These stori es are thei r stori es.
Acknowledgments: Humanum Arnarest
. . .
xaal
I am especi al l y grateful to Toni Tosti and the congregati on of
Westmi nster Presbyteri an Church (PCA) of Vancouver, Washi ng-
ton, for thei r encou}.agement and tremendous support of our
work. Thei r fi nanci al parti ci pati on i n thi s publ i shi ng project i s a
testi mony to thei r unswervi ng comrni ttment to the sancti ty of l i fe.
Fi nal l y, my i mmedi ate communi ty of fami l y, fri ends, and
staff have hel d me accountabl e and bol stered my courage day i n
and day out: Mark and J. El l yn Home, Davi d and Debbi e
Dunham, Wayne and Mary Jane Morri s, Ji m and Martha
Smal l , and of course Karen, Joel , Joanna, and Jesse Grant.
Whatever subjecti vi ty born of passi on that somehow was
abl e to sneak past thi s heavenl y host must be l edgered to my ac-
count. Whatever gl i tteri ng i ntensi ty remai ns must be l edgered
to thei rs. DeuJ u.dt.
Fi rst Week of Advent
Frankl i n, Tennessee
hic se aped diabolisl
To introduce a book supposes tlw greatest dt#iculty – because of the inevitable, ines-
capable presupposing.
2
Hilaire Belloc
I t was Franci s Bacon who fi rst asserted that: “A man i s known
by the company that he keeps – for i n both the posi ti ve and the
negati ve, i nteracti on unvei l s the vol umi nous mysteri es of the
heart .“s As true as that pri nci pl e may be, G. K. Chesterton’s re-
vi si on i s truer sti l l : “A man i s known by the company that he
does not keep – for i n both the posi ti ve and the negati ve, non-
i nteracti on unvei l s the vol umi nous mysteri es of the heart .“4
I have consi dered thi s noti on i ntentl y over the past several
years as I have — often i n wonderment — wi tnessed the non-
i nteracti ve evasi ons of the Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of
Ameri ca and i ts sundry i nsti tuti onal cohorts i n the aborti on i n-
dustry to thi s book.
Awai ti ng Thei r Repl y
Wherever I go throughout North Ameri ca for vari ous ki nds
of speaki ng engagements — and even as I venture beyond thi s
conti nent from ti me to ti me — a barrage of questi ons i nevi tabl y
confronts me concerni ng the book:
. What has been the response of Pl anned Parenthood?
G Have you been sued yet?
xv
xvi GRAND ILLUSI ONS
. Has the organi zati on ever publ i shed a substanti al refutati on?
G Has i t consented to a nati onal l y broadcast debate wi th you?
G What about the Uni ted Way or the March of Di mes? Have
they responded?
My answers are often rather astoni shi ng to the uni ni ti ated –
to those who actual l y bel i eve that the~~ts actual l y matter i n thi s
ti tani c struggl e for l i fe, l i berty, and truth:
. Pl anned Parenthood i s tryi ng i ts best to i gnore the book.
. I have not been sued.
. No refutati on of the book, substanti al or otherwi se, has been
publ i shed.
. The organi zati on has effecti vel y enforced a debate bl ackout.
G Li ke Pl anned Parenthood, the Uni ted Way has attempted
to i gnore the book, whi l e the March of Di mes has ci rcul ated
a remarkabl y scandal ous l etter ful l of easi l y demonstrabl e
fabri cati ons.
And thi s despi te the fact that Grand I llusions was the fi rst com-
prehensi ve and up-to-date expos6 of the gargantuan l eader of
the i nternati onal aborti on i ndustry, exami ni ng i ts hi story, phi -
l osophy, programs, and agendas. Wi th nearl y fi fteen hundred
copi ousl y annotated footnotes and four hundred pages of pri -
mary documentati on, i t has won awards — i ncl udi ng the ECPA
Gol d Medal l i on for publ i shi ng excel l ence – i t has achi eved a
“best sel l er” ranki ng– wi th nearl y 100,000 copi es i n pri nt – and,
i t has been anthol ogi zed, excerpted, revi ewed, abri dged, and
transl ated i n vi rtual l y every medi um i magi nabl e i n both secul ar
and Chri sti an ci rcl es on three conti nents. I t has been cri ti cal l y
accl ai med and recommended by every facti on and organi zati on
i n the pro-l i fe/pro-farni l y movement worl d-wi de.
You woul d thi nk that Pl anned Parenthood, the Uni ted Way,
and the March of Di mes woul d si t up and take noti ce. You
woul d thi nk that the organi zati on woul d attempt to answer the
charges. You woul d thi nk that i t woul d at l east gi ve i t the good-
ol e-col l ege+-y.
.
But no.
The strategy of Pl anned Parenthood and i ts pro-death bed-
fel l ows has been to meet the mounti ng cri ti ci sm fomented by the
Preface to the Second Edition xvii
book wi th deafeni ng si l ence. I t has al most compl etel y i gnored
the book. I n fact, onl y when i t i s absol utel y jorced to comment
on the i ssues rai sed by the book does i t dei gn to acknowl edge i ts
exi stence. And even then, i t merel y cyni cal l y sneers — di spatch-
i ng al l i ts evi dence wi th a semi -l ethal barrage of name cal l i ng
and deri si on.
The onl y two offi ci al responses to the book from Pl anned
Parenthood came i n a si ngl e i ssue of the organi zati on’s i n-house
newsl etter, I mi dm
The fi rst response i s a si mpl e note of warni ng from Dougl as
Goul d, Pl anned Parenthood’s Vi ce Presi dent for Communi cati ons:
Pl ease do not encourage Mr. Grant by agreei ng to debate hi m
shoul d he come to your town. Wi th one excepti on he has not
appeared on any mai nstream broadcasts, and hi s book has not
been gi ven seri ous attenti on.
5
That i s the voi ce of desperati on. I t i s al so the voi ce of decep-
ti on. Goul d knows ful l wel l that i nnumerabl e nati onal “mai n-
stream” broadcasts as wel l as pri nt medi ums have i ndeed profi l ed
me and my book— and that many more woul d l i ke to, i f onl y
they coul d get an opposi ng vi ewpoi nt from Pl anned Parenthood.
The bottom l i ne i s that he i s exerci si ng a bi t of covert damage
control .
The second response purports to be a book revi ew – despi te
the fact that i t i s l ess than fi ve paragraphs and three hundred
words l ong. I nstead of deal i ng wi th the book substanti vel y, the
author of the “revi ew,” Pl anned parenthood staHer Peter Gri mal di ,
resorts to name cal l i ng:
Mr. Grant’s book, l i ke so many of i ts i l k, i s a textbook exampl e
of the paranoi d styl e, fi l l ed wi th heated exaggerati on, sus-
pi ci ousness, and conspi ratori al fhntasy.G
No speci fi cs. No counteri ng evi dence. No sol i d defenses. No
debati ng i deas, phi l osophi es, or methodol ogi es. Gri mal di be-
l i eves that i t i s suffi ci ent to si mpl y assert the PPFA orthodoxy
and l eave i t at that:
‘The cl ai ms made i n thi s book,” he says, “are l i es.”T
. . .
Xv?.11 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
The onl y substanti ve rebuttal that he offers at al l concerns two
apparent stati sti cal errors that don’t even appear in tb book. ‘I f thi s i s
the best that Gri mal di can do, he i s skati ng on awful l y thi n i ce.
Just the Facts
The real i ty i s that doctors, l awyers, journal i sts, economi sts,
pol i ti cal sci enti sts, soci ol ogi sts, pro-l i fe l eaders, educato~s, acti v-
i sts, and numerous other experts i n rel ated fi el ds have poured
over vi rtual l y every detai l of Grand I llusion-s — before i t was pub-
l i shed, between each of the numerous pri nti ngs, and fol l owi ng
the most recent revi si on – to assure i ts accuracy and cogency.
What that ul ti matel y means i s that – for al l i ts ful mi nati ons
to the contrary – Pl anned Parenthood real l y has no answer to
the seri ous and mul ti tudi nous accusati ons posed by the book.
So, they just try to i gnore i t. Whi ch i s getti ng harder and
harder to do wi th every passi ng day.
The Uni ted Way has attempted to fol l ow thi s same strategy
to the l etter — wi th no better success. The organi zati on pretends
that the seri ous al l egati ons about i ts ethi cal i ntegri ty si mpl y do
not exi st. I n i ts correspondence, the nati onal offi ce fei gns utter
i ncogni zance. Before the “Aramony Scandal ” broke i nto the
news — when the presi dent of the nati onal organi zati on was
found to be uti l i zi ng a vast amount of the chari ty’s donati ons for
hi s own pl easures – a few mi nor offi ci al s made i nqui ri es i nto my
background and probed a bi t i nto the vari ous mi ni stri es that I
have been i nvol ved wi th. Thei r efforts have proven to be ti re-
some but not too seri ous.
That, at l east, i s more honest an approach than the one the
March of Di mes has taken.
I n a l etter wri tten by staffer Ri chard P. Leavi tt, si gned by
vi ce-presi dent Mary Hughes, and ci rcul ated to al l i nqui rers to
the nati onal offi ce of the March of Di mes Bi rth Defects Founda-
ti on, the organi zati on actual l y fabri cates data i n answer to the
charges i n Gr and I llusions. The l etter asserts concerni ng Chapter
Ei ght i n the book’s fi rst edi ti on:
The pri mary sources for Grant’s footnotes #66 and #69 are two
books publ i shed i n 1967 and 1953 respecti vel y. Si nce prenatal
geneti c di agnosi s by amni ocentesi s was fi rst reported i n 1967, I
Prejace to the Second Edition xix
doubt that anyone coul d survey geneti ci sts about amni ocentesi s
resul ts and publ i sh the fi ndi ngs i n a book that same year — or
that any such survey 22 years ago, even i f i t were done, woul d
have any beari ng on the March of Di mes today. More cl earl y
absurd i s the ci tati on of a March of Di mes statement of our
neutral i ty on the aborti on controversy i n a book publ i shed i n
1953, because i n that year we were sti l l purel y a pol i o organi za-
ti on that had not even concei ved of becomi ng i nvol ved i n bi rth
defects, l et al one any as yet nonexi stent debates about prenatal
di agnosi s or aborti on. These anachroni sms suggest that Grant,
or someone he’s ci ti ng as a secondary source, si mpl y made up
these ci tati ons, as wel l as the al l egati ons themsel ves.a
Sounds convi nci ng. At l east i t sounds convi nci ng unti l the
careful reader actual l y turns to footnotes #66 and #69, i n the fi rst
edi ti on of the book (or #69 and #72 i n thi s edi ti on), and di s-
covers that i t i s Leavi tt that i s maki ng thi ngs up. The dates for
the sources ci ted are i n fact, 1977 and 1985 respecti vel y – not
1967 and 1953 as Leavi tt cl ai ms.
Besi des these del i berate di storti ons, the rest of the four-page
memo amounts to l i ttl e more than a vague bl anket deni al of any
March of Di mes wrong-doi ng i n amni ocentesi s research, fund-
i ng of geneti ci sts through the organi zati on’s granti ng process,
and i nsti tuti onal i nvol vement wi th Pl anned Parenthood — despi te
al l the i rrefutabl e evi dence to the contrary. Shame-faced si l ence,
bl atant fal sehood, or sl y evasi on are ul ti matel y the organi zati on’s
onl y recourses.
Revi si ons
None of thi s i s to say that the fi rst edi ti on of the book was
fl awl ess. On the contrary, the text’s gl i tches, omi ssi ons, and
awkward passages were more than a l i ttl e gl ari ng to me from the
start. That i s why I am so grateful to have thi s opportuni ty to
revi se and refi ne the manuscri pt for thi s second edi ti on.
Readers of the ori gi nal wi l l noti ce several addi ti ons: a new
chapter on I nternati onal Pl anned Parenthood, a new appendi x,
a new sel ect bi bl i ography, and materi al on RU-486 and other
technol ogi cal devel opments. Besi des those changes, I have noted
the dramati c pol i ti cal changes i n the Uni ted States – whi ch have
radi cal l y al tered the soci ocul tural cl i mate worl dwi de — as wel l as
updated rel evant stati sti cs where necessary.
Ax GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Asi de from those substanti ve changes, onl y cosmeti c al ter-
ati ons have been made to the work. Even so, I pray that they
wi l l enabl e i t to fi nd a whol e new era of useful ness as the pro-l i fe
movement enters i ts thi rd decade of struggl e for the sancti ty of
human l i fe– and that i t wi l l conti nue to fl uster the professi onal
bureaucrats and i deol ogues at Pl anned Parenthood i nto an em-
barrassed si l ence.
The Gnarl ed Tare
I t seems that the mi ni ons of the death i ndustry can face any-
thi ng except the obstacl e of truth. They wi l l go to absurd l engths
to avoi d i t, to rai l agai nst i t, to deny i t, or fai l i ng zdl el se, to
smother i t i n a morose bl anket of subterfuge.
Thei r end can not but be as descri bed so powerful l y i n the
vi ol et prose of Ti -i stan Gyl berd:
When ere a man has ought to hi de,
Or fol l ows hard,
Besi de the tri ed;
When ere he fei gns true del i ght,
Or captures l ust,
Behi nd the ni ght:
Beware, I say, beware.
Levi athan has sown;
And hi s i s the gnarl ed tare.g
I ts grand evasi ons notwi thstandi ng, Pl anned Parenthood– and
i ts dastardl y confederates — stands condemned by i ts own pri de
of si l ence.
I N T R O D U C T I O N
AD VITUM
apologia pro vita 1
A good b~tle for justice is the beginning of all great songs. Z
Hilaire Belloc
Why Pl anned Parenthood?
Why a whol e book dedi cated to exami ni ng– and qui te appar-
entl y exposi ng — one of the l argest and most respected soci al ser-
vi ce provi ders i n our nati on’s hi story?
Sour grapes?
Spi te?
Uni nformed ani mosi ty?
Gui l t?
Rel i gi ous vendetta?
No, the fact i s that despi te nearl y a century of controversy
and confl i ct surroundi ng Pl anned Parenthood, there have onl y
been a handful of comprehensi ve exami nati ons of the organi za-
ti on’s hi story, pol i ci es, procedures, and programs. And most of
these have been speci al i zed academi c studi es.s
Thi s book then i s an attempt to fi l l that voi d.
The questi on of why the voi d has exi sted for so l ong i s one
that has pl agued me for many years. I t was onl y as I undertook
the massi ve task of researchi ng Pl anned Parenthood that any
ki nd of answer to that questi on began to surface.
For one thi ng, Pl anned Parenthood i s actual l y not an organ-
i zati on. I nstead, i t i s a l oose affi l i ati on of several hundred sepa-
ratel y i ncorporated, separatel y admi ni stered, and separatel y
fi nanced organi zati ons throughout the worl d. These separate or-
gani zati ons share a common hi story, a common phi l osophy, a
common agenda, and a common publ i c i mage. They al l pay an-
nual affi l i ati on fees and dues to nati onal and i nternati onal bureau-
crati c enti ti es. And they al l cooperate i n vari ous educati onal ,
1
2 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
pol i ti cal , judi ci al , and fi nanci al concerns. But, they al l mai ntai n
di sti ncti ve that make detai l ed anal ysi s and bl anket assessments
very di ffi cul t i ndeed.
Beyond the structural and i nsti tuti onal di l emma, the fact i s
that though the name Planned Pamntkood is a regi stered servi ce-
mark,A i t al ways has been —and probabl y al ways wi l l be — the
generi c name of a movement as wel l . For several decades fol l ow-
i ng Worl d War I I , central fi gures i n the organi zati on were
encouragi ng the use of the name Planned Parenthood to i denti fy
the enti re bi rth control -aborti on-popul ati on control soci al phe-
nomenon. s Al though there are vast areas of agreement between
the many i ndi vi dual s and i nsti tuti ons i n thi s generi c movement,
wi despread di versi ty agai n makes detai l ed anal ysi s and bl anket
assessment terri bl y tenuous.G
Fi nal l y, the freneti c l i ti gal character of Pl anned Parenthood –
both as an i nsti tuti onal associ ati on and as an i nstrumental move-
ment — has no doubt di scouraged previ ous seri ous i nvesti gati ons.
Most authors and most publ i shers tend to shy away from l egal
entangl ements.
7
Despi te these seri ous di ffi cul ti es, I became
convi nced that I needed to wri te a comprehensi ve expos~ of
Pl anned Parenthood.
That convi cti on was confi rmed when several pro-l i fe acti vi sts
from Ameri ca, Canada, and Great Bri tai n came knocki ng on
my door wi th several hundred thousand never-before-di scl osed
Pl anned Parenthood documents: i nternal memoranda, cl i ni c
vi si t records, medi cal charts, fi nanci al statements, publ i ci ty fi l es,
confi denti al correspondence, and meeti ng mi nutes. Frankl y, I
was fl abbergasted by what I saw as I thumbed through those
documents. I had been deepl y i mmersed i n the pro-l i fe move-
ment for more than a decade, and I was sti l l shocked.
So I set mysel f to the task. You have before you the resul t.
But be appri sed, thi s book i s by no means the l ast word on
Pl anned Parenthood. I have actual l y onl y just ski mmed the surface.e
A ful l treatment of Pl anned Parenthood’s pol i ti cal connecti ons,
i ts judi ci al agenda, i l l s research mani pul ati ons, i ts propaganda
techni ques, and i ts theol ogi cal ori entati on wi l l have to be taken
up by others.
Presupposi ti ons
Several ki nd revi ewers have asked me why I chose to make
my manuscri pt openl y and overtl y Chri sti an. Thei r concern was
I ntroduction: Ad Vitum 3
si mpl y that the book mi ght be qui ckl y di smi ssed and i ts message
i gnored i n the marketpl ace of i deas. They fel t that i t mi ght be
percei ved as i mpracti cal , apol i ti cal , and unpragmati c when i n
poi nt of fact i t i s none of those thi ngs. I n a mi l i eu where tradi -
ti onal val ues have been exi l ed to a desol ate cul tural outback and
where the proponents of those val ues have vol untar i l y
sequestered themsel ves i n a squal i d spi ri tual and i ntel l ectual
ghetto, those concerns are not at al l unwarranted.
Even so, I feel that the W@ appropri ate response to Pl anned
Parenthood i s a di sti ncti vel y Chri sti an response. And I am en-
ti rel y at ease i n announci ng that from the start.
G. K. Chesterton once qui pped that any new book of mod-
ern soci al i nqui ry i s bound to be dul l ardl y predi ctabl e i n both
form and functi on:
I t begi ns as a rul e wi th an anal ysi s, wi th stati sti cs, tabl es of
popul ati on, decrease of cri me among Congregati onal i sts,
growth of hysteri a among pol i cemen, and si mi l ar ascertai ned
facts; i t ends wi th a chapter that i s general l y cal l ed The Remeaj.
I t i s al most whol l y due to thi s careful , sol i d, and sci enti fi c
method that The Remedy is never found. For thi s scheme of
medi cal questi on and answer i s a bl under; the fi rst great
bl under of soci ol ogy. I t i s al ways cal l ed stati ng the di sease be-
fore we fi nd the cure. But i t i s the whol e defi ni ti on and di gni ty
of man that i n soci al matters we must actual l y fi nd the cure be-
fore we fi nd the di sease.g
Thi s book i s obvi ousl y an expl orati on, expl anati on, and ex-
posi ti on of the di sease of Pl anned Parenthood. But as Chesterton
has sai d, we need not approach our subject medi cal l y– whi ch
mi ght l ead us to a repugnant victimization or co-de@n&ncy model
of soci al rel ati onshi ps. I n thi s case, i t i s enti rel y appropri ate for
us to announce the cure before we engage i n exami nati on and
di agnosi s or i ndul ge i n recovery and rel ati ng. The cure i s, very
si mpl y, the Word of God. The Scri ptures. The Bi bl e.
The Bi bl e i s God’s own revel ati on of wi sdom, knowl edge,
understandi ng, and truth. I t i s not si mpl y a marvel ous col l ecti on
of quai nt sayi ngs and i nspi ri ng stori es. I t i s God’s message to
man. I t i s God’s i nstructi on. I t i s God’s di recti on. I t i s God’s
gui del i ne, Hi s pl umb l i ne, and Hi s bottom l i ne.
Al l those who i n fai th have gone on before us – forefathers,
fathers, patri archs, prophets, apostl es, preachers, evangel i sts,
4 GFWND ILLUSIONS
martyrs, confessors, asceti cs, and every ri ghteous spi ri t made
pure i n Chri st – have al ways l ooked to the Bi bl e as the bl uepri nt
for l i vi ng. They have al ways taken i t seri ousl y, studyi ng i t,
appl yi ng i t, and obeyi ng i t. That i s because they have compre-
hended the real i ty that from Genesi s to Revel ati on the Bi bl e i s
i ndeed God’s Word. And that God’s Word i s hope for the hope-
l ess, hel p for the hel pl ess, sal ve for the si ck, bal m for the broken,
and strength for the stri cken. I t i s the cure.
The doctors, l awyers, pol i ti ci ans, soci al sci enti sts, jud~es,
psychol ogi sts, bureaucrats, and vari ous and sundry other experts
who have harnessed thei r di sci pl i nes for the Pl anned Parenthood
movement, certai nl y cannot be faul ted for thei r concern over the
pl i ght of women and chi l dren – i f i ndeed thei r concern i s genui ne.
Where they have gone astray i s i n taki ng matters i nto thei r own
hands, seeki ng out thei r own new and novel cure. I nstead of ad-
heri ng to the wi se and i nerrant counsel of the Bi bl e – wal ki ng
al ong the wel l -trod path of the Sai nts – they have done “what was
ri ght i n thei r own eyes” (Judges 21:25). They have compl etel y
i gnored — and as a consequence vi ol ated — God’s Wi sdom. Thei r
pol i ci es, proposal s, and programs have been bl atantl y mun cen-
ter ed. I n other wor ds, they have been humani sti c.
“Humani sm i s: accordi ng to the Russi an i conodul e Al eksandr
Sol zheni tsyn, “the procl ai med and practi ced autonomy of man
from any hi gher force above hi m.”l o Or, as theol ogi an Franci s
Schaeffer has sai d, i t i s “the pl aci ng of man at the center of al l
thi ngs and maki ng hi m the measure of al l thi ngs.”11 Accordi ng
to humani sti c dogma, there i s no noti on of absol ute ri ght or
wrong. There are no cl ear-cut standards. Moral i ty i s rel ati ve.
And probl em sol vi ng i s enti rel y subjecti ve. 12
The probl em i s that humani sm i s enti rel y out of sync wi th
the fabri c of real i ty:
To the Law and to the Testi mony! I f they do not speak accord-
i ng to thi s Word, i t i s because they have no dawn (I sai ah 8:20).
To attempt to sol ve the peri l ous probl ems of modern soci ety
wi thout heari ng and heedi ng the cl ear i nstructi ons of the Bi bl e
i s utter fool i shness (Remans 1:18-23). I t i s an i nvi tati on to i n-
adequacy, i ncompetency, i rrel evancy, and i mpotency (Deu-
teronomy 28: 15). Al l such attempts are doomed to frustrati on
and fai l ure.
I ntroduction: Ad Vitum 5
Humani sm cannot work because humani sm i gnores the
essence of real i ty (Ephesi ans 5:6). I t i s fraught wi th fantasy (Col -
ossi ans 2:8). Onl y the Bi bl e can tel l us of thi ngs as they real ~ are
(Psal m 19:7-11). Onl y the Bi bl e faces real i ty squarel y, practi cal l y,
compl etel y, and honestl y (Deuteronomy 30:11-14). Thus, onl y
the Bi bl e can provi de genui ne sol uti ons to the probl ems that
pl ague manki nd (Psal m 119:105).
Jesus was forever remi ndi ng Hi s di sci pl es of these facts. He
made i t cl ear to them that the Bi bl e was to be thei r ul ti mate
standard — for l i fe and godl i ness, for fai th and practi ce, and for
professi on and confessi on:
I t i s wr i tten, “ Man shal l not l i ve by br ead al one, but on ever y
Wor d th at pr oceeds ou t of th e mou th of God” (Matth ew 4:4).
But i t i s easi er for heaven and earth to pass away than for one
stroke of a l etter of the Law to fai l (Luke 16:17).
Whoever then annul s one of the l east of these Commandments,
and so teaches others, shal l be cal l ed l east i n the Ki ngdom of
Heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shal l be
cal l ed great i n the Ki ngdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:19).
Agai n and agai n He affi rmed the truth that “al l Scri pture i s
God breathed” (2 Ti mothy 3:16), that i t i s useful for “teachi ng,
rebuki ng, correcti ng, and trai ni ng i n ri ghteousness” (2 Ti mothy
3:17), and that i t “cannot be broken” (John 10:35):
Al l Hi s Precepts are sure. They are uphel d forever and ever;
they are performed i n truth and upri ghtness (Psal m 111:7-8).
Al l men know thi s. Even the di l i gent and studi ed humani sts
i n Pl anned Parenthood know thi s. The work of God’s Law i s
wri tten on the hearts of al l men (Remans 2:14-15). They must
acti vel y restrai n or suppress thi s Ti -uth i n order to carry on wi th
thei r novel ti es (Remans 1:18). Though they know what i s ri ght,
they del i beratel y debase themsel ves wi th futi l e thi nki ng, fool i sh
passi ons, and fi l thy behavi or (Remans 1:19-24, 26-27). They pur-
poseful l y betray real i ty, exchangi ng God’s Word for l i es (Remans
1:25). Though they know the Ordi nances of Li fe, they consci ousl y
choose the precepts of death (Remans 1:28-31). And then they
6 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
attempt to i mpose thei r conjured i nsani ty on the rest of us, pro-
posi ng i t as the sol uti on to al l our earthl y i l l s (Remans 1:32).
So, despi te thei r desperate ravi ngs to the contrary, the onl y
way that we wi l l be abl e to devel op compassi onate sol uti ons to the
tough di l emmas of cri si s pregnanci es, poor maternal heal th, over-
extended fami l y resources, teen promi scui ty, and venereal di s-
eases i s i f we submi t oursel ves to the eternal , establ i shed, and
effectual Word of Ti -uth (Psal m 119:152). The onl y way we wi l l be
abl e to devel op genui ne and dynami c al ternati ves to the humani s-
ti c programs of Pl anned Parenthood i s i f we yi el d oursel ves to the
sol i tary, supreme, and suffi ci ent Word of Li fe (Proverbs 6:23).
“For My Thoughts are not your thoughts, nei ther are your
ways My Ways,” decl ares the Lord. “For as the heavens are
hi gher than the earth, so are My Ways hi gher than your ways,
and My Thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rai n and the
snow come down from heaven, and do not return there wi thout
wateri ng the earth, and maki ng i t bear and sprout, and fur-
ni shi ng seed to the sower and bread to the eater; so shal l My
Word be whi ch goes forth from My mouth; i t shal l not return to
Me empty, wi thout accompl i shi ng what I desi re, and wi thout
succeedi ng i n the matter for whi ch I sent i t” (I sai ah 55:8-11).
Throughout thi s book, as we survey the l andscape Pl anned
Parenthood has l ai d waste, thi s wi l l ever be before us.
The Cure Appl i ed
I n the fi rst two chapters we wi l l l ook at Pl anned Parenthood –
both the generi c movement and the i nsti tuti onal associ ati on – i n
very general terms. We wi l l basi cal l y be getti ng a l ay of the l and.
Concepts and controversi es i ntroduced i n these chapters wi l l be
deal t wi th i n much greater detai l l ater i n the book.
I n Chapter 3 we wi l l begi n to exami ne the hi story of Pl anned ‘
Parenthood. I say “begi n” si mpl y because the hi stori cal context
of the organi zati on’s pol i ci es, programs, pri nci pl es, pri ori ti es,
pl ans, and procedures i s an i mportant theme that we wi l l return
to agai n and agai n throughout the book.
I n Chapter 4 we wi l l l ook i nto the medi cal practi ces of Pl anned
Parenthood. Aborti on, bi rth control , and steri l i zati on are at the
heart of the organi zati on’s work. Just how safe are these practi ces?
I ntroduction: Ad Vitum 7
I n Chapter 5 we wi l l exami ne the very controversi al subject
of prejudi ce and di scri mi nati on. I s Pl anned Parenthood a rac-
i st movement?
I n Chapter 6 we wi l l l ook at Pl anned Parenthood’s crusade to
bri ng comprehensi ve sex educati on to every man, woman, and
chi l d i n Ameri ca. Just what does sex educati on actual l y accom-
pl i sh? How effecti ve i s i t i n combati ng teen pregnancy, runaway
promi scui ty, venereal di seases, and i nterpersonal i rresponsi bi l i ty?
I n Chapter 7 we wi l l cl osel y exami ne the fi nances of Pl anned
Parenthood. Where do the funds to run thi s massi ve coast-to-
coast, i nternati onal , cross-cul tural phenomenon come from?
And how are they spent?
I n Chapter 8 we wi l l take a l ook at the many di fferent organ-
i zati ons and i nsti tuti ons that acti vel y support and cooperate wi th
Pl anned Parenthood’s program for soci al transformati on.
I n Chapter 9 the medi a wi l l be our concern. How does the
establ i shed medi a deal wi th Pl anned Parenthood? And why?
I n Chapter 10 the extensi ve i nternati onal agenda of Pl anned
Parenthood wi l l be traced.
I n Chapter 11 we wi l l turn our attenti on to the church. I s
there a connecti on between the church’s acti ons – or i nacti ons –
and Pl anned Parenthood’s tremendous i nfl uence?
Wi th Chapter 12 we wi l l begi n to l ook at speci fi c strategi es to
deal wi th the probl ems rai sed by Pl anned Parenthood. Fi rst, we
wi l l determi ne what we must be i n order to confront evi l .
Then i n Chapter 13, we wi l l determi ne what we must do i n
order to confront evi l .
I n Chapter 14, we wi l l l ook at some posi ti ve, constructi ve
al ternati ves to the Pl anned Parenthood juggernaut.
I n Chapter 15, the vi gnette from the openi ng of the book i s
framed and resol ved.
The book cl oses wi th some appended resources to enabl e
fai thful Chri sti ans to make a practi cal di fference i n thei r farni -
I i es, i n thei r communi ti es, and i n thei r worl d.
I n anci ent Al exandri a, a school of l i terary i nterpretati on was
devel oped that anal yzed texts on three di fferent l evel s si mul tan-
eousl y: the physi cal or l i teral l evel , the i ntel l ectual or phi l oso-
phi cal l evel , and the spi ri tual or al l egori cal l evel . Thi s book was
wri tten to conform to that Al exandri a model . Thus i t operates
8 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
on al l three of those l evel s. So, for i nstance, the vari ous afl i l i ate
stati sti cs, personal stori es, and hi stori cal overvi ews are to be
taken qui te l i teral l y. The soci ol ogi cal anal ysi s, the Bi bl i cal theol -
ogy, and the i nsti tuti onal supposi ti ons are to be understood
phi l osophi cal l y. And the l i terary al l usi ons, Spi el bergi an fei nts,
and Lati n puzzl es are al l egori cal i ndi cators. Each l evel i s true,
but each l evel has i ts own perspecti ve of and approach to that
truth — a truth ul ti matel y summed up and encapsul ated i n
Chri st Jesus al one: the Tkuth (John 14:6).
Ad Maiorem Dei Cloriam.
P A R T O N E
THE ILLUSION
There is above all this ~upreme stamp of the barbarian; the sacrijice of the per-
manent to the temporary. 1
G. K. Chesterton
O N E
IN THE HEAT
OF THE FIGHT
ca-sus belli z
There is a moral strain, arisingfiom the divergence between what our laws and
moral phrases pretend, and what our sociep actual~is. B
Hilaire Belloc
I heard hi m comi ng.
Who woul dn’t?
Stumbl i ng over the pi l es of rubbi sh, refuse, and overgrowth
that l i ttered the al l ey, hi s steal th was extremel y questi onabl e.
But hi s determi nati on certai nl y wasn’t. Nor was hi s desti na-
ti on. He was headed ri ght for me.
I l ooked up, peeri ng between the cracks of broken boards.
The di l api dated fence gave me momentary vantage and advan-
tage. And I saw hi m. He was a perfect pi cture of spi t and pol i sh.
Hi s cri sp bl ue uni form pl ayed a stark contrast agai nst the al l ey’s
cudul ent cl utter. The gl eam of chrome and pol i shed l eather
threw fl i tti ng refl ecti ons of sunl i ght on the ground, shattered
tri angl es of morni ng bri ghtness ski ppi ng across the di scarded
baubl es and forgotten fasci nati ons that composed the heaps of
garbage between hi m and me.
“Hey. Hey you!”
The moment of deci si on. And I was frozen i n i ndeci si on.
“Hey. Get out of there.”
I di d. Cl amberi ng over the edge of the wretched and rusted
bi n, I hoi sted a bul ky sack to my shoul der and ski rted around
the fence.
“Stop. Ri ght
I di dn’t. As
washed away i n
wher e
best I
a ti dal
you are .“
coul d, I began to run, my i ndeci si on
wave of adrenal i n.
11
12 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
“Stop, dammi t. I sai d stop.”
I was runni ng as fast as I coul d now, burden upon my back,
fi re i n my l ungs, and passi on i n my heart.
“I ’m warni ng you. Stop.”
I ran as i f my l i fe depended on i t.
“I ’l l shoot you down, dammi t.”
I was strai ni ng, my heart bursti ng at my chest, my fear stab-
bi ng at my soul .
“I mean i t. I ’l l shoot.”
He swore vi l el y. He swore agai n. And agai n. And then he
opened fi re. Just as I reached the end of the al l ey and rounded
the corner, he shattered the Saturday morni ng sti l l ness wi th a
furi ous report.
I was pani c stri cken.
I ran harder and faster. But he was gai ni ng on me anyway.
I n desperati on I threw mysel f toward the street, sti l l cl utchi ng
my preci ous sackl oad. Another shot erupted overhead. And another.
I ran. I prayed. I made for the parki ng l ot ahead.
Ducki ng past a retai ner wal l and stumbl i ng over a guardrai l ,
I burst i nto a smal l crowd of men, women, and chi l dren paci ng
back and forth al ong a thi rty-foot stretch of si dewal k between the
l ot and the street. My fri ends. Safety.
“Get me out of here,” I screeched.
Gawki ng, uncomprehendi ng, they just stood there.
Breathl ess and terri fi ed, I l unged toward a car. “The keys. I
need the keys. Now!”
Just then, the securi ty guard came chargi ng toward us from
behi nd the retai ner wal l .
“The keys. I need the keys.”
I stuffed my sack through the wi ndow and jumped behi nd
the wheel . Honki ng wi l dl y and screami ng madl y, I fi nal l y
snapped thei r spel l of astoni shment, and several men sprang
i nto acti on.
One tossed me the keys. Two others pi l ed i nto the back seat.
1
I ski dded away from the curb just as another bl ast echoed round
about us.
“Whi ch way do I go?” I was gaspi ng for ai r. My senses were
numb. “Whi ch way?”
“Uh, I dunno. Uh, head for the freeway, I guess.”
“Whi ch way i s that?” I mpati ent, I swerved around the cor-
ner, l eavi ng a trai l of dust cl ouds and fl ayi ng skree.
I n the Heat of the Fight 13
As they steered me i n the ri ght di recti on, I gl anced back.
The securi ty guard was not about to l et us get away. Of that, I
was sure. He roared after us i n an omi nous and carni vorous
pi ckup. I t was the ki nd of truck that young boys drool over:
jacked hi gh off the ground, and gaudi l y adorned wi th fog l amps,
mud gear, and massi ve chrome mags. I t l urched i nto vi ew just a
bl ock and a hal f behi nd us.
The chase was on.q
Faci ng the Anomal y
Day had just begun and I was al ready off the mark. The vast
unendi ng mi dwestern sky was crystal l i ne bl ue and cl oudl ess.
Songbi rds fi l l ed the ai r wi th sweetness and del i ght. The fresh
aroma of turned soi l and amber waves of grai n beckoned from
the outski rts of town. And here I was, careeni ng down the free-
way l i ke a scal ded cat.
Not qui te my i dea of a pl easant Saturday morni ng out.
I t had al l started out i nnocentl y enough, though. I was i n
town for a coupl e of speaki ng engagements. Several pro-l i fe ad-
vocates, i ncl udi ng the two men currentl y pl ayi ng “El l i ot Ness” i n
the back seat of my “getaway car; had i nvi ted me to parti ci pate
i n thei r regul ar Saturday morni ng pi cket of a l ocal aborti on
cl i ni c. s Such i nvi tati ons for me are l i ke the bi te of a si l k pi ranha.
I accepted.
The ni ght before, my hosts had taken me out and about
town to show me the si ghts. We vi si ted some of the great archi -
tectural i cons of North Ameri ca’s heartl and: an i mposi ng Sul l i van
warehouse, an ecl ecti c Graves showroom, a l andmark Wri ght
home, a daunti ng Jahn offi ce tower, and a sterl i ng Johnson
theater. We revel ed i n the gl ori ousl y scul pted bri dges and the
marvel ousl y restored depots. We stopped by the farmers’ market
where a furi ous cacophony of si ghts, sounds, and smel l s drenched
us wi th the del i ri um of busi ness-as-usual . Neon, grani te, and
steel combi ned wi th fl esh and bl ood to procl ai m wi th unmi stak-
abl e cl ari ty the vi brancy and vi tal i ty of thi s communi ty.
The ci ty was al i ve. I t pul sed wi th an assured urgency. I t bore
i n i ts breast that brash exi stenti al exuberance that demarcates
Ameri can soci ety.
As a l ast stop on our whi rl wi nd tour, my hosts drove me past
the si te of the pi cket schedul ed for the next morni ng: the abortuary.
14 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Suddenl y, I was confronted wi th the central anomal y of these
modern ti mes: a l i beral l ust for l i fe, a l avi sh l ove of l i fe, a l ux-
uri ant l i tany of l i fe, and yet, si mul taneousl y, a l eaden l oathi ng of
l i fe. I was struck by the compl ex absurdi ty of our cul tural dance:
a compul si ve rehearsal of the ri te of l i fe confused and confounded
by a chroni c deni al of the ri ght to l i fe.G
Back i n my hotel room, al one wi th my thoughts, a haunti ng
refrai n rang i n my ears:
We must cry out for the young
How l ong must thi s cri me go on?
Unti l we see
The Church i n uni ty?
We must cry out for the young
Sound the warni ng, make i t strong
And move as one
The ti me has come.
The ti me has come.7
I caught mysel f pi ni ng. Maudl i n moments.s
I shook the mood before i t took hol d, though. I deci ded to
put on my “Matt Scudder Cap”g and do a bi t of research. 10 The
ti me had come.
I t di dn’t take me l ong to get the bal l rol l i ng, even at that l ate
hour. I perused the phone di rectory. I made several cal l s to hos-
pi tal s, pathol ogy l abs, di sposal servi ces, and emergency cl i ni cs –
addi ng to my hotel bi l l an obscene fi fty cents api ece. And I asked
a few key questi ons of a few key peopl e. 11
Wi thi n hal f an hour I knew wi th a fai r amount of certai nty
what I woul d fi nd i n the morni ng. I t woul d not be pl easant.
A shi ver went up and down my spi ne.
I n the Bel l y of the Beast
Dawn broke tawny as a l i on and somnol ent as a hearthsi de
tom. A bel vedere weekend, teal true and rumor red, beckoned
through the hotel wi ndow sheers.
I hasti l y went through my regul ar morni ng ri tual : shower,
shave, devoti ons, and a franti c search for my wal l et. I al ways try
to put my money i n a “safe pl ace” when I ’m away from home.
I n the Heat of the Fight 15
I nvari abl y, I forget where that “safe pl ace” i s and am forced to
spend preci ous moments racki ng my sti l l anestheti zed brai n i n
order to di scover how “cl ever” I was the ni ght before. On thi s
parti cul ar morni ng, I hunted through drawers, i n cl osets, and
under mattresses for al most twenty mi nutes before I remem-
bered that I had hi dden the wal l et i n the i ce bucket. I ’ve si nce
been tol d that’s one of the fi rst pl aces a thi ef checks when he’s
casi ng a room.
I di dn’t have ti me for breakfast now, so I went down to the
l obby to awai t my ri de to the pi cket.
The dri ve was pl easant and uneventful . Tal k ranged from
basebal l scores to department stores, from amusement parks to
broken hearts, from movi e rel eases to dry-cl eaned creases. No
one sai d a word about the dark portent of danger that we al l
fel t. I , for one, was tryi ng to i gnore i t, hopi ng that i t woul d just
go away.
But i t woul dn’t.
And I knew why.
I knew what woul d be wai ti ng for us at the cl i ni c. And no
amount of hopi ng coul d erase that knowl edge.
We parked just across from the ol d bui l di ng. I t was a real
oddi ty i n the once di sti ngui shed nei ghborhood. Si tuated on the
mai n street i n town, i t was down four or fi ve bl ocks from where
the commerci al secti on began, i n an area that had l ong ago
sported wi de l awns and overarchi ng el ms. Now, al l those trees
were gone, vi cti ms of Dutch El m di sease, and the grand prom-
enade had an exposed, befuddl ed ai r. Gal l ant Engl i sh gardens
and proud Tudor homes had gi ven way to a barren wastel and of
asphal t and gaudy metal warehouses. 12 The cl i ni c occupi ed a
remnant of the past. I t was once a statel y mansi on — brownstone
and i vy, l eaded gl ass and cedar shakes. I t was an i sl and of anti -
qui ty ami dst a sea of moderni ty.
When i t was bui l t around the turn of the century, i t was seri -
ous and si mpl e to excess. Contemporary men rarel y appreci ate
that styl e. They prefer the esoteri c eccentri ci ty of moderni sm.
No doubt they are ri ght, si nce they are restl ess space-ti me
nomads. 13 But men and women who have l i ved l ong and are
ti red of wanderi ng— who want rest, who have done wi th tempo-
ral aspi rati ons and ambi ti ons, whose l i fe i n the urban Negev has
16 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
been a broken arch – feel i ts repose and sel f-restrai nt as they feel
nothi ng el se. 1A The qui et strength of i ts curved l i nes, the sol i d
support of i ts tal l col umns, the moderate proporti ons of i ts
gabl es and transepts, even i ts absence of di spl ay, of effort, and of
sel f-consci ousness, sati sfi them as no other art does. They come
back to i t to rest, after a l ong ci rcl e of pi l gri mage– the cradl e of
rest from whi ch thei r forefathers started. 15
Here though, they fi nd that rest none too deep.
The apex of the brownstone rose l i ke a sugarl oaf forty feet
above the foundati ons, majesti c and unfettered. But the foun-
dati ons bel ow had been despoi l ed by the creepi ng conveni ence
of contemporanei ty. 16
The bottom fl oor of the bui l di ng was apparentl y remodel ed
someti me duri ng the i rreverent days of the si xti es i n order to ac-
commodate the cl i ni c. A fal se facade and broad spans of pl ate
gl ass i nvi ted cl i ents i nto a steri l e bei ge foyer. The renovati ons of
the si xti es, l i ke the bui l di ngs of the si xti es, show bl and economy,
and someti mes worse. The worl d grew cheap, as the worl d’s
worl d must. 17
Contemporary men may l i ke i t al l the better for bei ng l ess
seri ous, l ess heroi c, and mor e what the Fr ench cal l
%ourgeoi s” –just as they may l i ke the styl e of Loui e Loui e better
than that of Loui s XI V, Madonna better than Montesqui eu,
and vi deos better than Vi deossi s — for taste i s as free as wi l l .
Athanasi us cal l ed such freedom “capti vi ty.’ Luther cal l ed i t
“bondage.” Cal vi n cal l ed i t “depravi ty.” Basi l cal l ed i t “vani ty.”
Chrysostom cal l ed i t “debauchery.” And Sol zheni tsyn cal l ed i t
“i rresponsi bi l i ty.” Si n’s shackl es severel y l i mi t the l ati tude of both
taste and wi l l . l a
A scraggl y l i ne of pi cketers were al ready doi ng thei r paces
back and forth i n front of the bui l di ng. They made for a motl ey
crew. A sweetl y atti red grandmother was wal ki ng wi th a ful l y
festooned col l ege student. A young mother pushi ng a doubl e
strol l er and carryi ng a gargantuan si gn was accompani ed by a
teenager who preened a tragi cal l y hi p hai rcut and a phosphores-
centl y decorated T-shi rt. A mi ddl e-aged coupl e, perfectl y type-
cast fundamental i sts, were engrossed i n a conversati on wi th
three nuns. Several young fami l i es, who l ooked as i f they had
suddenl y been si detracked from a tri p to the zoo or a pi cni c i n
I n the Heat of the Fight 17
the park, supervi sed chi l dren’s acti vi ti es. Two men, i n whose
vei ns fl owed zeal ot’s bl ood, were taki ng turns readi ng passages
of Scri pture over a megaphone. One was dressed i n a banker’s
gray fl annel sui t. The other wore ragged jeans and a chambray
work shi rt. Hardl y heterogeneous, yet they testi fi ed as one that
the ol d bui l di ng bore the sorry stai ns not onl y of bad taste, but of
bad wi l l as wel l .l g
I joi ned them.zo
Every thi rty mi nutes for the next two and a hal f hours, we
watched as a fresh cl utch of doe-eyed gi rl s were whi sked i nto the
cl i ni c by “pro-choi ce escorts.” They met the gi rl s at thei r cars and
qui ckl y ai med them up the si dewal k. They snarl ed at our offers
of hel p and batted away our l i terature. I f a gi rl di spl ayed the
l east hi nt of hesi tati on, the “escorts” woul d take her by the arm
and rush her toward the door. So much for “choi ce .“21
When, despi te thei r best efforts, a fri ghtened and confused
teen sl i pped thei r grasp and turned asi de to tal k to one of the
protesters, to read a Gospel tract, the “escorts” fl ew i nto a fren-
zi ed rage. They l unged at the pi cket l i ne. Taunti ng, jeeri ng,
cursi ng, and revi l i ng, they tri ed to recapture thei r prey. One
turned her contorted, wi l d-eyed gaze toward me.
“You pi g; she sputtered. “You damned, chauvi ni st pi g. Let
the gi rl go.”22
I l ooked over my shoul der where the gi rl was kneel i ng i n the
grass, qui etl y prayi ng wi th several pi cketers, utterl y i ncogni zant of
the efforts of thi s thrashi ng, yammeri ng champi on for “choi ce.=zs
‘Why don’t you go home? Mi nd your own busi ness!” She
was ri ght i n my face, yel l i ng i n my ear, shovi ng, red-faced, and
l i vi d. “You’re traumati zi ng the gi rl , you pi g.”
She went on and on, cl i ch6s repeated l i ke a worn-out record.
But al l to no avai l . The gi rl was wal ki ng away, arm i n arm wi th
her new-found fri ends. She sai d she was keepi ng her baby.zq
Frustrated, the “escorts” retreated to the bui l di ng. A qui ck
conference ensued wi th the cl i ni c di rector, two nurses, and a
securi ty guard. They were cl earl y di sturbed and kept gesturi ng
i n our di recti on wi th stabbi ng fi ngers and mal evol ent stares.
After a few moments of haggl i ng between themsel ves, they di s-
patched the guard, presumabl y to “restore order” to thi s now
thoroughl y unpl easant Saturday morni ng.
18 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
As he sauntered toward us, cal l i ng us to attenti on, he struck
me as an angui shed, angry man. But hi s anger was hi dden and
subversi ve. I t was tucked neatl y i nto the dark fol ds of hi s uni -
form l i ke a murderer’s kni fe hi dden i nsi de an ol d coat on a cl oset
shel f. On hi s breath was what the phi l osophi c observer was fr ee
to regard as ei ther hi s l ast dri nk on Fri day or hi s fi rst on Satur-
day. Certai nl y, he was not parti cul ar.
“Look here, peopl e. Don’t you thi nk you’ve caused enough of
a ruckus here today? Why don’t you just go on home?”
Most of the pi cketers i gnored hi m. They resumed thei r
march back and forth on the sunset si de of the bui l di ng, whi l e
the banker wi th the megaphone and the sweetl y atti red grand-
mother expl ai ned Scri ptural profundi ti es to hi m. *S
“I don’t wanna hear your spi el . I just want you to l eave.
Now.”
Unperturbed, the banker conti nued readi ng from hi s wel l -
worn Bi bl e.
“Hey, come on. Gi ve me a break, wi l l ya? I don’t need thi s
gr i ef.”
Now, i t was the grandmother’s turn. She quoted Scri pture by
memory. Ki ng’s Engl i sh. Perfect i nfl ecti on.
“You peopl e are i mpossi bl e.”
At that, both protesters turned tender and tri ed to reason
wi th the guard. *G But, there was no reasoni ng wi th hi m. Stern
faced, anger no l onger hi dden, he harumphed a few moments
l onger. And then, thoroughl y fl ustered, he turned to go.
Suddenl y, al l was qui et on the western front.
I deci ded i t was now or never.
Hel l ’s Bal l ad
I l eft the si dewal k and rounded the corner of the bui l di ng. A
l ong retai ner wal l dropped off to the parki ng l ot. The concrete
there was overl ai d wi th graffi ti , years of abbrevi ated mani festo,
twi sti ng i nto a si ngl e metascrawl of rage and i ndi gnati on. *T I
crossed the l ot and ducked behi nd an ol d fence i nto a servi ce
al l ey.
Before me was a l arge garbage dumpster. The object of my
reconnai ssance. I stood before i ts reeki ng hul k and paused.
Uncertai n. Hesi tant. And ski tti sh.
I n the Heat of the Fight 19
I fel t fai nt and fool i sh. ‘What on earth am I getti ng mysel f
i nto?” I wondered. Z*
I t was the same sensati on that I ’d fel t standi ng on the free
throw l i ne i n the Pershi ng El ementary School gym a quarter
century earl i er. We were one poi nt behi nd, and I knew that wi th
seven seconds to go I hel d the di stri ct champi onshi p i n my
hands. But al l I wanted to do was to crawl up under the ol d pi ne
bl eachers and throw up. I di dn’t want to bravel y face my desti ny.
I di dn’t want to take my free throws.
I knew what was i n that dumpster just as surel y as I knew
that I woul d mi ss those shots.
Memory i s a madman that hoards my col ored rags and
throws away my preci ous gems. Presci ence i s a school -rearm
that bel abors what I ought to be and i gnores what I thought to
be. I took a deep breath and cl i mbed i nto the bi n.zg
The stench was overwhel mi ng. Rotten frui t, stal e tobacco,
feti d beer, and hospi tal astri ngent assaul ted my senses. Bi l e rose
up l i ke a knot i n my throat.
But, the si ght was worse even than the smel l . I t was horri d.
A scene l i ke a bal l ad come to l i fe. A bal l ad composed about the
tragi c events i n some border hel l .
Several garbage bags had spi l l ed thei r contents out i nto the
open bi n. Mi xed wi th the empty Coke cans, fast food wrappers, “
ci garette butts, and offi ce l i tter were bundl es of surgi cal gauze and
l ami nari a matted wi th bl ood. And wrapped i n those bundl es
were the broken bodi es of several dozen chi l dren. Di smembered
arms and l egs. Crushed skul l s. Muti l ated corpses. Unseei ng
eyes. The l eeri ng l ook of death was al l around me.
They tel l me that compari sons wi th the Nazi Hol ocaust are
i nappropri ate. Hyperbol e, they say. Apparentl y, such peopl e
have never been i nsi de thi s dumpster. Thei r comprehensi on of
the aborti on i ssue i s theoreti cal . I t i s pol i ti cal . Or soci ol ogi cal .
But, thi s dumpster i s as i nescapabl e as Auschwi tz. I ts evi dence i s
as i rrefutabl e. As damnabl e. so
I reached across the carnage and opened one of the pl asti c
bags. Even wi th al l that I ’d seen thus far I was enti rel y unpre-
pared for thi s. There were no bl oody l i mbs. There were no brutal
decapi tati ons. There were no broken spi nes, di sembowel ed bod-
i es, or shredded extremi ti es. I nstead, what I saw i n thi s bag was
20 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
a perfect baby. Whol e. Unbl emi shed. Brown hai red and ol i ve
ski nned. The sort of chi l d you’d make si l l y faces at through the
materni ty ward wi ndow. The sort of chi l d you’d expect to see i n
a bassi net, snuggl ed i nto a fl uffy pi nk bl anket.
I caught my breath. Stunned.
The Greek gods tossed men l i ke di ce. I nvoki ng spi ri ts from
the vast deep or cal l i ng up enormi ti es from earthen el ements,
they made a rude feti sh of cruel ty. Thei r di abol i sm knew no
bounds. But, even they woul d have strai ned to conjure a deca-
dence as ugl y as thi s.zB
I l i ghtl y brushed the chi l d’s cheek wi th the back of my hand
and marvel ed at ‘the del i cacy of l i fe. Li ke hymni ng angel s chi me,
I whi spered a prayer. And tears fel l from my eyes l i ke rai n. 29
Just then, I heard the securi ty guard comi ng. I bundl ed the
chi l d up i n her crude pl asti c sarcophagus and made my mad
dash to safety.30
I nsomni a’s Cl ari ty
“Why was that guy shooti ng?”
“Can he real l y get away wi th that?”
“Shoul dn’t we report hi m to the pol i ce?”
“Or was he the pol i ce?”
“Do you thi nk we coul d prosecute?”
“Woul d the DA even bel i eve our story?”
“How many actual wi tnesses do we have?”
“How di d you know what you’d fi nd i n the garbage?”
“I t’s not l egal to throw babi es out l i ke that, i s i t?”
“What do we do now?”
“Are you sure he’s not sti l l fol l owi ng us?”
We were weavi ng through l i ght traffi c on the freeway. The
securi ty guard had apparentl y broken off the chase and we were
headed back to my hotel . The i mmedi ate cri si s was past and my
“getaway” accompl i ces were ful l of questi ons.
I di dn’t have a whol e l ot of answers.
I knew that I woul d fi nd a mass grave i n the dumpster, I tol d
them, because of the l i ttl e bi t of tel ephone work the ni ght before .31
I t appeared that nei ther the state nor the ci ty had fetal di sposal
or medi cal waste ordi nances. There were no pathol ogy l abs i n
town that had busi ness deal i ngs wi th the cl i ni c. There were no
I n the Heat of the Fight 21
bi o-medi cal i nci nerator servi ces. Li ke so many other abortuari es
around the country, thi s cl i ni c had l i ttl e choi ce but to hurl i ts vi cti ms
i nto the garbage. Offered upon the Al tar of Conveni ence, they are
i ndi gnantl y heaped upon Gehenna.ss That, I ’d expected. The
guard, the gun, the chase – wel l , that was another story al together.
I had heard of i nci dents, from ti me to ti me, of overwrought cl i ni c
operators or staff doctors wi l dl y wi el di ng handguns i n the face of
pro-l i fe opposi ti on. I had seen gruff and overbeari ng securi ty
guards stretch the l etter of the l aw, pushi ng, shovi ng, and bai ti ng
pi cketers. I had seen Di stri ct Attorneys refuse to take up, or even
consi der, l egi ti mate charges agai nst cl i ni c personnel i n extremel y
abusi ve si tuati ons. I had even wi tnessed the exerci se of raw judi -
ci al power i n an attempt to quash pro-l i fe acti vi ti es. But, i n al l
my days, I had never seen a more reckl ess or fool hardy di spl ay.qG
Back at the hotel , we al l got busy tyi ng up l oose ends. We
cal l ed a l awyer for l egal counsel . We cal l ed a l ocal pastor so that
the baby coul d be properl y buri ed. We cal l ed our fami l i es, our
fri ends, our contacts, and the medi a. Over the next several
hours, we were subjected to i ntervi ews, accusati ons, charges,
and countercharges. But as the day wore on, i t became al l too
apparent that the “power s that be” consi dered the baby i n the
dumpster and the shots i n the al l ey nothi ng more than a tempest
i n a teapot. A soon-to-be-forgotten unfortunate i nci dent.
By the next eveni ng I was on a pl ane headed home. The
fl i ght was l ong and ti resome. I tri ed to catch a qui ck nap, but the
perfect recal l and vi vi d cl ari ty of i nsomni a wreaked havoc on my
repose. My mi nd was haunted by i nsane i mages of twi sted l i fe-
l ess bodi es, faces recoi l i ng i n terror, and sprays of gunfi re scor -
i ng the ground around me wi th deep fury.sT
When at l ast I arri ved at home, al l the l i ghts were out and
everyone was fast asl eep i n thei r beds. I went from room to r oom
l ookl ng at each of my chi l dren as they sl ept. I sat on the edge of
the bed where my youngest was snuggl ed up wi th hi s speci al
bl anket cl utched ti ght to hi s breast.
I gazed at hi m l yi ng there for a l ong moment. Awestruck. I
l i ghtl y brushed hi s cheek wi th the back of my hand and mar vel ed
at the del i cacy of l i fe. Li ke hymni ng angel s chi me, I whi spered a
prayer. And once agai n, tears fel l from my eyes – l i ke rai n.
Onl y then di d I feel some measure of rel i ef.
And resol ve.
T W O
ALL THAT GLITTERS
ecce si gn.um 1
I t is not dz$cult to discern that the practical man in social rejlorm is exact@ the
same ani mal as the praztical man in euety other department of human energy, and
may be discovered suffering from the same twin disabilities which stamp the prac-
tical rnun wherever found: an inabilip to c&ine his ownjrst principles and an in-
ability to follow the consequences proceeding from his own action.
2
Hilaire Belloc
Aborti on i s nasty busi ness. And i t i s bi g busi ness.
Si nce i ts decri mi nal i zati on twenty years ago, aborti on has
grown i nto a fi ve-hundred-mi l l i on-dol l ar-a-year i ndustry i n the
Uni ted States,
3
and an esti mated ten bi l l i on dol l ars a year worl d-
wi de.4 More than one hundred and twenty thousand women
each day, al most fi fty mi l l i on per year, resort to aborti on and
then to i ts vari ous bi rth control subsi di ari es.
5
I t has thus become
the most frequentl y performed surgi cal operati on.G Though
propaganda sti l l hangs l i ke a ground mi st over the al ready com-
pl i cated i ssue, these stati sti cs make one thi ng qui te certai n: The
mi nd-numbi ng vastness of the market, the opportuni ti es for a
wi l dl y profi tabl e stock-i n-trade, and the catacl ysmi c effects on
the soci al fabri c have catapul ted aborti on to the forefront of our
soci al , economi c, pol i ti cal , and ethi cal concerns.
And standi ng out l i ke the Nephi l i m i n the mi dst of those con-
cerns i s Pl anned Parenthood. T
Pl anned Parenthood i s the worl d’s ol dest, l argest, and best-
organi zed provi der of aborti on and bi rth control servi ces. * From
i ts humbl e begi nni ngs around the turn of the century, when the
enti re shoestri ng operati on consi sted of a two-room makeshi ft
cl i ni c i n a rundown Brookl yn nei ghborhood
g
staffed by three un-
trai ned vol unteers, 1° i t has expanded dramati cal l y i nto a mul ti -
bi l l i on-dol l ar i nternati onal congl omerate wi th programs and
23
24 GMND ILLUSIONS
acti vi ti es i n one hundred thi rty nati ons on every conti nent. 11 I n
the Uni ted States al one, i t empl oys more than twenty thousand
staff personnel and vol unteers 1* i n over ei ght hundred cl i ni cs, i s
nearl y two hundred affi l i ates, 14 and more than fi fty chapters 15 i n
every major metropol i tan area, coast to coast. 16
Uti l i zi ng thi s consi derabl e weahh, manpower, and i nfl uence,
Pl anned Parenthood has muscl ed i ts way i nto vi rtual l y every
facet of modern l i fe. I t now pl ays a strategi c rol e i n the heal th
and soci al servi ces communi ty. 17 I t i s acti vel y i nvol ved i n both
adverti si ng and programmi ng i n the mass medi a. 18 I t exerts a
major i nfl uence on publ i c and pri vate educati on. 19 I t carri es
consi derabl e pol i ti cal cl out through l obbyi ng, l egi sl ati on, advocacy,
campai gni ng, and l i ti gati on. ZO I t i s i nvol ved i n publ i shi ng,*l
research, 22 medi cal technol ogy,z3 judi ci al acti vi sm,z* publ i c rel a-
ti ons,zs forei gn afFai rs,zG psychol ogi cal counsel i ng,z7 soci ol ogi cal
pl anni ng,zB demographi c i nvesti gati on,zg curri cul um devel op-
ment, 30 pharmacol ogi cal di stri buti on ,31 theol ogi cal reori entati on ,32
and publ i c l egal servi ce provi si on. 33
But despi te thi s nearl y omni present i ntrusi on i nto fami l y,
Church, state, and cul ture, Pl anned Parenthood has somehow
managed to manufacture for i tsel f a sterl i ng reputati on. I t has
brokered i ts aborti on trade i nto a publ i c i mage that i s very
nearl y unassai l abl e.
I t has a reputati on for provi di ng effecti ve and professi onal
soci al servi ces for the needy. I t has a reputati on for devel opi ng
honest and i nsi ghtful educati onal programs for the young. I t has
a reputati on for mai ntai ni ng the ri ghts and l i berti es of the weak,
the desperate, the fri ghtened, and the downtrodden. I t has a
reputati on for advocati ng l ow-cost, readi l y avai l abl e counsel i ng
and heal th care servi ces for women. And i t has a no-nonsense,
tough-as-nai l s, down-to-earth, where-the-robber-meets-the-road
ki nd of reputati on that has made i t a gl i tteri ng star i n the grand
constel l ati on of the Ameri can soci al servi ce fi el d.
Al l that gl i tters, however, i s not gol d.
Just as Pl anned Parenthood’s weal th and presti ge has been
bui l t on death, defi l ement, and destructi on, i ts reputati on has
been bui l t on decepti on, di si nformati on, and di storti on. I t i s a
reputati on bui l t on i l l usi ons.
Pl anned Parenthood i s not al l that i t i s cracked up to be. I n
fact, i t i s not anythi ng that i t i s cracked up to be. I t i s not even cl ose.
All that Glitters 25
The Pro-Choi ce I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims to advocate the j-eedom of women to
choose t~ and when they will have children, without government interfer-
ence. S* But that i s an i l l usi on. 35
Pl anned Parenthood i s anythi ng but a “pro-choi ce” organi -
zati on. And i t i s anythi ng but a popul i st, non-i nterventi oni st
champi on of l i berty agai nst governmental coerci on.
The truth i s that from i ts very i ncepti on, Pl anned Parenthood
has sought mandatory popul ati on control measures – measures
careful l y desi gned to deny the freedom to choose. 36 Over the
years i t has proposed that our government i mpl ement such thi ngs
as “compul sory aborti on for out-of-wedl ock pregnanci es ,“ST
federal enti tl ement “payments to encourage aborti on,”sg “com-
pul sory steri l i zati on for those who have al ready had two chi l -
Cl ren,”sg and “tax penal ti es” for exi sti ng l arge fami l i es.AO
Al though Pl anned Parenthood’s steri l i zati on crusade has
onl y seen acceptance i n the Uni ted States from ti me to ti me —
especi al l y among the i l l , the i nfi rm, the poor, and the i ncarcer-
ated*l — most of i ts other coerci ve programs have been embraced
enthusi asti cal l y el sewhere around the gl obe .*Z
Chi na, for exampl e, has taken Pl anned Parenthood’s sug-
gesti ons to heart, l aunchi ng a brutal , no-hol ds-barred, one-
chi l d-per-coupl e pol i cy.4s Nearl y one hundred mi l l i on forced
aborti ons, mandatory steri l i zati ons, and coerci ve i nfanti ci des
l ater,4A Pl anned Parenthood conti nues to mai ntai n that the com-
muni st government’s genoci dal approach to popul ati on control
i s a “model of effi ci ency.”*s I t has fought to mai ntai n Uni ted
States fundi ng of the Chi nese operati on,AG and has conti nued to
i ncrease i ts own fundi ng and program support i nvol vementAT
despi te wi despread reports of human ri ghts atroci ti es.As
Si mi l ar draconi an measures have been i mpl emented at
Pl anned Parenthood’s behest i n dozens of countri es throughout
the Thi rd Worl d.Ag Provi di ng many of these countri es wi th
detai l ed restrai nts and quotas, suggested compul sory i ncenti ves
and di si ncenti ves, and assi stance i n ci rcumventi ng publ i c opi n-
i on and moral opposi ti on, Pl anned Parenthood has taken the
l ead i n the i nternati onal campai gn to crush the ri ghts of women
to choose i f and when they wi l l have chi l dren.so
The sl ow advance of Pl anned Parenthood’s coerci ve pro-
grams has eroded freedom of choi ce i n the Uni ted States as wel l .
26 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Parents often cannot choose to obtai n ful l medi cal di scl osure for
thei r mi nor chi l dren.sl Fathers often cannot choose to save the
l i ves of thei r unborn babi es.sz Pro-l i fe advocates often cannot
choose to exerci se thei r fi rst amendment ri ghts i n front of abortu-
ari es and cl i ni cs. 53 Al ternati ve centers for women wi th cri si s
pregnanci es often cannot choose to counsel , l obby, sol i ci t, or
adverti se on an equzd basi s wi th abortuari es. 54 Medi cal person-
nel often cannot choose to abstai n from aborti on, i nfanti ci de, fetal
harvesti ng and euthanasi a procedures.ss Ci ti es and states often
cannot choose to uni l ateral l y regul ate commerci al aborti on acti vi ti es
wi thi n thei r juri sdi cti ons. 56 And pol i ti cal candi dates cannot choose to
broadcast tel evi si on ads that portray the “brutal truth” of aborti on-
on-demand.sp Al l thi s, thanks to the di l i gence of Pl anned
Parenthood and i ts i nsi stence on government i nterference i nto
the personal l i ves of men, women, and chi l dren everywhere.sa
I n a recent survey of women who had recei ved aborti ons at
Pl anned Parenthood, si xty percent stated that thei r counsel or had
“very strongl y encouraged them to choose aborti on as the best
sol uti on to thei r probl em.”sg Thi s i s especi al l y si gni fi cant i n l i ght
of the fact that over ni nety percent of those encouraged to abort
by thei r Pl anned Parenthood counsel or sai d that “there was a
strong chance” they woul d have chosen against the aborti on i f they
“had not been so strongl y encouraged to abort .“G’J Over si xty
percent were “sti l l hopi ng to fi nd an al ternati ve” when they went
i n for counsel i ng.Gl Onl y twenty-fi ve percent were al ready “fi rm
i n thei r deci si on” to obtai n an aborti on .6*
So what di d the “champi ons of choi ce” at Pl anned Parenthood
do to hel p these women through the agoni zi ng deci si on-maki ng
process? Di d they l ay out al l the opti ons? Di d they di scuss al l
the avai l abl e al ternati ves? Di d they go over al l the possi bl e
ri sks, hazards, and compl i cati ons? Di d they offer women a real
choi ce? Hardl y.
Ni nety-fi ve percent of the women sai d that thei r Pl anned
Parenthood counsel ors gave “l i ttl e or no bi ol ogi cal i nformati on
about the fetus whi ch the aborti on woul d destroy.”Gs Ei ghty per-
cent sai d that thei r counsel ors gave “l i ttl e or no i nformati on
about the potenti al heal th ri sks whi ch mi ght fol l ow the surgery.nGq
Si xty-ei ght percent fel t that “the procedure was not descri bed wi th
any degree of depth or cl ari ty.”Gs And ei ghty-ni ne percent sai d that
thei r counsel or was “strongl y bi ased i n favor of the aborti on.”GG
All that Glitters 27
Far from advocati ng choi ce then, Pl anned Parenthood has
become, over the years at home and abroad, the most val i ant
crusader agai nst choi ce si nce Madame Mao and the “Gang of
Four” conducted the Cul tural Revol uti on.
Pl anned Parenthood i s not, by any stretch of the i magi na-
ti on, a “pro-choi ce” organi zati on. I t i s i nstead one of the most
vi ci ous opponents of choi ce i n the worl d today. I t knows no glas-
nost. We si mpl y cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The Chari ty I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims to serve the needs ofpoor women and low-
income families. 67 But that i s an i l l usi on.
Pl anned Parenthood’s pose as a champi on of the underpri vi -
l eged i s a cruel hoax foi sted on the uni nformed and unsuspecti ng.
The truth i s, Pl anned Parenthood appears to want to elimi-
nate the poor, not serue them.GS Ani mosi ty toward the weak and
l owl y has been i ts hal l mark from i ts earl i est days.G9 I n fact, i ts
enti re progam of fami l y l i mi tati on was desi gned to foster an
el i ti st pogrom agai nst the undercl asses. 70
I n 1922, Margaret Sanger, founder of Pl anned Parenthood,
chi ded soci al workers, phi l anthropi sts, and churchmen for per-
petuati ng “the cruel ty of chari ty.nTl She argued that organi zed
attempts to hel p the poor were the “surest si gn that our ci vi l i zati on
has bred, i s breedi ng, and i s perpetuati ng constantl y i ncreasi ng
numbers of defecti ve, del i nquents, and dependents.”Tz She
went on to wri te that the most “i nsi di ousl y i njuri ous phi l an-
thropfl was the materni ty care gi ven to poor women.n She con-
cl uded her di atri be by descri bi ng al l those who refused to see the
necessi ty of severel y regul ati ng the ferti l i ty of the worki ng cl ass
as “beni gn i mbeci l es, who encourage the defecti ve and di seased
el ements of humani ty i n thei r reckl ess and i rresponsi bl e swarm-
i ng and spawni ng.”TA
Her al ternati ve to chari ty was “to eliminate the stocks” that
she fel t were most detri mental “to the future of the race and the
wor l d.”
75
To that end, Pl anned Parenthood has al ways targeted
mi nori ti es, the unwanted, and the di sadvantaged for fami l y l i m-
i tati on, contracepti on, aborti on, and steri l i zati on. 76 “More chi l -
dren from the fi t, l ess from the unfi t: Sanger pi ned, “that i s the
chi ef i ssue of bi rth control .””
28 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
To thi s day the thrust of Pl anned Parenthood’s l i terature
focuses on the terri bl e burden that the poor pl ace on the ri ch.TB I t
conti nual l y remi nds us of the costs that wel fare mothers i ncur for
the el i te.Tg I t constantl y devi ses new pl ans to penetrate ~l ack,
Hi spani c, and ethni c communi ti es wi th i ts cri ppl i ng message of
Eugeni c raci sm .80 I t seems that i ts onl y use for the depri ved and
rejected i s as bai t for huge federal subsi di es and foundati on
grants. “I f we must have wel fare: Sanger argued, “gi ve [t to the
ri ch, not to the poor.”Bl Her organi zati on has for years attempted
to transl ate that phi l osophy i nto publ i c pol i cy.
Among measures Pl anned Parenthood has recentl y spot-
l i ghted i n i ts l i terature are such thi ngs as the el i mi nati on of chi l d
care, medi cal attenti on, schol arshi ps, housi ng, l oans, and subsi -
di es to poor fami l i es.Bz I n addi ti on i t has gi ven voi ce to such no-
ti ons as materni ty benefi ts bei ng drasti cal l y reduced or even
el i mi nated, substanti al , across-the-board marri age and chi l d
taxes bei ng i mposed, and l arge fami l i es not bei ng gi ven preferen-
ti al chari tabl e rel i ef.sa
Pl anned Parenthood i s not, by any stretch of the i magi na-
ti on, an advocate of the poor. I t i s i nstead a great oppressor and
expl oi ter of the poor. I ts i mage-consci ous rhetori c of compassi on
i s a paragon of Orwel l i an Newspeak-doubl e thi nk. We si mpl y
cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The Pri vate Fundi ng I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims to be a private~funhd, non-projt fam-
ily planning organization. B* But that i s an i l l usi on.
Fi rst of al l , Pl anned Parenthood i s not an “organi zati on” – i t
i s i nstead an associ ati on of more than three hundred separatel y
i ncorporated organi zati ons worl dwi de.Bs Second, i t i s not i n-
vol ved pri mari l y i n “fami l y pl anni ng” — i t i s i nstead i nvol ved i n
‘fami l y banni ng.”sG Fi nal l y, and perhaps most i mportantl y, i t i s
by no means “pri vatel y” funded, ei ther.s7
The truth i s, a vast proporti on of Pl anned Parenthood’s fund-
i ng at every l evel —from the l ocal l evel to the i nternati onal l evel –
comes ri ght out of the Ameri can taxpayer’s pocket. I t has become
for al l i ntents and purposes an unoffi ci al – and thus unrestrai ned
and unrestri cted — branch of the federal government.
I t i s wi del y known that Pl anned Parenthood recei ves tens of
mi l l i ons of tax dol l ars through the Ti tl e X appropri ati ons of the
All that Glitters 29
Publ i c Heal th Servi ce Act.ss I n fi scal 1987, Ti tl e X funds
amounted to a whoppi ng $142.5 mi l l i on.*g I n 1988, that sum was
upped to $146 mi l l i on .
90
And by 1992 i t topped $200 mi l l i on.gl
Duri ng the twel ve years of pro-l i fe Republ i can admi ni strati ons,
fundi ng for Pl anned Parenthood’s l asci vi ous Ti tl e X programs
actual l y tri pl ed.gz For the Democrats now i n power, onl y the sky
i s the l i mi t .93 Di spensed as a vi rtual bl ock grant, to be spent i n
whatever way Pl anned Parenthood and the other benefi ci ari es
see fi t, thi s Ti tl e X money i s obvi ousl y a major source of i ncome
for the abortuari es and bi rth control cl i ni cs of our l and.gq
What i s not wi del y known, however, i s that those Ti tl e X
appropri ati ons represent onl y a smal l proporti on of Pl anned
Parenthood’s taxpayer l argess. There are some ei ghteen addi -
ti onal federal statutes,gs as wel l as hundreds of state and l ocal
measures, that authori ze publ i c expendi tures and support for
“fami l y pl anni ng” programs, pol i ci es, and procedures.gG So, for
i nstance, even duri ng the “pro-l i fe” Republ i can admi ni strati ons,
Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni cs, affi l i ates, and chapters recei ved annual
federal fundi ng under the seventeen-mi l l i on-dol l ar Ti tl e V provi -
si on of the Soci al Securi ty Maternal and Chi l d Heal th Program.g7
Each year they recei ved federal fundi ng under the ni ne-mi l l i on-
dol l ar Medi cai d appropri ati ons bi l l . I n addi ti on, those cl i ni cs,
affi l i ates, and chapters benefi ted each year from the government’s
ei ght-mi l l i on-dol l ar contracepti ve devel opment spl urge,gg i ts
three-mi l l i on-dol l ar expendi ture for a contracepti ve eval uati on
project, ‘
9
i ts si xty-si x-mi l l i on dol l ar spendi ng spree for “repro-
d
uc
ti
v
e sci ences,s 100 i ts fourteen mi l l i on dol l ars spent on demo-
graphi c and behavi oral research, 101 and i ts twenty-seven mi l l i on
dol l ars budgeted for communi ty servi ces bl ock grants. l “z I nter-
nati onal l y, vari ous Pl anned Parenthood agenci es have been abl e
to ski m the cream off vi rtual l y every Uni ted States forei gn ai d
package. Thi s i ncl udes a l i on’s share of the more than two hun-
dred mi l hon dol l ars i n I nternati onal Popul ati on Assi stance fi .mds~os
and the more than one hundred mi l l i on dol l ars i n contracepti ve
and aborti faci ent research appropri ati ons. 104 Addi ti onal l y, Pl anned
Parenthood gets a l arger part of the untol d bi l l i ons i n grants,
contracts, and cooperati ve agreements of the Uni ted Nati ons
Fund for Popul ati on Acti vi ti es, the Worl d Bank, and the Agency
for I nternati onal Devel opment. 10S
That i s a l ot of money. That i s a l ot ofyow money and a l ot of
my money. And i t i s getti ng worse wi th every passi ng moment.
30 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Pl anned Parenthood i s not, by any stretch of the i magi nati on,
a pri vatel y funded, non-profi t fami l y pl anni ng organi zati on. I t i s
i nstead one of the l argest — i f not the l argest —public~ funded
mul ti -nati onal col l ecti ves the worl d has ever seen. We si mpl y
cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The Bi rth Control I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims that its system of birth control is safe and
efectiue. 106 But that i s an i l l usi on.
Pl anned Parenthood’s bl i nd fai th i n i ts chemi cal and mechan-
i cal methodol ogy i s compl etel y and enti rel y unfounded. 10T The
truth i s, Pl anned Parenthood’s program of bi rth control has fai l ed
to i nhi bi t unwanted pregnanci es, and i t has dramati cal l y i n-
creased the ri sk of severe medi cal probl ems for the women who
fol l ow i t. l I JS Ni nety percent of the fi fty-fi ve mi l l i on women of re-
producti ve age i n the Uni ted States use some form of contracep-
ti on, l og i ncl udi ng as many as seventy-ni ne percent of al l sexual l y
acti ve teens. 1 I ’J Even so, more than three mi l l i on unwanted preg-
nanci es are reported every year. 111 More than fourteen mi l l i on
cases of venereal di sease are reported every year. 112
The number of reported compl i cati ons and si de effects i n-
creases wi th every passi ng day. 113 Al l thi s i s direct~ attri butabl e to
Pl anned Parenthood’s cul t of contracepti on. 114
Accordi ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s own fi gures, the annual
i n-use fai l ure rate for the Pi l l i s as hi gh as el even percent. 115 For
the di aphragm, the normal fai l ure rate i s nearl y thi rty-two per-
cent. 116 For the i ntra-uteri ne devi ce (I UD), i t i s al most el even
percent. 117 For “safe sex” condoms, i t i s over ei ghteen percent. 118
And for the vari ous foam, cream, and jel l y spermi ci des, i t can
range as hi gh as thi rty-four percent. 119 That means that a sex-
ual l y acti ve fourteen-year-ol d gi rl who fai thful l y uses the Pi l l has
a forty-four percent chance of getti ng pregnant at l east once be-
fore she fi ni shes hi gh school . l Z’J She has a si xty-ni ne percent
chance of getti ng preWant at l east once before she fi ni shes col -
l ege. 121 And she has a thi rty percent chance of getti ng pregnant
two or more ti mes. 122 I f she rel i es on “safe sex” condoms, the l i ke-
l i hood of an unwanted pregnancy whi l e she i s i n school ri ses to
nearl y ei ght y-seven percent. 123 I n other words, the Pl anned
Parenthood system vi rtual l y guarantees that women wi l l get preg-
nant — and that they wi l l then be “forced” to fal l back on the bi rth
control l ynch pi n: aborti on.
All that Glitters 31
Safe and effecti ve? Not by a l ong shot. Pl anned Parenthood’s
program of bi rth control i s nothi ng but forepl ay for aborti on.
Besi des the fact that i t i s fraught wi th awfd si de effects, compl i ca-
ti ons, and medi cal ri sks, i t i s i ncapabl e of preventi ng unwanted
pregnanci es as wel l . Pl anned Parenthood’s enti re myth i s an
empty charade. We si mpl y cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The STD I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims thai! it is in the forefront of the battle
against sexual~ transmitted diseases.
1
*
4
But that i s an i l l usi on.
Pl anned Parenthood i s not onl y not i n the fowjront of the
battl e, i t i s not even in the battl e. The truth i s, Pl anned Parent-
hood’s efforts have been tragi cal l y counterproducti ve. I t has be-
come a veri tabl e Typhoi d Mary, actual l y encouragi ng the spread
of syphi l i s, gonorrhea, chl amydi a, herpes, hepati ti s, granul oma,
chancroi d, and even AI DS at an al armi ng rate. Besi des the fact
that i t constantl y exhorts youngsters to fl aunt a ri bal d and i rre-
sponsi bl e promi scui ty, 125 i t conti nual l y promotes an al armi ngl y
“unsafe” exerci se of that promi scui ty. I nstead of affordi ng i ts
forni cati ng di sci pl es wi th the sl i m securi ty of barri er devi ces, i t
pri mari l y peddl es the enti rel y unguarded prescri pti on bi rth
control methods. Ei ght y percent of Pl anned Parenthood’s
cl i ents recei ve non-barri er contracepti ves, 1*G and ei ghty-ei ght
percent of those who previ ousl y practi ced “safe sex” are dis-
suaded from conti nui ng. 1*T
Admi ttedl y, barri er devi ces such as condoms offer onl y l i mi ted
protecti on agai nst venereal i nfecti on. 1*S Due to i n-use mechani cal
fai l ure – l eaks, breaks, tears, sl i ppage, and spi l l age – thei r effec-
ti veness has been esti mated to be at best ei ghty-two percent. 129
But the Pi l l offers no protecti on whatsoever. Nei ther does the
I UD or the di aphragm or spermi ci des or contracepti ve sponges
or any of the other non-barri er bi rth control devi ces that Pl anned
Parenthood favors. Worse, recent studi es i ndi cate that not onl y
do these methods fai l to guard against venereal i nfecti on, they
may actual l y enhance the ri sks. l SI J “Apparentl y,” says demographi c
anal yst Robert Ruff, “Pl anned Parenthood bel i eves that safe sex
i s a l ot l ess i mportant than free sex.> 131
Pl anned Parenthood i s not, by any stretch of the i magi nati on,
i n the forefront of the battl e agai nst venereal di sease. I t i s i nstead
32 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
part of the probl em, servi ng as a condui t for “unsafe” sexual
practi ces. We si mpl y cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The Sex Educati on I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims that sex education is a necessa~ and e$ec-
tive mean-s ofpreuenting teen pregnancies. 132 But that i s an i l l usi on.
Pl anned Parenthood’s mul ti -mi l l i on-dol l ar, tax-funded edu-
cati onal efforts have proven to be anythi ng but necessary and
effecti ve.
The truth i s, Pl anned Parenthood’s sex educati on programs
have backfi red, actual l y increasing teen pregnanci es. Accordi ng
to i ts own survey, conducted by the Loui s Harri s pol l sters,
teens who have taken “comprehensi ve” sex educati on courses
have a fi fty percent higher rate of sexual acti vi ty than thei r “un-
enl i ghtened” peers. ~ss And yet the courses had no si gni fi cant
effect on thei r contracepti ve usage. 13* The concl usi on, one that
even Pl anned Parenthood researchers have been unabl e to
escape, i s that sex educati on courses onl y exacerbate the teen
pregnancy probl em. 135
I n an effort to denounce the threat that such a concl usi on
poses to i ts preci ous empi re, Pl anned Parenthood has erected a
scaffol d of spuri ous stati sti cs, studi es, and surveys. 136 A l ong
fusi l l ade of fi gures come cl amori ng out of i t. Fresh sal vos of
ari thmeti c are marshal ed to the cause. But al l to no avai l . The
col d hard facts l i ke grani te tetons straddl i ng i ts path have forced
Pl anned Parenthood to go on a qui xoti c offensi ve. 137
I n 1970 fewer than hal f of the nati on’s school di stri cts offered
sex educati on curri cul a and none had school -based bi rth control
cl i ni cs. 138 Today more than seventy-fi ve percent of the di stri cts
teach sex educati on and there are more than one hundred cl i ni cs
i n operati on. 139 Yet the percentage of i l l egi ti mate bi rths has onl y
i ncreased duri ng that ti me, from a mere fi fteen percent to an
astoni shi ng fi fty-one percent. 1*O
I n Cal i forni a, the publ i c school s have requi red sex educati on
for more than thi rty years, and yet the state has mai ntai ned one
of the hi ghest rates of teen pregnancy i n the nati on. 1*1
Accordi ng to the Harri s pol l , the onl y thi ngs that effecti vel y
i mpact the teen pregnancy probl em are frequent church atten-
dance and parental oversi ght,l *z the very thi ngs that Pl anned
All that Glitters 33
Parenthood has been rai l i ng agai nst for three-quarters of a cen-
tury — the very thi ngs that sex educati on courses are desi gned
to ci rcumvent. 143
Pl anned Parenthood’s program of sex educati on i s not, by
any stretch of the i magi nati on, a necessary or effecti ve means of
preventi ng teen pregnanci es. I nstead, i t does just the opposi te.
We si mpl y cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The Aborti on I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims that its eforts to provide abortion semices
haue at last removed the specter of dangerous back-all~ abortionsj-om our
knd. 144 But that i s an i l l usi on.
The specter remai ns, darker and more omi nous than ever
befor e.
The truth i s, mhy of the butchers who ran the ol d back-al l ey
operati ons have si mpl y moved uptown to pl y thei r gri sl y trade
for Pl anned Parenthood. 115
The same unsafe techni ques, the same l echerous moti va-
ti ons, and the same twi sted and perverse ethi cs that marred thei r
cri mi nal careers conti nue to haunt them. 146 The 1973 Roe v. W&i e
deci si on di d nothi ng to change that. Pl anned Parenthood’s
“efforts” do nothi ng to change i t, ei ther.
Aborti ons are dangerous. Pl anned Parenthood’s own l i abi l -
i ty rel ease forms say so —i n very fi ne pri nt, of course. 147 There i s
no such thi ng as a “safe and l egal ” aborti on. Legal , yes. 14s Safe,
no way. 149
Recentl y the Centers for Di sease Control conducted a study
of maternal deaths and di scovered that aborti on i s now the
si xth most common cause. The resul ts of the study, rel eased
i n the journal Obstetrics and Gynecolo~, admi tted that those
aborti on-rel ated deaths may be under-reported by as much as
fi fty percent. 150
Accordi ng to a Johns Hopki ns Uni versi ty study, nearl y
twenty percent of al l mi d-tri mester aborti ons resul t i n seri ous
geni tal tract i nfecti ons. 151 And a study conducted by two UCLA
obstetri cal and gynecol ogi cal professors concl uded that “abor-
ti on can be a ki l l er,” due to “pel vi c abscess, perforati on of the
uterus, and someti mes al so of the bowel .” 152 But even i f such i n-
fecti ons and abscesses do not prove to be fatal , they can cause
34 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
seri ous and permanent medi cal compl i cati ons. Accordi ng to one
physi ci an, wri ti ng i n the Bri ti sh ~our nal of P2nereal Di sease, “i nfec-
ti on i n the womb and tubes often does permanent damage. The
Fal l opi an tube i s a fragi l e organ, a very ti ny bore tube. I f i nfec-
ti on i njures i t, i t often seal s shut. The typi cal i nfecti on i nvol vi ng
these organs i s pel vi c i nfl ammatory di sease, or PI D.”l SS Thi s
condi ti on affects nearl y fi fteen percent of al l those who submi t to
i nduced aborti on. 154
Other medi cal compl i cati ons of aborti on i ncl ude steri l i ty – as
many as twenty-fi ve percent of al l women recei vi ng mi d-tri mester
aborti ons; 155 hemorrhagi ng — nearl y ten percent of al l cases re-
qui re transfusi ons; 156 vi ral hepati ti s – occurri ng i n ten percent of
i dl those transfused; 1ST embol i sm – i n as many as four percent of
al l cases; 158 cervi cal l acerati on, cardi o-respi ratory arrest, acute
ki dney fai l ure, and amni oti c fl ui d embol us – occurri ng i n as
many as forty-two percent of al l Prostagl andi n aborti ons. 159
As a resul t of these compl i cati ons, women i n Ameri ca have
seen a massi ve i ncrease i n the cost of medi cal care. l GO Whi l e the
average cost of normal heal th mai ntenance for men has i ncreased
nearl y twel ve percent over the l ast ei ght years due to i nfl ati on,
the average cost for women has skyrocketed a ful l twenty-seven
percent. 161
Pl anned Parenthood has not removed the specter of danger-
ous back-al l ey aborti ons. Not by any stretch of the i magi nati on.
As the worl d’s number one aborti on provi der and promoter, i t
has i nstead extended that dark and di smal shadow al l across the
l and. 162 We si mpl y cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The I nnovati on I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims that it is on the cutting edge of medical
technolo~ with its birth control and aborta~acient research. But that i s
an i l l usi on.
The truth i s, Pl anned Parenthood’s research and devel op-
ment projects have al most uni versal l y proven to be utter fai l ures.
The recent RU-486 debacl e i s a case i n poi nt.
Spawni ng a spate of news stori es and edi tori al s i n the i nter-
nati onal news medi a extol l i ng the homeri c vi rtues of the French
aborti on drug, Pl anned Parenthood pundi ts have heral ded
RU-486 as a stunni ng breakthrough – not onl y as a conven-
ti onal aborti faci ent but possi bl y as an effecti ve “morni ng after”
All that Glitters 35
contracepti ve pi l l as wel l . They have thus thrust the drug — whi ch
they hel ped to devel op al ong wi th the Worl d Heal th Organi za-
ti on, the Uni ted Nati ons Popul ati on Fund, the Rockefel l er
Foundati on, and Roussel -Ucl af – before a woe-weary worl d
wi th a hearty ye-heave-ho.
Eti enne-Emi l e Baul i eu, the chi ef devel oper of the drug and
an i nternati onal spokesman for Pl anned Parenthood, says wi th
no l i ttl e hyperbol e, that i t i s, “the most i mportant i nventi on of
the twenti eth century: and that i t therefore has been ri ghtful l y
‘el evated to mythi c status.“163 Apparentl y hi s assessment i s
somethi ng more than pol i ti cal posturi ng or personal braggadoci o —
for he i s by no means al one:
Accordi ng to Patri ci a I rel and, the presi dent of the Nati onal
Organi zati on for Women – and another strong supporter of
Pl anned Parenthood – the drug i s i ndeed, “symbol i c of the battl e
for women’s ri ghts. I t i s the cornerstone of our future.” 1~
Mol l y Yard, who was I rel and’s i mmedi ate predecessor at
NOW, agrees, sayi ng that RU-486 i s “a most cri ti cal drug.” Per-
haps even, “the most si gni fi cant medi cal advance i n human hi story
and the symbol of a bri ghter future for women everywhere .“ 165
Paul Ehrl i ch, popul ati on researcher and author – as wel l as a
Pl anned Parenthood board member – asserts that i t i s the “medi -
cal breakthrough” that “women everywhere have been hopi ng
and prayi ng for.” 166
Ni ta Lowey, a congresswoman from New York, cl ai ms i t i s
“an i mportant medi cal i nnovati on that coul d dramati cal l y
enhance women’s pri vacy and heal th.” 167
El eanor Smeal , presi dent of the Femi ni st Majori ty Founda-
ti on, says that RU-486 i s a “trul y remarkabl e” drug that has
“amazi ng properti es whi ch hol d tremendous promi se for the
benefi t of women.” I ndeed, she bubbl es, i t i s “an hi stori c break-
through i n medi ci ne.” 168
Syndi cated col umni st and Pl anned Parenthood mouthpi ece
El l en Goodman opi ned that, “RU-486 offers the best possi bi l i ty
of muti ng the aborti on confl i ct whi l e at the same ti me protecti ng
pri vacy.
~ l @ That i s a marriage that she apparentl y bel i eves was
made i n heaven.
)
But the most l audatory prai se of al l comes from Lawrence
Lader, l ongti me Pl anned Parenthood advocate and founder of
the Nati onal Aborti on Ri ghts Acti on League. He sai d:
36 GFMND ILLUSIONS
RU-486 presents a cl assi c case of how sci enti fi c progress can
revol uti oni ze our l i ves. Wi thi n the l ast century, the rai l road
opened up Western Ameri ca and became a major factor i n turn-
i ng the Uni ted States i nto an economi c col ossus. The el evator
was essenti al to the devel opment of the skyscraper, the verti cal
ci ty, and the concentrati on of busi ness and servi ces i n a uni fi ed
geographi c area. The automobi l e gave us more than speed; i t
opened up the suburbs and the possi bi l i ty of combi ni ng a rural
or semi -rural l i festyl e wi th empl oyment i n the central ci ty. The
cathode-ray tube made tel evi si on possi bl e. Anti bi oti cs and
other pi oneeri ng drugs extended our l i fe-span and i mproved
the qual i ty of these added years. But when i t comes to maki ng
an i mpact on our personal rel ati onshi ps, the sci ence of control -
l i ng human reproducti on must be consi dered uni que. No other
devel opment — not even the tel ephone, wi th i ts advantage of
bri ngi ng fami l i es and fri ends together– has so drasti cal l y
changed our l i ves. l TO
Accordi ng to Lader, “Wi th the devel opment of RU-486,
sci enti fi c progress has reached a whol e new stage .“ 171
I t i s di ffi cul t to argue wi th an i nventi on that i s touted as even
more si gni fi cant than the rai l road, the el evator, the automobi l e,
tel evi si on, anti bi oti cs, and the tel ephone — one that woul d put an
end to bi tterness and stri fe and offer manki nd a dazzl i ng new hope.
The fact i s, after a decade of feveri sh fi ne-tuni ng, RU-486 i s
unrel i abl e, unsafe, and utterl y unremarkabl e.
For starters, i t doesn’t work very wel l . That i t has a stand-
al one fai l ure rate of between fi fteen and forty percent – and yet
i s sti l l taken seri ousl y —i s i tsel f a marvel of modern medi ci ne. 172
Even wi th the addi ti on of the prostagl andi n, the fai l ure rate i s
abysmal l y hi gh. One out of every twenty RU-486 aborti ons fi i i l —
whereas onl y one i n two hundred surgi cal sucti on procedures
need to be repeated. 173
I t i s not at al l safe or easy ei ther. I n a recent cl i ni cal study i n
Bri tai n, fi ve hundred ei ghty-ei ght women were gi ven aborti ons
wi th RU-486 combi ned wi th the prostagl andi n gemeprost. Fi ve
of the women bl ed so much that they requi red transfusi ons. One
hundred si xty-si x of them needed narcoti cs to ease the pai n.
Some one hundred fi fty vomi ted, and another seventy-three
suffered di arrhea. Thi rty-fi ve fai l ed to abort and had to undergo
All that Glitters 37
a fol l ow-up surgi cal procedure. And together, they averaged
more than twenty days of heavy bl eedi ng afterwards. 174
And that report i s by no means an i sol ated anomal y. Agai n
and agai n, wherever RU-486 has been tested, seri ous compl i ca-
ti ons have been reported. On Apri l 9, 1990, an I nternati onal
I nqui ry Commi ssi on on RU-486 was establ i shed i n Puteaux,
France, to i nvesti gate the wi de range of these al l eged medi cal
hazards. Ten of the most hi ghl y regarded medi cal and phar-
maceuti cal researchers i n Europe — i ncl udi ng the current presi -
dents of the French Nati onal Academy of Medi ci ne and the
Nati onal Pharmacol ogi cal Commi ssi on – exami ned every shred
of cl i ni cal and consumer data on the drug. Thei r fi nal report was
more than a l i ttl e di sturbi ng. Besi des the common si de effects of
nausea, i rregul ar pul se, and di arrhea, they found that “abnor-
mal uteri ne metrorrhagi a” devel oped “i n more than ni nety per-
cent of the cases .“ 175 Moreover, an average drop of thi rty percent
i n haematocri te was observed. 176 “That may parti al l y expl ai n,”
they argued, “the undul y hi gh i nci dence of coronari te cri ses.” 177
Fi nal l y, they noted “a strong sti mul ati ng effect by RU-486 on the
growth of a breast cancerous cel l ul ar l i ne,” and “notabl y severe
i nhi bi tory properti es on the i mmuni tory system.~ 178
Shortl y after the report was rel eased, Roussel -Ucl af admi tted
that nearl y ten percent of al l the women who had used the drug
experi enced “undesi rabl e si de effects .“ 179 Two l i fe-threateni ng
heart attacks had been reported: one myocardi al i nfarcti on and
one cardi ac arrest. I sc’ I n addi ti on, they reveal ed that another
woman had fal l en i nto a coma for more than thi rty-si x hours fol -
l owi ng the admi ni strati on of the procedure. 181
When the fi rst RU-486-rel ated deaths were reported i n the
spri ng of 1991, the French Mi ni stry of Heal th — whi ch had once
heral ded the drug as the “moral property” of women – i nsti tuted
a whol e host of new restri cti ve regul ati ons. 18* When questi oned
about these precauti ons, Roussel -Ucl af’s offi ci al spokeswoman,
Catheri ne Euvrard, expl ai ned si mpl y that the drug was “too
dangerous” to remai n i n use wi th “unregul ated abandon.”18s
Not onl y i s RU-486 i neffecti ve and dangerous, the treatment
i nvol ves a l ong and protracted ordeal — requi ri ng up to four
cl i ni cal vi si ts. 184 I t i s physi cal l y pai nful and psychol ogi cal l y
debi l i tati ng. 185 Newsweek magazi ne regretful l y, but honestl y,
38 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
r epor ted, “RU-486 i s not the mi racul ous, pai nl ess, pri vate
morni ng-after drug that some have envi si oned.” 186 And that i s
the hei ght of understatement.
But even apart from such obvi ous boondoggl es as RU-486,
Pl anned Parenthood’s best efforts to pawn off i ts sl i ghtl y l ess
fl amboyant technol ogi cal schemes has ended i n compl ete fai l ure.
Despi te spendi ng bi l l i ons of our tax dol l ars over the l ast forty
years i n an effort to convi nce the women of the worl d that casual
promi scui ty, recreati onal drug use, and chi l d-ki l l i ng on demand
are enl i ghtened and sophi sti cated sol uti ons to al l thei r woes, thei r
sexual behavi or remai ns – by Pl anned Parenthood’s standards –
boori shl y recal ci trant.
Ci ti ng thei r own massi ve demographi c and heal th survey i n
twel ve nati ons, Pl anned Parenthood admi tted that onl y 25.2
percent of al l the women uti l i zi ng i ts vari ous bi rth control tech-
nol ogi es were ei ther “successful ” or “sati sfi ed.” 1B7 A fi -dl 56 percent
had abandoned Pl anned Parenthood’s draconi an programs be-
cause of a vari ety of compl ai nts, i ncl udi ng a huge proporti on of
i n-use fai l ures and undesi red physi cal and emoti onal si de-effects. 1ss
Further, the survey reveal ed that an addi ti onal 200 mi l l i on current
users of Pl anned Parenthood servi ces were expected to di scon-
ti nue before l ong. 189 I n other words, Pl anned Parenthood i s
faced wi th a whol esal e mul ti -cul tural rejecti on of i ts precepts and
pri nci pl es. Even so, soci al workers, acti vi sts, and pol i ti ci ans con-
ti nue to pl ace thei r fai th i n them. The i rasci bl e H. L. Mencken
once qui pped that “Hooey pl eases boobs a great deal more than
sense .”l go Apparentl y he was ri ght. Neverthel ess, the women of
the worl d have di scovered thi s di rty l i ttl e secret: Pl anned Parent-
hood’s technol ogi cal advances aren’t advances at al l . Not by any
stretch of the i magi nati on. They don’t work. They never have,
and they apparentl y never wi l l . We si mpl y cannot contend or
pretend otherwi se.
The Popul ati on I l l usi on
Planned Parenthood claims that its birth control, sex education, and
abortion juggernaut is essential to control rapid population growth. I gl
But that i s an i l l usi on.
I ts justi fi cati ons ri ng hol l ow. Pl anned Parenthood i s si mpl y
graspi ng at straws.
All that Glitters 39
The truth i s that there i s no rapi d popul ati on growth for
Pl anned Parenthood to control . There i s no popul ati on cri si s.
Ther e i s no popul ati on expl osi on. Ther e ar en’t too many
peopl e. 192 I f anythi ng, there aren’t enough peopl e. I nstead of
worryi ng about Pl anned Parenthood’s “popul ati on bomb,” 193
many researchers are concerned about a “bi rth dearth.” 191
Ferti l i ty i n the Uni ted States has been steadi l y decl i ni ng for
two centuri es. 195 And i t has been bel ow repl acement l evel si nce
1972.196 I n Western Europe, the fi gures are even more fri ght-
eni ng: The Netherl ands saw i ts ferti l i ty rate pl unge fi fty-three
percent i n just twenty years. 197 The French rate has dropped
thi rty-two percent i n just el even years. 198 Onl y Fi nl and has been
abl e to avoi d the sui ci dal bent of the rest of the conti nent, I gg
prompti ng French statesman, Jacques Chi rac, to excl ai m,
“Europe i s vani shi ng. . . . Soon our countri es wi l l be empty.”zoo
I n the Thi rd Worl d regi ons of Asi a, Afi -i ca, and Lati n Ameri ca,
ferti l i ty rates are now decl i ni ng al most as rapi dl y.z”l As a resul t,
the worl dwi de bi rthrate i s now fal l i ng faster than the mortal i ty
rate for the fi rst ti me i n recorded hi story.zoz And the trend ap-
pears to be accel erati ng.z03 Despi te thi s, Pl anned Parenthood
persi sts i n i ssui ng franti c i nvecti ves agai nst overcrowdi ng and
overpopul ati on.zOA Fal se fi gures tumbl e out of i t l i ke the dry rush
of a grai n chute. ZOS I t i s l ost i n a don’t-confuse-me-wi th-~he-facts
ki nd of obl i vi on. ZOG Li ke Don Qui xote i t i s madl y crashi ng across
foggy moors, jousti ng wi th phantoms, wi nd churns, and vai n
i magi nati ons. But of course, the joke i s on US, because Pl anned
Parenthood pursues i ts fol l y at our expense. Spendi ng our
money, steal i ng our future, and wasti ng our hope, i t careens
down the path of death and destructi on.
Pl anned Parenthood’s attempt to justi $ i ts bi rth control , sex
educati on, and aborti on schemes by appeal i ng to the threat of a
popul ati on expl osi on has been a bri l l i ant but desperate publ i c
rel ati ons assaul t on real i ty. Fl yi ng i n the face of the facts, i ts
campai gn has been as fbl se as the shi mmeri ng sands of the
Sahara. We si mpl y cannot contend or pretend otherwi se.
The Bi g Li e
Li es. Li es. Li es. Al l l i es.
One after another, Pl anned Parenthood’s l i es,zOT hal l owed i n
near sancti ty, bl aze forth i n a posi ti ve confl agrati on of revered
shi bbol eths. Taken together, those l i es compri se the lie. The Bi g
Li e. The Grand I l l usi on. The Myth of Pl anned Parenthood.
40 GMND ILLUSIONS
Myths, accordi ng to theol ogi an J. I . Packer, are “stori es
made up to sancti fi soci al patterns .Zzos ~ They are l i es, careful l y
desi gned to rei nforce a parti cul ar phi l osophy or moral i ty wi thi n
a cul ture. They are i nstruments of mani pul ati on and control .
When Jeroboam spl i ntered the nati on of I srael after the
death of Sol omon, he thought that i n order to consol i date hi s
rul e over the northern facti on he woul d have to wean the peopl e
from thei r spi ri tual and emoti onal dependence on the Jerusal em
templ e. So he manufactured myths. He l i ed.
And Jeroboam sai d i n hi s heart, “Now the ki ngdom wi l l return
to the house of Davi d. I f thi s peopl e go up to offer sacri fi ces i n
the house of the Lord at Jerusal em, then the heart of thi s peo-
pl e wi l l return to thei r l ord, even to Rehoboam ki ng of Judah;
and they wi l l ki l l me and return to Rehoboam ki ng of Judah.”
So the ki ng consul ted, and made two gol den cal ves, and he sai d
to them, ‘I t i s too much for you to go up to Jerusal em; behol d
your gods, O I srael , that brought you up from the l and of
Egypt .“ And he set one i n Bethel , and the other he put i n Dan.
Now thi s thi ng became a si n, for the peopl e went to worshi p be-
fore the one as far as Dan. And he made houses on hi gh pl aces,
and made pri ests from among al l the peopl e who were not of
the sons of Levi . And Jer oboam i nsti tuted a feast i n the ei ghth
month on the fi fteenth day of the month, l i ke the feast whi ch i s
i n Judah, and he went up to the al tar; thus he di d i n Bethel ,
sacri fi ci ng to the cal ves whi ch he had made. And he stati oned
i n Bethel the pri ests of the hi gh pl aces whi ch he had made.
Then he went up to the al tar whi ch he had made i n Bethel on
the fi fteenth day i n the ei ghth month, even i n the month
whi ch he had devi sed i n hi s own heart; and he i nsti tuted a
feast for the sons of I srael , and went up to the al tar to burn i n-
cense (1 Ki ngs 12:26-33).
Jeroboam i nsti tuted a fal se feast at a fal se shri ne, attended
by fhl se pri ests, before fal se gods, and al l on a fal se pretense. But
hi s l i es succeeded i n swayi ng the peopl e. Jeroboam’s mythol ogy
sancti fi ed a whol e new set of soci al patterns. What woul d have
been unthinkable before – i dol atry, apostasy, and travesty–be-
came al most overni ght not onl y thi nkabl e or acceptabl e, but
conventi onal and habi tual . As a resul t, the new ki ng was abl e to
mani pul ate and control hi s subjects.
All that Glittms 41
The powerful , the woul d-be-powerful , and the wi sh-they-
were-powerful have al ways rel i ed on such tacti cs. Pl ato and
Thucydi des observed the phenomenon duri ng Greece’s cl assi cal
era. *
09
Pl utarch and Augusti ne i denti fi ed i t duri ng the Roman
epoch. *10 Sergi os Kasi l ov and Basi l Argyros noted i t duri ng the
Byzanti ne mi l l enni um.zl l Ni ccol o Machi avel l i and Thomas More
recogni zed i ts i mportance duri ng the European Renai ssance. *1*
And Al eksandr Sol zheni tsyn and Col i n Thubron have poi nted i t
out i n our own ti me.*l s Most of the myth-makers never actual l y
bel i eved i n the gods upon Ol ympus, across the Ri ver Styx, or wi th-
i n the Kreml i n Pal ace. After al l , they knew al l too wel l from
whence those l i es came. But as hi gh pri ests of decei t, they used
the l i es to domi nate the hearts and mi nds and l i ves of the masses.
The Bi bl e says that such men are fti l of decei tful words
(Psal m 36:3). Thei r counsel i s decei tful (Proverbs 12:5). Thei r
favor i s decei tful (Proverbs 27:6). And thei r hearts are decei tful
(Mark 7:22). They defraud the unsuspecti ng (Remans 16:18),
di spl ayi ng the spi ri t of anti -Chri st (2 John 7), al l for the sake of
weal th, presti ge, and prerogati ve (Proverbs 21:6).
Such pui ssance i s i n the l ong run al l too fl eeti ng, however
(Revel ati on 21:8), because myth-makers do not go unpuni shed
(Proverbs 19:5). Ul ti matel y, thei r si n fi nds them out (Jeremi ah
17:11).
Sti l l , because thei r l i es wreak havoc among the i nnocent
(Mi cah 6:12), i t i s essenti al that we not be taken i n. Not onl y are
we to be al ert to decepti on (Ephesi ans 4:14), testi ng the words
and deeds of the myth-makers agai nst the Truth (1 John 4:1-6),
but we are to ex@e thei r decepti ons as wel l (Ephesi ans 5:11).
Pl anned Parenthood, not at al l unl i ke Jeroboam and the
other i nfamous myth-makers throughout hi story, has thus far
been abl e to parl ay i ts decepti on i nto a substanti al empi re. But
now, the truth must be tol d. The i l l usi on must be exposed. The
Bi g Li e must be demythol ogi zed.
Woe to the bl oody ci ty, compl etel y ful l of l i es and pi l l age; Her
prey never departs (Nahum 3:1).
P A R T T W O
THE LEGACY
The modern world a’s full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. Th virtues
have gone mad because thg have been isolatedfiom each other and are wan-
dering alone. Thus some scientists care for truth; but thea”r truth is pitiless.
And thus, some humanitarians on~ care for pip; but thir pi~ – I am sony
to say – is often untruth~l. 1
G. K. Chest&on
T H R E E
BAD SEED: THE
HISTORICAL LEGACY
To comprehend the fzisto~ of a thing is to unlock the mysteries of its present, and
more, to disclose thz pro~ndities of its @ure.
3
Hilaire Belloc
On January 1, 1900, most Ameri cans greeted the twenti eth
century wi th the proud and certai n bel i ef that the next hundred
years woul d be the greatest, the most gl ori ous, and the most
gl amorous i n human hi story. They were i nfected wi th a san-
gui ne spi ri t. Opti mi sm was rampant. A brazen confi dence col -
ored thei r every acti vi ty.
Certai nl y there was nothi ng i n thei r experi ence to make
them thi nk otherwi se. Never had a century changed the l i ves of
men and women more dramati cal l y than the one just past. The
twenti eth century has moved fast and furi ousl y, so that those of ~
us who have moved i n i t feel someti mes gi ddy, watchi ng i t spi n;
but the ni neteenth moved faster and more furi ousl y sti l l . Rai l -
roads, tel ephones, the tel egraph, el ectri ci ty y, mass producti on,
forged steel , automobi l es, and countl ess other modern di scov-
eri es had al l come upon them at a di zzyi ng pace, expandi ng
thei r vi si ons and expectati ons far beyond thei r grandfathers’
wi l dest dreams. I t was more than unfounded i magi nati on,
then, that l ay behi nd the New I brk Worl ds New Year’s predi c-
ti on that the twenti eth century woul d “meet and overcome al l
peri l s and prove to be the best that thi s steadi l y i mprovi ng
pl anet has ever seen.”4
Most Ameri cans were cheerful l y assured that control of man
and nature woul d soon l i e enti rel y wi thi n thei r grasp and woul d
45
46 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
bestow upon them the unfathomabl e mi l l enni al power to al ter
the desti ni es of soci eti es, nati ons, and epochs. They were a peo-
pl e of purpose. They were a peopl e of mani fest desti ny.
What they di d not know was that dark and mal i gnant seeds
were al ready germi nati ng just beneath the surface of the new
century’s soi l . Josef Stal i n was a twenty-one-year-ol d semi nary
student i n Ti fl i s, a pi ous and serene communi ty at the cross-
roads of Georgi a and the Ukrai ne. Beni to Mussol i ni was a
seventeen-year-ol d student teacher i n the qui et suburbs of
Mi l an. Adol f Hi tl er was an el even-year-ol d aspi ri ng art student
i n the quai nt upper Austri an vi l l age of Brannan. And Margaret
Sanger was a twenty-year-ol d shy and out-of-sorts nurse-
probati oner i n Whi te Pl ai ns, New York. Who coul d have ever
guessed on that ebul entl y auspi ci ous New Year’s Day that those
four youngsters woul d, over the span of the next century, spi l l .
more i nnocent bl ood than al l the murderers, warl ords, and
tyrants of past hi story cotnl i ned ? Who coul d have ever guessed
that those four youngsters woul d together ensure that the hopes
and dreams and aspi rati ons of the twenti eth century woul d be
smothered under the wei ght of hol ocaust, genoci de, and tri age?
As the champi on of the prol etari at, Stal i n saw to the sl augh-
ter of at l east fi fteen mi l l i on Ukrai ni an kul aks. As the popul arl y
accl ai med 11 Duce, Mussol i ni massacred as many as four mi l l i on
Ethi opi ans, two mi l l i on Eri treans, and a mi l l i on Serbs, Croats,
and Al bani ans. As the wi l dl y l i oni zed Fiihrer, Hi tl er extermi nated
more than si x mi l l i on Jews, two mi l l i on Sl avs, and a mi l l i on Pol es.
As the founder of Pl anned Parenthood and the i mpassi oned
heroi ne of femi ni st causes ce%?bres, Sanger was responsi bl e for the
brutal el i mi nati on of more than twenty mi l l i on chi l dren i n the
Uni ted States and as many as one and a hal f bi l l i on worl dwi de.s
No one i n hi s ri ght mi nd woul d want to rehabi l i tate the rep-
utati ons of Stal i n, Mussol i ni , or Hi tl er. Thei r barbari sm, treachery,
and debauchery wi l l make thei r names l i ve on i n i nfamy forever.
Amazi ngl y though, Sanger has escaped thei r wretched fate. I n
spi te of the fact that her cri mes agai nst humani ty were no l ess
hei nous than thei rs, her pl ace i n hi story has somehow been sani -
ti zed and sancti fi ed. I n spi te of the fact that she openl y i denti fi ed
hersel f i n one way or another wi th thei r ai ms, i ntenti ons, and
movements — wi th Stal i n’s Sobornmtic Col l ecti vi sm, G wi th Hi tl er’s
Eugeni c Raci sm,
7
and wi th Mussol i ni ’s Agathistic Di stri buti sm8 –
she somehow managed to establ i sh an i ndependent reputati on
for the perpetuati on of her memory.
Bad Seed: The Historical LegaV 47
I n l i fe and death, she has been l auded as a “radi ant”g and
“courageous”l ” reformer. 11 She was heral ded by fi .-i end and foe
al i ke as a “heroi ne,”l z a “ champi on,” 13 a “sai nt,”l A and a
“martyr.” 15 Honored by men as di fferent and di vergent as H. G.
Wel l sl G and Marti n Luther Ki ng,17 George Bernard Shawl B and
Harry Truman,l g Bertrand Russel l z” and John D. Rockefel l er,zl
Al bert Ei nstei nzz and Dwi ght Ei senhower}q the “woman r ebel ”zA
somehow was abl e to secret away her perverse atroci ti es, emerg-
i ng i n the annal s of hi story vi ndi cated and vi ctori ous.
That thi s coul d happen i s a scandal of grotesque proporti ons.
Growi ng Up Wrong
Margaret Sanger was born on September 14, 1879, i n the
smal l i ndustri al communi ty of Corni ng i n upstate New York,
the si xth of el even chi l dren.zs Her father, Mi chael Hi ggi ns, was
an I ri sh Cathol i c i mmi grant who fanci ed hi msel f a freethi nker
and a skepti c. As a youngster he had enl i sted i n General Wi l l i am
Sherman’s Twel fth New York Caval ry, and proudl y parti ci pated
i n the i nfamous campai gn that ravaged and ravi shed the South,
across Tennessee, through Atl anta, and to the sea. 26 He worked
sporadi cal l y as a stone mason and a tombstone carver but was
never wi l l i ng or abl e to provi de adequatel y for hi s l arge fami l y.zT
Margaret’s mother, Anne Purcel l , was a second generati on
Ameri can from a stri ct Cathol i c fami l y. She was frai l and tuber-
cul ous but utterl y devoted to her i mprovi dent husband and her
ever growi ng brood of chi l dren.
The fami l y suffered col d, pri vati on, and hunger. They al so
suffered scorn, shame, and i sol ati on because of Mi chael ’s radi -
cal Soci al i st i deas and acti vi ti es. Margaret woul d l ater descri be
her fami l y’s l i fe together as “joyl ess and fi l l ed wi th drudgery
and fear.”z*
Cl earl y, thei rs was an i mpoveri shed l i fe. But, not onl y di d
the Hi ggi nses suffer soci al l y and materi al l y, they were spi ri tual l y
depri ved as wel l . One day when Margaret was on her knees say-
i ng the Lord’s Prayer, she came to the phrase “Gi ve us thi s day
our dai l y bread,” and her father cut i n. ‘Who were you tal ki ng
to?” he asked. “To God,” she repl i ed. “Wel l , tel l me, i s God a
baker?” Wi th no l i ttl e consternati on, she sai d, “No, of course
not. But He makes the rai n, the sunshi ne, and al l the thi ngs that
48 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
make the wheat, whi ch makes the bread.” After a thoughtful
pause her father rejoi ned, “Wel l , wel l , so that’s the i dea. Then
why di dn’t you just say so? Al ways say what you mean, my
daughter, i t i s much better.”zg
I n spi te of Mi chael ’s concerted efforts to undermi ne Margaret’s
young and fra~l e fai th, her mother had her bapti zed i n St.
Mary’s Cathol i c Church on March 23, 1893. A year l ater, on
Jul y 8, 1894, she was confi rmed. Both ceremoni es were hel d i n
secret — her father woul d have been furi ous had he known. For
some ti me afterward she di spl ayed a zeal ous devoti on to spi ri -
tual thi ngs, but gradual l y the smotheri ng effects of Mi chael ’s
cyni ci sm took thei r tol l . By the ti me she was seventeen her pas-
si on for Chri st had col l apsed i nto a hatred of the church — a hat-
red that woul d be her spi ri tual hal l mark for the rest of her l i fe .SO
Margaret moved away from her unhappy home as soon as
she coul d. Fi rst, she went away to a boardi ng school , Cl averack
Col l ege of the Hudson Ri ver I nsti tute, where she got her fi rst
taste of freedom. And what a wi l d and i ntoxi cati ng freedom i t
was: She pl unged i nto radi cal pol i ti cs, suffragette femi ni sm, and
unfettered sex. 31 When she coul d no l onger afford the tui ti on,
she moved home onl y l ong enough to gather her bel ongi ngs and
set her affai rs i n order. She had drunk from the cup of con-
cupi scence and woul d never agai n be sati sfi ed wi th the qui et vi r-
tues of domesti c tranqui l i ty.
She deci ded to move i n wi th her ol der si s~er i n Whi te Pl ai ns,
taki ng a job as a ki ndergarten teacher. Assi gned to a cl ass made
up pri mari l y of the chi l dren of new i mmi grants, she found that
her pupi l s coul dn’t understand a word that she sai d. She qui ckl y
grew ti red of the l abori ous routi ne of teachi ng day i n and day
out, and qui t after two terms. Next, she tri ed nursi ng. But hos-
pi tal work proved to be even more vexi ng and taxi ng than teach-
i ng. She never fi ni shed her trai ni ng. 32 She escaped from the
harsh ‘bondage” of l abor and i ndustry i n the onl y way a poor gi rl
coul d i n those “unenl i ghtened” days when the Puri tan Work
Ethi c was sti l l ethi cal : She marri ed i nto money.
The Wi nter of Her Di scontent
Wi l l i am Sanger wasn’t exactl y ri ch, but he was cl ose enough
for Margaret. He was a young man of great promi se. An archi -
tect wi th the famed McKi m, Mead, and Whi te fi rm i n New York
Bad Seed: The Historical Legacy 49
Ci ty, he had al ready made a name for hi msel f whi l e worki ng on
the pl ans for Grand Central Stati on and the Wool worth bui l di ng.
He met Margaret at a party i n Whi te Pl ai ns and i mmedi atel y
fel l head over heel s i n l ove. He courted her wi th a si ngl e-mi nded
zeal , promi si ng her devoti on, l ei sure, and a beauti ful home —
the ful fi l l ment of her most cheri shed dreams.
Wi thi n a few months, they were marri ed.
The Sangers settl ed i nto a pl easant apartment i n Manhattan’s
upper east si de and set up housekeepi ng. But housekeepi ng ap-
peal ed to Margaret even l ess than teachi ng or nursi ng. She
qui ckl y grew restl ess. Her doti ng husband began casti ng about,
tryi ng to fi nd a way to sati s~ her passi ons. He sent her off for
l ong vacati ons i n the Adi rondacks. He hi red mai ds and atten-
dants. He bought her expensi ve presents. He even bui l t her an
extravagant home i n the suburbs. Nothi ng seemed to sui t hi s
temperamental bri de.
I n short order they had three chi l dren, two boys and a gi rl –
Margaret thi nki ng that they woul d be the keys to her ful fi l l ment.
But al as, they too proved to be but temporary di versi ons. After
nearl y a decade of undefi ned domesti c di ssati sfacti on, Margaret
convi nced Wi l l i am to sel l al l they had, i ncl udi ng thei r suburban
estate, and move back i nto the Manhattan hubbub.
She qui ckl y threw hersel f i nto the fast-paced soci al l i fe of
the ci ty: shoppi ng, di ni ng, revel i ng, and theater goi ng. She at-
tempted to drown her’ rootl ess di scontent i n the wastrel cham-
pagne of i mprovi dence.
Meanwhi l e, Wi l l i am began to renew ol d ti es i n radi cal pol i -
ti cs by attendi ng Soci al i st, Anarchi st, and Communi st meeti ngs
down i n Greenwi ch Vi l l age. From ti me to ti me, when she bored
of her patri ci an acti vi ti es, Margaret woul d tag al ong. Before
l ong, she coul d thi nk of l i ttl e el se, She suddenl y shed her bour-
geoi s habi ts and took to Bohemi an ways. I nstead of whi l i ng the’
hours away i n the el egant shops al ong Fi fth Avenue, she pl unged
headl ong i nto the mael strom of rebel l i on and revol uti on.
The Woman Rebel
At fi rst, Wi l l i am was thri l l ed by Margaret’s conversi on. I t
seemed that hi s bri de had at l ast found ful fi l l ment. Her commi t-
ment was rabi d. She was forever attendi ng ral l i es, meeti ngs, and
50 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
caucuses, getti ng acquai nted wi th the foremost radi cal s of the
day: John Reed, Eugene Debs, Cl arence Darrow, Wi l l Durant,
Upton Si ncl ai r, Jul i us Hammer, and Bi l l Haywood.qq She joi ned
the Soci al i st Party and attended al l of i ts functi ons. She even vol -
unteered as a women’s organi zer for Local Number Fi ve, speak-
i ng at l abor organi zati on meeti ngs and wri ti ng for the Party
newspaper, The Call,
By thi s ti me, vi rtual l y al l the revol uti onary el ements of Amer-
i can pol i ti cal l i fe had been uni fi ed i n the Soci al i st Party: the Radi -
cal Republ i cans, the Reformi st Uni tari ans, the Kni ghts of Labor,
the Mugwumps, the Anarchi sts, the Popul i sts, the Progressi -
vi sts, the Suffragettes, the Si ngl e Taxers, the Grangers, and the
Communi sts.q4 From ten thousand members i n 1901, i t had
swol l en to fi fty-ei ght thousand by 1908, and more than twi ce that
number were recorded four years l ater.qs And i ts voti ng strength
was many ti mes greater even than that, accounti ng for more
than si x percent of al l the votes cast i n the nati onal el ecti ons of
1912. When Margaret and Wi l l i am Sanger entered the fray that
year, the Party had el ected twel ve hundred publ i c offi ci al s i n
thi rty-three states and one hundred and si xty ci ti es, and i t regu-
l arl y publ i shed over three hundred peri odi cal s.sG Especi al l y en-
ti ci ng to Margaret was the fact that no other pol i ti cal movement
i n Ameri can hi story had fought so consi stentl y for women’s
suffrage, sexual l i berati on, femi ni sm, and bi rth control .
Whi l e Wi l l i am was happy that Margaret had fi nal l y found a
cause that sati sfi ed her restl ess spi ri t, he gradual l y became con-
cerned that she was taki ng on too much too soon. Thei r apart-
ment was i n a perpetual state of di sarray. Thei r chi l dren were
constantl y bei ng farmed out to fri ends and nei ghbors. And thei r
ti me al one together was non-exi stent.
But then when Margaret fel l under the spel l of the mi l i tant
utopi an Emma Gol dman, Wi l l i am’s husbandl y concern turned
to extreme di sapproval . Margaret had gone from an arch-typi cal
‘materi al gi rl ” to a revol uti onary fi rebrand al most overni ght.
And now she was taki ng her cues from one of the most contro-
versi al i nsurrecti oni sts al i ve. I t was just too much.
Gol dman was a fi ery renegade who had cl ose connecti ons wi th
revol uti onari es the worl d over: Bol shevi ks i n Russi a, Fabi am i n
Engl and, Anarchi sts i n Germany, and Mal thusi ans i n France.
Bad Seed: The Historical Legs.ey 51
She l ectured around the country, drawi ng l arge crowds, di s-
coursi ng on everythi ng from the necessi ty of free l ove to the
nobi l i ty of i ncendi ary vi ol ence, from the evi l s of capi tal i sm to the
vi rtues of assassi nati on, from the peri l s of democracy to the need
for bi rth control . She made her l i vi ng sel l i ng her Anarchi st mag-
azi ne Mother Earth. and by di stri buti ng l eafl ets on contracepti on
and l i berated sex. 37
Margaret was compl etel y overwhel med. She hung on Gol d-
man’s every word and began to read everythi ng i n Gol dman’s
l i brary i ncl udi ng the massi ve, seven-vol ume Studies in the
Psycholo~ oj Sex by Havel ock El l i s, whi ch sti rred i n her a new
l ust for adventure. She tol d Wi l l i am that she needed emanci pa-
ti on from every tai nt of Chri sti ani zed capi tal i sm, i ncl udi ng the
stri ct bonds of the marri age bed.
He was shocked.
, Wi l l i am too was commi tted to the revol uti on, but onl y to a
poi nt. I n a desperate attempt to save thei r marri age, he rented a
cottage on Cape Cod and took Margaret and the chi l dren for a
l ong vacati on.
By the ti me they returned, Gol dman had departed the
Bohemi an scene i n Greenwi ch Vi l l age for a speaki ng tour, and
Margaret’s attenti ons were defl ected from promi scui ty, at l east
for the moment. She conti nued readi ng the radi cal and sensual
l i terature of El l i s and others, but her acti vi sm took a di fferent
tur n.
A stri ke of texti l e workers i n Lawrence, Massachusetts, drew
the attenti ons of Soci al i st sympathi zers al l over the country.
Sponsored by a mi l i tantl y Marxi st uni on, the I ndustri al Work-
ers of the Worl d (I WW), the stri ke was seen as a tremendous
chance to bri ng the revol uti on to the streets of Ameri ca. Bi l l
Haywood, the l abor l eader who had opportuni sti cal l y formed
the uni on after a seri es of “sweat shop” di sasters, came to the
Vi l l age l ooki ng for professi onal organi zers to hel p hi m manage
the stri ke.
Margaret jumped at the chance.
Her great tenaci ty and i nnocent wi nsomeness proved to be a
tremendous asset for Haywood. She was abl e to sti r up a great
deal of sympatheti c publ i ci ty, and as a resul t the stri ke was a
tremendous success. I n fact, i t was real l y too successful . I t had
52 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
attracted the support of Governors, Congressmen, and even
Presi dent Taft. The battl e was won, but the war was l ost – the
revol uti on never made i t to the streets because the anger of the
rebel l i on was di ffused by the acceptance of the establ i shment.
The I WW was unabl e to recover from i ts vi ctory and was never
agai n abl e to stage a successful stri ke. Margaret returned to
Wi l l i am and the chi l dren, despondent and di scouraged.
I n the weeks that fol l owed, she occupi ed hersel f by dabbl i ng
i n mi dwi fery by day and by hol di ng court i n Mabel Dodge’s
sal on by ni ght.
Dodge was a weal thy young di vorc~e, recentl y returned
from France, where she had spent most of her marri ed years.
She had a stunni ng Fi fth Avenue apartment where she started
a sal on model ed after those i n the Pal ai s Royal e and Pari s’s
Left Bank. Her seri es of eveni ngs were opportuni ti es for i ntel -
l ectual s, radi cal s, arti sts, actors, wri ters, and acti vi sts to
gather, mi ngl e, debate, aspi re, and conspi re. Each ni ght had i ts
own theme: someti mes i t woul d be pol i ti cs, someti mes drama,
or perhaps poetry or economi cs or art or sci ence. I deas and l i -
quor fl owed freel y unti l mi dni ght, when Dodge woul d usher i n
a sumptuous meal of the fi nest meats, poul try, cheeses, and
French pastri es.
Margaret’s topi c of di scussi on was al ways sex. Her detour
i nto l abor acti vi sm had done l i ttl e to darnpen her i nterest i n the
subject. When i t was her turn to l ead an eveni ng, she hel d
Dodge’s guests spel l bound, ravagi ng them wi th i ntoxi cati ng no-
ti ons of “romanti c di gni ty, unfettered sel f-expressi on, and the
sacredness of sexual desi re.”sa Free l ove had been practi ced
qui etl y for years by the avant-garde i ntel l ectual s i n the Vi l l age.
Eugene ONei l l took on one mi stress after another, i mmor-
tal i zi ng them i n hi s pl ays. Edna St. Vi ncent Mi l l ay “hopped
gai l y from bed to bed and wrote about i t i n her poems.”sg Max
Eastman, Emma Gol dman, Fl oyd Del l , Rockwel l Kent, Edgar
Lee Masters, and many others had for some ti me enjoyed unre-
strai ned sexpl oi ts.qo But no one had champi oned sexual free-
dom as openl y and ardentl y as Margaret .41 When she spoke, the
others became transfi xed. Dodge was especi al l y struck by her
sensuous di dactae. Later she woul d wri te i n her memoi rs:
Bad Seed: The Historical Legmy 53
Margaret Sanger was a Madonna type of woman, wi th soft
brown hai r parted over a qui et brow, and crystal -cl ear brown
eyes. . . . I t was she who i ntroduced us al l to the i dea of bi rth
control , and i t, al ong wi th other rel ated i deas about sex, be-
came her passi on. I t was as i f she had been more or l ess arbi -
trari l y chosen by the powers that be to voi ce a new gospel of not
onl y sex-knowl edge i n regard to concepti on, but sex-knowl edge
about copul ati on and i ts i ntri nsi c i mportance.
She was the fi rst person I ever knew who was openl y an ardent
propagandi st for the joys of the fl esh. Thi s, i n those days, was
radi cal i ndeed when the sense of si n was sti l l so i ndubi tabl y
mi xed wi th the sense of pl easure. . . . Margaret persomdl y set
out to rehabi l i tate sex. . . . She was one of i ts fi rst consci ous
promul gators .42
Everyone seemed to be del i ghted by Margaret’s expl i ci t and
brazen tal ks. Everyone except her husband, that i s. Wi l l i am
began to see the Soci al i st revol uti on as nothi ng more than “an
excuse for a Saturnal i a of sex.”As He deci ded he had best get
Margaret away once agai n.
Thi s ti me, he took Margaret and the chi l dren to Pari s. He
coul d pursue hi s i nterests i n modern art. Margaret coul d study
her now keen fasci nati on wi th the advanced contracepti ve
methods wi del y avai l abl e i n France. And together they coul d re-
fi -esh thei r commi tment to each other i n the worl d’s most romanti c
ci ty. Agai n though, he woul d be di sappoi nted. After two weeks,
Margaret became anxi ous for her Vi l l age fri ends and l overs. She
begged Wi l l i am to return. He refused, so she si mpl y abandoned
hi m there, and returned to New York wi th the chi l dren.
Wi thout her husband to support her every whi m and fancy,
Margaret was forced to fi nd some means of provi di ng an i ncome
for hersel f and the chi l dren. She had conti nued to wri te for The
‘Cal l and found some degree of sati sfacti on i n that, so she deci ded
to try her hand at wri ti ng and publ i shi ng a paper hersel f.
She cal l ed i t The Woman Rebel. I t was an ei ght-sheet pul p wi th
the sl ogan “No Gods! No Masters!” embl azoned across the mast-
head. She adverti sed i t as “a paper of mi l i tant thought; and
mi l i tant i t was i ndeed. The fi rst i ssue denounced marri age as a
“degenerate i nsti tuti on,” capi tal i sm as “i ndecent expl oi tati on:
and sexual modest y as “obscene prudery.”A4 I n the next i ssue, an
54 GMND ILLUSIONS
arti cl e enti tl ed “A Woman’s Duty” procl ai med that “rebel women”
were to “l ook the whol e worl d i n the face wi th a go-to-hel l l ook i n
the eyes.”h5 Another arti cl e asserted that “rebel women cl ai m the
fol l owi ng ri ghts: the ri ght to be l azy, the ri ght to be an unmarr-
i ed mother, the ri ght to destroy . . . and the ri ght to l ove.”*G I n
l ater i ssues, she publ i shed several arti cl es on contracepti on, sev-
eral more on sexual l i berati on, three on the necessi ty for soci al
revol uti on, and two defendi ng pol i ti cal assassi nati ons. *T
The Woman Rebel was mi l i tant, al l ri ght. I n fact, i t was so
mi l i tant that Margaret was promptl y served wi th a subpoena
i ndi cti ng her on three counts for the publ i cati on of l ewd and i n-
decent arti cl es i n vi ol ati on of the federal Comstock Laws.
The Comstock Laws had been passed by Congress i n 1873.
Thei r purpose was to cl ose the mai l s to “obscene and l asci vi ous”
materi al , parti cul arl y the eroti c postcards and pornographi c
magazi nes from Europe whi ch, duri ng the confused post-Ci vi l
Wm peri od, were fl oodi ng the country. Anthony Comstock, i ts
sponsor, was appoi nted a speci al agent of the Post Offi ce, wi th
the power to see that i t was stri ctl y enforced. For nearl y hal f a
century he fought a si ngl e-handed campai gn to “keep the mai l s
cl ean” and to “ensure just condemnati on for the purveyors of
fdth, eroti ci sm, and degeneracy.”qa
I f convi cted — and convi cti on was al most certai n —Mar gar et
coul d be sentenced to as much as fi ve years. Fri ghtened, she ob-
tai ned several extensi ons of her court date. But then, deci di ng
that her case was hopel ess, she determi ned to fl ee the country
under an assumed name. She had her Soci al i st fri ends forge a
passport, provi de her wi th connecti ons i n Canada and Engl and,
and take charge of her chi l dren. As a fi nal gesture, just before
she sl i pped over the border, she had them pri nt and di stri bute
one hundred thousand copi es of a contraband l eafl et she had
wri tten on contracepti on cal l ed Fami @ Li nzi tati on. I t was l uri d
and l asci vi ous, desi gned to enrage the postal authori ti es and
ti ti l l ate the masses. But worse, i t was dangerousl y i naccurate,
recommendi ng such thi ngs as Lysol douches, bi chl ori de of mer-
cury el i xi rs, heavy doses of l axati ves, and herbal aborti faci ents. *9
Margaret Sanger’s i l l ustri ous career as the “champi on of
bi rth control ” was now wel l underway.
Bad Seed: The Historical Legacy 55
Sex Educati on
Margaret spent more than a year i n Engl and as a fugi ti ve
from justi ce .-But she made certai n that the ti me was not wasted.
She had found her cause: Revol uti onary Soci al i sm. She had
found her ni che i n the cause: Sexual Li berati on. And now she
woul d further that cause wi th a si ngl e-mi nded zeal .
As soon as she came ashore, Margaret began to make contact
wi th the vari ous radi cal groups of Bri tai n. She began attendi ng
Soci al i st l ectures on Ni etzsche’s moral rel ati vi sm, Anarchi st l ec-
tures on Kropotki n’s subversi ve pragmati sm, and Communi st
l ectures on Bakuni n’s col l ecti vi sti c rati onal i sm. But she was
especi al l y i nterested i n devel opi ng ti es wi th the Mal thusi ans.
Thomas Mal thus was a ni neteenth-century professor of
pol i ti cal economy whose theori es of popul ati on growth and eco-
nomi c stabi l i ty qui ckl y became the basi s for nati onal and i nter-
mti onal soci al pol i cy throughout the West. Accordi ng to hi s
scheme, popul ati on grows exponenti al l y over ti me, whi l e pro-
ducti on onl y grows ari thmeti cal l y. Poverty, depri vati on, and
hunger are thus evi dence of a popul ati on cri si s. I t fol l ows that
the onl y responsi bl e soci al pol i cy i s one that addresses the unnat-
ural probl em of popul ati on growth. I n fact, Mal thus argued, to
deal wi th si ckness, cri me, pri vati on, and need i n any other way
si mpl y aggravates the probl ems further.
I n hi s magnum opus, An Essay on the Principle of Population,
publ i shed i n si x edi ti ons from 1798 to 1826, Mal thus wrote:
Al l chi l dren born, beyond what woul d be requi red to keep up
the popul ati on to a desi red l evel , must necessari l y peri sh, un-
l ess room be made for them by the deaths of grown persons. . . .
Therefore . . . we shoul d faci l i tate, i nstead of fool i shl y and
vai nl y endeavori ng to i mpede, the operati ons of nature i n pro-
duci ng thi s mortal i ty; and i f we dread the too frequent vi si tati on
of the horri d form of farni ne, we shoul d sedul ousl y encourage
the other forms of destructi on, whi ch we compel nature to use.
I nstead of recommendi ng cl eanl i ness to the poor, we shoul d en-
courage contrary habi ts. I n our towns we shoul d make the
streets narrower, crowd more peopl e i nto the houses, and court
the return of the pl ague. I n the country, we shoul d bui l d our
vi l l ages near stagnant pool s, and parti cul arl y encourage settl e-
ments i n al l marshy and unwhol esome si tuati ons. But above
56 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
al l , we shoul d reprobate speci fi c remedi es for ravagi ng di seases;
and restrai n those benevol ent, but much mi staken men, who
have thought they were doi ng a servi ce to manki nd by projecti ng
schemes for the total exti rpati on of parti cul ar di sorders .
50
Mal thus’s di sci pl es — the Mal thusi ans and the Neo-Mal thus-
i ans –bel i eved that i f Western ci vi l i zati on were to survi ve, the
physi cal l y unfi t, the materi al l y poor, the spi ri tual l y di seased, the
raci al l y i nferi or, and the mental l y i ncompetent had to be el i mi -
nated. And whi l e Mal thus was forthri ght i n recommendi ng pl ague,
pesti l ence, and petri fi cati on, hi s di sci pl es fel t that the subtl er ap-
proaches of educati on, contracepti on, steri l i zati on, and aborti on
were more practi cal ways to ease the pressures of over-popul ati on.
As hi stori an Paul Johnson has shown, the Mal thusi ans “were
not men of acti on.”sl I nstead, “they tri ed to sol ve the probl ems of
the worl d i n the qui et of thei r studi es, i nsi de thei r own heads. . . .
They produced a new vocabul ary of mumbo-jumbo. I t was al l
hard-headed, sci enti fi c, and rel entl ess.”sz Even so, thei r doctri nes
were i mmensel y appeal i ng to the i ntel l ectual el i te. Accordi ng
to Johnson:
Al l the abl est el ements i n Western soci ety, the trendsetters i n
opi ni on, were whol l y taken i n by thi s monstrous doctri ne of
unreason. Those who objected were successful l y denounced as
obscuranti sts, and the enemi es of soci al progress. They coul d
no l onger be burned as hereti cal subverters of the new orthodoxy,
but they were successful l y and progressi vel y excl uded from the
control of events .
53
Thi s, despi te the fact that the Mal thusi an mathemati cal
scheme had been proven by hi stori cal veri ti es to be utterl y
obsol ete, i f not enti rel y fal se.sq
Margaret i mmedi atel y got on the Mal thusi an bandwagon.
She was not phi l osophi c%dl y i ncl i ned, nor was she parti cul arl y
adept at pol i ti cal , soci al , or economi c theory, but she di d recog-
ni ze i n the Mal thusi ans a ki ndred spi ri t and a tremendous op-
portuni ty. She was al so shrewd enough to real i ze that her noti ons
of Radi cal Soci al i sm and Sexual Li berati on woul d not ever have
the popul ar support necessary to usher i n the revol uti on wi thout
some appeal to al trui sm and i ntel l ectual i sm. She needed somehow
to capture the moral and academi c “hi gh ground.” Mal thusi ani sm,
Bad Seed: The Historical Legacy 57
she thought, just mi ght be the key to that ethi cal and i ntel l ectual
posture. I f she coul d argue for bi rth control usi ng the sci enti fi cal l y
veri fi ed threat of poverty, si ckness, raci al tensi on, and over-
popul ati on as i ts backdrop, then she woul d have a much better
chance of maki ng her case. So she began to absorb as much of
the Mal thusi an dogma as she coul d.
Margaret al so i mmersed hersel f i n the teachi ngs of each of
the Mal thusi an offshoots. I f a l i ttl e bi t of somethi ng i s a good
thi ng, then a l ot i s even better. There were the Phrenol ogi sts, the
Eugeni ci sts, and the Soci al Darwi ni sts. There were Onei di ans,
Pol ygeni sts, Crani ometri ci sts, Recapi tul ati oni sts, Larnbrosi ans,
Bi neti sts, Heredi tari ans, Freudi ans, and Neoteni sts.ss From
each group she pi cked up a few popul ar sl ogans and concepts
that woul d permanentl y shape her crusade.
But even more i mportant than these i nsti tuti onal and i ntel l ec-
tual connecti ons, Margaret’s Engl i sh exi l e gave her the opportuni ty
to make some cri ti cal i nterpersonal connecti ons as wel l . Her bed
‘ became a veri tabl e meeti ng pl ace for the Fabi an upper crust:
H. G. Wel l s, George Bernard Shaw, Arnol d Bennett, Arbuthnot
Lane, and Norman Hai re. And of course, i t was then that she
began her unusual and tempestuous affai r wi th Havel ock El l i s.
El l i s was the i conocl asti c grandfather of the Bohemi an sexual
revol uti on. The author of nearl y fi fty books on every aspect of
concupi scence from sexual i nversi on to auto-eroti ci sm, from the
revol uti on of obsceni ty to the mechani sm of detumescence, from
sexual peri odi ci ty to pornographi c eoni sm,sG he had provi ded
the free l ove movement wi th much of i ts i ntel l ectual apol ogi a.
Much to hi s chagri n however, he hi msel f was sexual l y i mpotent,
so he spent hi s l i fe i n pursui t of new and ever more exoti c sen-
sual pl easures. He staged el aborate orgi es for hi s Mal thusi an
and Eugeni ci st fri ends; he enti ced hi s wi fe i nto i nnumerabl e l es-
bi an affai rs whi l e he qui etl y observed; he experi mented wi th
mescal i ne and vari ous other psychotropi c and psychedel i c
drugs; and he establ i shed a network for both homosexual and
heterosexual encounters.
To Margaret, ~l i s was a modern-day sai nt. She adored hi m
at once, both for hi s radi cal i deas and for hi s unusual bedroom
behavi or. The two of them began to pl ot a strategy for
Margaret’s cause. El l i s emphasi zed the necessi ty of pol i ti cal ex-
58 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
pedi ency. Margaret woul d have to tone down her pro-aborti on
stance. She woul d, he sai d, have to di stance hersel f from revol u-
ti onary rhetori c. The sci enti fi c and phi l anthropi c-soundi ng
themes of Mal thus and Eugeni cs woul d have to repl ace the pol i t-
i cal l y charged themes of ol d-l i ne l abor Anarchi sm and Soci al i sm.
By the ti me her year i n Engl and was over, Margaret’s i deas
were fi rml y i n pl ace, her strategy was thoroughl y mapped out,
and her agenda was careful l y outl i ned.
She set out for Ameri ca wi th a demoni c determi nati on to
al ter the course of Western ci vi l i zati on.
Uhi matel y, she succeeded.
Pl anned Parenthood I s Concei ved
Margaret’s fi rst task after crossi ng the Atl anti c was to face
the l egal charges agai nst her. Usi ng the ski l l s she devel oped i n
the I WW, she i mmedi atel y began a bri l l i ant publ i c rel ati ons
campai gn that so ral l i ed publ i c support for her cause that the au-
thori ti es were forced to drop al l charges.
She had won her fi rst vi ctory.
Then, i n order to capi tal i ze on al l the publ i ci ty that her vi c-
tory had generated, she embarked on a three-and-a-hal f-month,
coast-to-coast speaki ng tour. She was a stunni ng success, draw-
i ng l arge, enthusi asti c crowds.
Another vi ctory.
Next, she deci ded to open a bi rth control cl i ni c. Papers,
pamphl ets, and speeches coul d onl y do so much to usher i n the
revol uti on. Fol l owi ng her Mal thusi an and Eugeni c i nsti ncts, she
opened her cl i ni c i n the Brownsvi l l e secti on of New York, an area
popul ated by newl y i mmi grated Sl avs, Lati ns, I tal i ans, and Jews.
But there woul d be no vi ctory for Margaret Sanger i n thi s
venture. Wi thi n two weeks,, the cl i ni c had been shut down by
the authori ti es. Margaret and her si ster, Ethel , were arrested
and sentenced to thi rty days each i n the workhouse for the di s-
tri buti on of obscene materi al s and the prescri pti on of danger-
ous medi cal procedures.
Margaret was undeterred, of course. As soon as she was re-
l eased, she founded a new organi zati on, the Bi rth Control
League, and began to publ i sh a new magazi ne, The Bi r th Control
Review. She was sti l l i ntent on openi ng a cl i ni c, but her ti me i n
Bad Seed: The Historical LegaV 59
jai l had convi nced her that she needed to cul ti vate a broader fol -
l owi ng before she made another attempt at that. The new organ-
i zati on and magazi ne woul d hel p her do just that.
And she was ri ght.
Though she was now drawi ng severe publ i c cri ti ci sm from such
men as the fi ery popul ar evangel i st Rev. Bi l l y Sunday, the famed
Cathol i c soci al reformer Msgr. John Ryan, and the gal l ant former
presi dent Theodore Roosevel t, Margaret was gai ni ng stature
among the urbane a.hd urban i ntel l i gentsi a. Money began to
pour i nto her offi ce as subscri pti ons and donati ons soared. And
the fact that arti cl es from i nfl uenti al authors such as H. G. Wel l s,
Pearl Buck, Jul i an Huxl ey, Karl Menni nger, Havel ock El l i s, and
Harry Emmerson Fosdi ck appeared on the pages of the Reoi ew
onl y boosted Margaret’s respectabi l i ty that much more.
By 1922 her fame and fortune were unshakabl y secure. She
had won several key l egal battl es, had coordi nated an i nterna-
ti onal conference on bi rth control , and had gone on a very suc-
cessful round-the-worl d l ecture tour. Her name had become a
househol d word and one of her numerous books had become an
i nstant bestsel l er i n spi te of— or perhaps because of— the tre-
mendous controversy i t had caused.
Enti tl ed The Ri ot oj Civilization, i t was one of the fi rst popu-
l arl y wri tten books to operi l y expound and extol Mal thusi an and
Eugeni c ai ms. Throughout i ts 284 pages, Margaret unashamedl y
cal l ed for the el i mi nati on of “human weeds,” for the cessati on of
chari ty, for the segregati on of “morons, mi sfi ts, and the mal ad-
justed” and for the’ steri l i zati on of “geneti cal l y i nferi or races.”s7
Publ i shed today, such a book woul d be l abel ed i mmedi atel y as
abomi nabl y raci st and total i tari an. But wri ti ng when she di d,
Margaret onl y gai ned more accl ai m.
Her cause seemed unstoppabl e now. The revol uti on had
trul y begun.
Even so, Margaret was mi serabl e. Her pri vate l i fe was i n ut-
ter shambl es. Her marri age had ended. Her daughter caught
col d and ul ti matel y di ed of pneumoni a. Her boys were negl ected
and forgotten. And her once ravi shi ng beauty was fadi ng wi th
age and abuse.
Desperate to fi nd meani ng and happi ness, she l ost hersel f i n
a profusi on of sexual l i ai sons. S* She went from one l over to
60 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
another, someti mes several i n a si ngl e day. She experi mented
wi th i nnumerabl e eroti c fantasi es and feti shes, but sati sfacti on
al ways el uded her grasp. She began to dabbl e i n the occul t, par-
ti ci pati ng i n seances and practi ci ng Eastern medi tati on. She
even went so far as to appl y for i ni ti ati on i nto the mysteri es of
Rosi cruci ani sm and Theosophy.
When al l el se fai l ed, she turned to the one thi ng that she
knew woul d bri ng her sol ace: once agai n, she marri ed i nto
money.
J. Noah Sl ee was the presi dent of the Three-i n-One Oi l
Company and a l egi ti mate mi l l i onai re. A conservati ve church-
goi ng Epi scopal i an, he opposed everythi ng that Margaret stood
for, but found her i rresi sti bl e anyway.
At fi rst, Margaret resi sted hi s pl eas for marri age. She sti l l
bel i eved that i t was a “degenerate i nsti tuti on.” But ni ne mi l l i on
dol l ars was a mi ghty temptati on. I t was a temptati on she si mpl y
.
coul d not resi st.
But just to make certai n that the new rel ati onshi p woul d not
i nterfere wi th her affai rs and her cause, she drew up a prenupti al
agreement that Sl ee was forced to si gn just before the weddi ng
ceremony. I t sti pul ated that Margaret woul d be free to come and
go as she pl eased wi th no questi ons asked. She was to have her
own apartment and servants wi thi n her husband’s home, where
she coul d entertai n “fri ends” of her own choosi ng, behi nd cl osed
doors. Furthermore, Sl ee woul d have to tel ephone her from the
other end of the house even to ask for a di nner date.
‘Margaret tol d her l overs that wi th that document, the marr-
i age woul d make l i ttl e or no di fference i n her l i fe — apart from
the conveni ence of the money, of course.5g And she went out of
her way to prove i t; she fl aunted her promi scui ty and i nfi del i ty
every chance she coul d get.
She was sti l l terri bl y unhappy, but at l east now she was ter-
ri bl y ri ch, too.
I mmedi atel y, Sanger set hersel f to the task of usi ng her new
weal th to further the cause. She opened another cl i ni c — thi s ti me
cal l i ng i t a “Research Bureau” i n order to avoi d l egal tangl es. ‘o
Then she began to smuggl e di aphragms i nto the country from
Hol l and.Gl She waged several successful “turf” battl es to mai n-
tai n control over her “empi re.”GZ She campai gned di l i gentl y to
Bad Seed: The Historical Lega~ 61
wi n over the medi cal communi ty.Gs She secured massi ve founda-
ti on grants from the Rockefel l er, the Fords, and the Mel l ons.G4
She took her struggl e to Washi ngton, testi fyi ng before several
congressi onal commi ttees, advocati ng the l i beral i zati on of con-
tracepti ve prescri pti on l aws.Gs And she fought for the i ncorpora-
ti on of reproducti ve control i nto state programs as a form of
soci al pl anni ng.GG Wi th her al most unl i mi ted fi nanci al resources,
she was abl e to open doors and pul l stri ngs that had heretofore
been enti rel y i naccessi bl e to he-r.
Margaret was al so abl e to use her new-found weal th to fi ght
an i mportant publ i c rel ati ons campai gn to redeem her reputati on.
Because of her Mal thusi an and Eugeni c connecti ons, she
had become cl osel y associ ated wi th the sci enti sts and theori sts
who put together Nazi Germany’s “race puri fi cati on” program.
She had openl y endorsed the euthanasi a, steri l i zati on, aborti on,
and i nfanti ci de programs of the earl y Rei ch. She publ i shed a
number of arti cl es i n The Birth Control Review that mi rrored
Hi tl er’s Aryan-Whi te Supremaci st rhetori c. She even commi s-
si oned Dr. Ernst Rudi n, the di rector of the Nazi Medi cal Ex-
peri mentati on program, to wri te for The Review hi msel f.
Natural l y, when Worl d War I I broke out and the gri sl y
detai l s of the Nazi programs began to come to l i ght, Margaret
was forced to backpedal her posi ti on and cover up her compl i -
ci ty. The Great Depressi on had been a boon for raci st and
Eugeni c arguments, but those days were now past. Charges of
anti -Semi ti sm had been harml essl y hurl ed at her si nce her tri al
i n 1917, but now that Auschwi tz and Dachau had become very
much a part of the publ i c consci ence, she real i zed she woul d
have to do somethi ng, and qui ckl y.
Her fi rst step toward redeemi ng her publ i c i mage was to
change the name of her organi zati on.G7 “Pl anned Parenthood”
was a name that had been proposed from wi thi n the bi rth con-
trol movement si nce at l east 1938. One of the arguments for the
new name was that i t connoted a posi ti ve program and conveyed
a cl ean, whol esome, fami l y-ori ented i mage. I t di verted attenti on
from the i nternati onal and revol uti onary i ntenti ons of the move-
ment, focusi ng i nstead on the personal and i ndi vi dual di men-
si ons of bi rth control . By 1942, i t was deci ded. The organi zati on
woul d be cal l ed the Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of Ameri ca.
62 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Next, she embarked on an aggressi ve afhl i ati on program
that brought hundreds of l ocal and regi onal bi rth control l eaWes
under the umbrel l a of a nati onal organi zati on, and then dozens
of nati onal organi zati ons were brought under the umbrel l a of an
i nternati onal organi zati on. Thi s enabl ed Margaret to draw on
the i ntegri ty and respectabi l i ty of grassroots organi zati ons,
sol i di fyi ng and securi ng her pl ace at the top.
Fi nal l y, she i ni ti ated a massi ve propaganda bl i tz ai med at the
war-weary, ready-for-prosperi ty mi ddl e cl ass. Al ways careful to
hi de her i l l i ci t affai rs and her radi cal pol i ti cal l eani ngs, her camp-
ai gn emphasi zed patri oti sm and fami l y val ues.
Before l ong, Margaret’s bri l l i ant strategy had won for her,
and Pl anned Parenthood, the admi rati on and respect of vi rtu-
al l y the enti re nati on, and certai nl y of the enti re soci al servi ces
communi ty.
Of course, these tremendous successes di d l i ttl e to ease the
ache of her perpetual unhappi ness. She conti nued her sordi d
and promi scuous ti ai rs even after ol d age and poor heal th had
ov er tak en her.Gs Her patheti c attr acti on to occul ti sm
deepened.Gg And perhaps worst of al l , by 1949 she had become
addi cted to both drugs and al cohol . 70
By the ti me she di ed on September 6, 1966, a week shy of her
ei ghty-seventh bi rthday, Margaret Sanger had nearl y ful fi l l ed
her promi se to spend every l ast penny of Sl ee’s fortune.71 I n the
process, though, she had l ost everythi ng el se: l ove, happi ness,
sati sfacti on, ful fi l l ment, fami l y, and fri ends. I n the end, her
struggl e was for naught, “for what does i t profi t a man to gai n
the whol e worl d, but to l ose hi s own soul ? Or what shal l a man
gi ve i n exchange for hi s soul ?” (Mark 8:36-37).
The Conti nui ng Legacy
Just as a nati on’s “head” defi nes the character and vi si on of
that nati on, so an organi zati on’s “head” defi nes the character and
vi si on of that organi zati on.
Thi s i s a very basi c Bi bl i cal pri nci pl e. I t i s the pri nci pl e of
“l egacy.” I t i s the pri nci pl e of “i nheri tance.”
The Canaani te peopl e were perverse and corrupt. They
practi ced every manner of wi ckedness and reprobati on. Why
were they so di ssol ute? The answer, accordi ng to the Bi bl e, i s
Bad Seed: The Historical Legmy 63
that thei r founders and l eaders passed evi l onto them as thei r legacy,
as thei r inhaitawe (Genesi s 9:25; Levi ti cus 18:24-25; Amos 1:3-12).
Si mi l arl y, the Moabi tes and the Ammoni tes were a rebel -
l i ous and i mprovi dent peopl e. They rai l ed agai nst God’s Law
and God’s Peopl e. Why were they so defi ant? Agai n, the Bi bl e
tel l s us that thei r founders and l eaders passed i nsurrecti on on to
them as thei r legacy, as thei r inheritance (Genesi s 19:30-38; Num-
bers 21:21-23; Amos 1:13-15; Amos 2:1-3). A seed wi l l al ways
yi el d i ts own ki nd (Genesi s 1:11). Bad seed bri ngs forth bi tter
harvest (Ezra 9:2; I sai ah 1:4; I sai ah 14: 20). You reap what you
sow (Gal ati ans 6:7). A nati on or an organi zati on that i s sown,
nurtured, and grown by decei t, promi scui ty y, and l awl essness,
cannot hel p but be evi l to the core (Hosea 8:7).
Pl anned Parenthood i s a paradi gmati cal i l l ustrati on of thi s
pri nci pl e. Margaret Sange#s character and vi si on are perfectl y
mi rrored i n the organi zati on that she wrought. She i ntended i t
that way. And the l eaders that have come after her have i n no
wi se attempted to have i t another way.
Dr. Al an Guttmacher, the man who i mmedi atel y succeeded
her as presi dent of Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of Ameri ca,
once sai d, “We are merel y wal ki ng down the path that Mrs.
Sanger carved out for us. ’72 Faye Wattl eton, presi dent of the
orgti i zati on duri ng the decade of the ei ghti es, has cl ai med that
she i s “proud” to be “wal ki ng i n the footsteps” of Margaret Sanger?3
And the presi dent of the New York affi l i ate i s Al exander Sanger,
her grandson.
74
Thus, vi rtual l y everythi ng that she bel i eved, everythi ng that
she aspi red to, everythi ng that she practi ced, and everythi ng
that she ai med for i s somehow refl ected i n the organi zati on and
program of Pl anned Parenthood, even today. The fri ghteni ng
thi ng about Pl anned Parenthood’s hi stori cal l egacy i s that the
l egacy i s not just hi stori cal . I t i s as current as tomorrow morn-
i ng’s newspaper.
Aborti on. I n her book Women and t/ ze New Race, Margaret
Sanger asserted that “the most merci ful thi ng a l arge fami l y can
do to one of i ts i nfant members i s to ki l l i t .“7f’ Today, Pl anned
Parenthood’s commi tment to that phi l osophy i s sel f-evi dent. The
organi zati on i s the worl d’s number-one aborti on provi der.TG I t
has aggressi vel y fought the i ssue through the courts.TT I t has made
ki l l i ng i nfant members of l arge fami l i es i ts hi ghest pri ori ty.TS
Bad seed bri ngs forth bi tter harvest. The l egacy conti nues.
64 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Pronukcui @ Li k e her mentor s Emma Gol dman and
Havel ock El l i s, Margaret Sanger was not content to keep her
l asci vi ous and concupi scent behavi or to hersel f. She was a
zeal ous evangel i st for free l ove. Even i n her ol d age, she per-
si sted i n prosel yti zi ng her si xteen-year-ol d granddaughter, tel l -
i ng her that ki ssi ng, petti ng, and even i ntercourse were fi pe as
l ong as she was “si ncere,” and that havi ng sex about “three ti mes
a day” was “just about ri ght .=79 Today, Pl anned Parenthood’s
commi tment to undermi ni ng the moral val ues of teens i s evi dent
i n vi rtual l y al l i ts l i terature. I t teachs ki ds to masturbate .80 I t en-
dorses premari tal forni cati on.gl I t approves of homosexual i ty.sz
I t encourages sexual experi mentati on.ss I t vi l i fi es Chri sti an val -
ues, prohi bi ti ons, and consci ences.sq Bad seed bri ngs forth bi tter
harvest. The l egacy conti nues.
Socialism. Margaret Sanger was commi tted to the revol u-
ti on. She wanted to overthrow the ol d order of Western
Chri stendom and usher i n a “New Age.” Though i n her l atter
years she toned down her radi cal rhetori c, she never wavered
from that stance. Today, Pl anned Parenthood conti nues to carry
the banner for bi g government, bi g spendi ng, freewheel i ng l i b-
eral causes and agendas.ss Even the normal l y sedate Wi l l Street
J ournal had to admi t that “Pl anned Parenthood’s l ove afFai r wi th
Soci al i sm has become more than a harml ess upper mi ddl e-cl ass
hobby and now borders on the l udi crous.”sG Bad seed bri ngs
forth bi tter harvest. The l egacy conti nues.
Greed. When Leon Trotsky came to the Uni ted States bri efl y
i n 1917, he met Margaret Sanger and her fri ends and came away
wi th a feel i ng of great revul si on .87 I n hi s memoi rs, he recorded
nothi ng but di staste for the ri ch, smug Soci al i sts he encountered
i n the Vi l l age.ss He sai d they were l i ttl e better than “hypocri ti cal
Babbi ts,” referri ng to the Si ncl ai r Lewi s character who used hi s
parl or-room Soci al i sm as a screen for personal ambi ti on and
sel f-aggrandi sement. 89 Sanger and the other Vi l l age el i ti sts were
revol uti onari es onl y to the extent that Soci al i sm di d not confl i ct
wi th weal th, l uxury, and pol i ti cal i nfl uence.g” Today, Pl anned
Parenthood’s commi tment to the revol uti on conti nues to hi nge
on that unswervi ng pursui t of “fi l thy l ucre .“91 From i ts dogged
preoccupati on wi th government contracts, grants, and bequests,
to i ts commerci al ventures, i nvestments, and vocati ons, i ts
Bad Seed: The Historical Legacy 65
mercenary avari ci ousness i s everywhere apparent .92 Bad seed
bri ngs forth bi tter harvest. The l egacy conti nues.
Rel i gi on. I n her fi rst newspaper, The Woman Rebel , Margaret
Sanger admi tted that “Bi rth control appeal s to the advanced
radi cal because i t i s cal cul ated to undermi ne the authori ty of the
Chri sti an churches. I l ook forward to seei ng humani ty free
someday of the tyr anny of Chr i sti ani ty no l ess than
Capi tal i sm.
~93 TodaY, planned parenthood i s conti nui ng her
crusade agai nst the church. I n i ts adverti sements ,9A i n i ts l i ter-
ature, gs i n i ts programs, gG and i n i ts pol i ci es,gT the organi zati on
makes every attempt to mock, bel i ttl e, and undermi ne Bi bl i cal
Chri sti ani ty. Bad seed bri ngs forth bi tter harvest. The l egacy
conti nues.
Decei t. Throughout her l i fe, Margaret Sanger devel oped a
raki sh and reckl ess pattern of di shonesty.gs She twi sted the truth
about her qual i fi cati ons as a nurse,gg about the detai l s of her
work, 100 and about the vari ous sordi d addi cti ons that control l ed
her l i fe. 101 Her autobi ographi es were fi l l ed wi th exaggerati ons,
di storti ons, and out-and-out l i es. 10Z She even went so far as to
al ter the records i n her mother’s fami l y Bi bl e i n order to protect
her vani ty. 10S Today, Pl anned Parenthood fai thful l y carri es on
her tradi ti on of di si nformati on. The organi zati on conti nual l y
mi srepresents the facts about i ts l ucrati ve bi rth control , 10A sex
educati on, 105 and aborti on enterpri ses. 106 Bad seed bri ngs forth
bi tter harvest. The l egacy conti nues.
A recent Pl anned Parenthood report bore the sl ogan “Proud
of Our Past — Pl anni ng the Future.” 10T I f that i s true — i f the or-
gani zati on real l y i s proud of i ts venal and profl i gate past, and i f i t
real l y i s pl anni ng the future – then we al l have much to be con-
cerned about.
Those who pl ow i ni qui ty and those who sow troubl e harvest i t.
By the breath of God they peri sh, and by the bl ast of Hi s anger
they come to an end (Job 4:8-9).
F O U R
BACK-ALLEY BUTCHERS:
THE MEDICAL LEGACY
aegrescit nwdeno 1
There is no fortress of mank flesh so made, but subtle, treacherous time corms
creeping in. Oh, long before his last assaults begin, the enemy% on; the strong-
hold is betrayed; and the one lone~ watchman, ha~-dismayed, beyond the cover-
i ng of dark, he hears them come: the distant hosts of death that march with
mu@ed drum. f
Hilaire Belloc
The overcast sky hung i n gray stri ps over the ci ty– pal e
where the sun nearl y broke through the cl ouds, darker where
stubborn patches of rai n rode the currents of a l ol l i ng stormy
breeze. The gl aze of the heavens permi tted no shadows, onl y a
darkeni ng of col or here and there, and a dul l i ng of percepti on.
Carol i ne Ness tol d me that her l i fe was l i ke that now.
“Dreary; she sai d. “Sad and dreary.”
Her thi ck bl onde hai r fel l i n l ong, l oose waves to her
shoul ders. Her eyes were as bl ue as poker chi ps. Backl i t by
bri ght neon, her sl i m and el egant frame bore an ari stocrati c
beauty. But her expressi on was as di m and di stant as a star i n
hal f l i ght.
“I feel l i ke a caged ani mal – trapped by a terri bl e and tragi c
past.” She turned, her col d gaze pi erci ng me. “And there’s no
way out.~
We had just cl i mbed the stai rs from the Col umbus Ci rcl e sta-
ti on i nto the mi d-Manhattan bustl e near Li ncol n Center. The
l ong cl ackety I RT ri de from Wal l Street through Soho, Green-
wi ch Vi l l age, Chel sea, the Garment Di stri ct, Ti mes Square,
and the Theater Di stri ct had afforded us a uni que opportuni ty to
67
68 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
observe the ci ty’s teemi ng crush of vari ety. And i t had afforded
us a uni que opportuni ty to tal k. Anonymi ty and pri vacy are
never so avai l abl e than when surrounded by thousands of
strangers on a New York subway.
Carol i ne was twenty-two when she had her fi rst aborti on.
Ei ght months l ater, she had another. “The fi rst one seemed to go
just fi ne,” she tol d me. “There was a l i ttl e bl eedi ng and some
pai n for the next few weeks. Nothi ng seri ous, though.”
But i t wm seri ous. That became readi l y apparent when she
went i n for the second aborti on. “There was qui te a bi t of scar
ti ssue i n my cervi x. The physi ci an seemed hesi tant at fi rst, but
deci ded to go ahead wi th the procedure.”
That was not the l ast mi stake that the doctor woul d make
that day. Hi s sharp, bl i ndl y wi el ded curette i nadvertentl y per-
forated Carol i ne’s al ready scarred cervi x. When he i nserted the
sucti on apparatus, i t passed through to the body cavi ty. The
sheari ng force of the sucti on then seri ousl y l acerated the bl adder
and tore l oose the ri ght ureter — the tube that carri es uri ne from
the ki dneys to the bl adder. The del i cate parametri um and peri -
toneum membranes were ruptured and a pool i ng hematoma
surrounded the enti re ri ght renal system.
Compl etel y unaware of the damage he had caused, the doc-
tor fi ni shed the procedure, sent Carol i ne to the recovery room,
and turned hi s attenti ons to other matters. After a forty-fi ve
mi nute rest, he rel eased her.
“I col l apsed on the subway on my way home. I thi nk I was i n
shock,” she sai d. She was sufferi ng from a l ot more than shock.
An emergency room exami nati on reveal ed heavy hemorrhagi ng
and l eakage of uri ne per vagi nam. Attendants rushed her i nto
the operati ng room where surgeons rel uctantl y performed an
emergency ri ght nephrectomy and oophorectomy — the removal
of the ri ght ki dney and ovary. They al so evacuated the hema-
toma and resecti oned the torn endometri um.
“I spent about ten days i n the hospi tal after that ~ she tol d me
as we wal ked past the Jui l l i ard toward the Hudson Ri ver. Those
ten days had cost her a pl ace i n the school ’s renowned drama de-
partment. “But the worst was sti l l yet to come.”
Over the next several weeks, Carol i ne suffered from recur-
ri ng abdomi nal pai n, hi gh fever, vagi nal di scharge, and abnor-
mal bl eedi ng. She was schedul ed for both a cystoscopy and a
l aparoscopy and was once agai n admi tted to the hospi tal . The
Back-Allqv Butchers: The Medical Legmy 69
expl oratory surgeri es reveal ed that a porti on of the fetal skul l
had been i mbedded i nto the resected i ntra-abdomi nal ti ssue.
They al so reveal ed a severe pel vi c i nfl ammati on caused by
bacteri a from the mangl ed renal system.
“The doctors sai d that I had no choi ce but to undergo a com-
pl ete hysterectomy.” Tears began to wel l up i n her eyes. “I was
onl y twenty-two. My whol e l i fe was ahead of me. I was happy.
Carefree. And then thi s . . . wel l , I just coul dn’t bel i eve that thi s
was actual l y happeni ng to me .“
The next day, the doctors remeved Carol i ne’s remai ni ng
ovary, al ong wi th her uterus, cervi x, fal l opi an tubes, and l ymph
gl ands. She woul d never agai n be abl e to bear chi l dren.
“The counsel ors at Pl amed Parenthood tol d me that abor-
ti on was the onl y responsi bl e choi ce i n my si tuati on,” she sai d.
‘Now l ook at me. My heal th i s broken. My career i s rui ned. My
emoti ons are shot. And the onl y two chi l dren 111 ever bear are
dead and gone.’
By now we were l ooki ng out over the dark roi l i ng waters of
the Hudson. Angry swel l s broke over the ol d stone wal l s at the
ri ver’s edge, drenchi ng the si dewal k wi th a bone-chi l l i ng spray.
The bl ari ng sounds and gl ari ng l i ghts of the ci ty had receded
i nto the background as the grey turbul ent channel before us
ti l ed up our senses.
After a l ong and uncomfortabl e si l ence, Carol i ne turned to
me, her tears no l onger contai ned. “Why di dn’t someone tel l me?
Why di dn’t anyone tel l me that aborti on wasn’t safe? Why?”
Why i ndeed?
The Medi cal Ri sks of Aborti on
Whi l e Pl anned Parenthood conti nues bl i thel y promoti ng
thei r %afe and l egal ” aborti ons,s thousands of women just l i ke
Carol i ne Ness al l across Ameri ca and around the worl d suffer
fi -om the “i nherent ri sks”q and “compl i cati ons”s that those pro-
cedures present.6 For some that sufferi ng i s but a mi nor and ,
temporary i nconveni ence. For others, l i ke Carol i ne, i t becomes
a permanent di sabi l i ty.
Dr. Horton Dean i s a gynecol ogi st wi th a pri vate practi ce i n
a fashi onabl e nei ghborhood near Los Angel es. Si nce 1973 he has
seen a marked i ncrease i n the number of pati ents wi th si gni fi -
cant compl i cati ons –both mental and physi cal – as a resul t of
l egal aborti ons. “I am convi nced: he tol d me, “that the Pl anned
70 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Parenthood programs pose the greatest heal th hazard i n Amer-
i ca today.”T He esti mates that as many as fi fteen percent of al l
fi rst-tri mester, forty percent of al l mi d-tri mester, and ni nety per-
cent of al l l ate-tri mester aborti ons resul t i n probl ems demandi ng
seri ous medi cal attenti on. s
A number of studi es conducted by some of the fi nest medi cal
research i nsti tuti ons al l around the gl obe confi rm Dean’s concl u-
si on that “there i s no such thi ng as a safe and l egal aborti on”: i n
Hungary,g Japan, 10 Greece, 11 Great Bri tai n, 12 Czechosl ovaki a, 13
The Netherl ands, 14 Norway,l s I srael , 16 Yugosl avi a, 17 Free
Chi na,l s and i n the Uni ted States at the Johns Hopki ns Uni ver-
si ty Medi cal School , 19 the Vanderbi l t Uni versi ty Medi cal
School ,zO the Uni ver si ty of Mar yl and Medi cal School ,zl
Crei ghton Uni versi ty Medi cal School ,zz Cornel l Uni versi ty
Medi cal %hool ~s the UCLA Medi cal %.hool ,zq and the Uni versi ty
of North Carol i na Medi cal School . 25 I n every case, aborti on was
found to dangerousl y ri sk maternal mortal i ty, peri natal fi tness,
congeni tal mal formati on, and future ferti l i ty.zG
Al l thi s evi dence fl i es i n the face of what Pl anned Parenthood
has repeatedl y mai ntai ned over the l ast several years.zT Accord-
i ng to i ts stati sti cs, the compl i cati on rate for l egal aborti on i s
l ess than one percent and i s thus safer than ful l -term pregnancy
and chi l dbi rth. 28
Accordi ng to renowned obstetri ci an and gynecol ogi st Mat-
thew Bul fi n, the reason that these esti mated fi gures are so skewed
i s that Pl anned Parenthood and the vari ous other agenci es that
measure maternal compl i cati on rates are “mi ssi ng vi tal i nput for
thei r mortal i ty and morbi di ty studi es by not seeki ng i nformati on
from the physi ci ans who see the compl i cati ons from l egal abor-
ti ons — emergency room physi ci ans and the obstetri ci ans and
gynecol ogi sts i n pri vate practi ce. The physi ci ans who do the
aborti ons and the cl i ni cs and centers where aborti ons are done
shoul d not be the onl y sources from whi ch compl i cati on stati sti cs
are deri ved.”zg
“There are a l ot more compl i cati ons out there than anyone
seems to care to bel i eve,” says Dean. “I t i s a nati onal heal th di saster.”qo
Al though Pl anned Parenthood stubbornl y r efhses to admi t, pub-
l i cl y that such a di saster exi sts, pri vatel y i t i s qui te concerned.
So, ever si nce 1986, i t has conducted “medi cal ri sk reducti on
semi nars .“S1 I nstead of focusi ng on the actual aborti on procedures
Back-All~ Butchers: The Medical Legaty 71
ad techni ques used i n thei r cl i ni cs though, the Pl anned Parent-
hood professi onal s gave the bul k of thei r attenti on to the ques-
ti on of how to contai n sky-rocketi ng i nsurance rates and ever-
i ncreasi ng mal practi ce sui ts. S* Apparentl y they knew onl y too
wel l that i t i s impossible to devel op safe aborti on procedures or
techni ques. The best they coul d hope to do was reduce thei r
l egal l i abi l i ty.ss
The fact i s, eoe~ one of the procedures and techni ques that
Pl anned Parenthood uti l i zes i n i ts boomi ng aborti on trade i n-
vol ves two vi cti ms: the murdered unborn chi l ds* and the
muti l ated, vi ol ated, and uni nformed mother. I t i s by Pl anned
Parenthood’s own admi ssi on a terri bl y “ri sky busi ness.”35
Menstrual extraction. Thi s method of aborti on i s general l y
performed i mmedi atel y fol l owi ng a rape i nci dent. Si nce a preg-
nancy cannot be confi rmed at thi s earl y stage, menstrual extrac-
ti ons are not counted i n aborti on stati sti cs, but i t i s esti mated
that as many as fi fteen thousand a year are performed i n the
Uni ted States.3G The procedure i nvol ves the i nserti on of a
vacuum aspi rator i nto the uterus and the extracti on of al l uteri ne
contents. As i nnocuous and si mpl e as thi s may sound, i t can
resul t i n seri ous compl i cati ons: uri nary tract i nfecti ons, cervi cal
trauma, sepsi s, peri toni ti s, endometri ti s, and sal pi ngi ti s. 37
Lesl i e Thompson was “date raped.” “When the pol i ce were
fi ni shed taki ng my statement: she sai d, “they took me to a
Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni c. The counsel or there tol d me that a
doctor was goi ng to treat me wi th a rape ki t. I was so upset, I
never asked any questi ons. I di dn’t have any i dea what a rape kit
was. I fi gured that the pol i ce and the nurses and the doctors were
just fol l owi ng procedure.”
The cl i ni c personnel performed a menstrual extracti on abor-
ti on on Lesl i e and rel eased her an hour l ater. “For the next sev-
eral days ,“ she tol d me, “I had a persi stent pai n and a l ow grade
fever that I just coul dn’t knock. I fi nal l y went i n to see my own
doctor.” Upon exami nati on he found that she was sufferi ng from
endometri ti s — an i nfl ammati on of the uteri ne l i ni ng caused by
an i nfecti on that had set i n fol l owi ng the aborti on. He was abl e
to treat Lesl i e wi th anti bi oti cs and she qui ckl y recovered. “He
tol d me that i f I ’d wai ted even a day or two l onger, I ’d have been
i n real troubl e. I guess I was fortunate. But i t ki nda makes me
wonder how many women don’t have that ki nd of good fortune.”
72 GIWND ILLUSIONS
Sucti On-As@zti on. Thi s fi rst-tri mester method of aborti on i s
one of the most common techni ques used i n Pl anned Parent-
hood cl i ni cs. I t may account for as much as ei ghty-fi ve percent
of al l aborti ons now performed i n the Uni ted States. 38 The pro-
cedure i nvol ves paral yzi ng the cervi cal muscl e ri ng and then i n-
serti ng a vacuum tube i nto the uterus and agai nst the body of
the chi l d. The sucti on i s al most thi rty ti mes more powerful than
a home vacuum cl eaner, and l i teral l y tears the chi l d’s body l i mb
from l i mb. The scraps are then sucked through the tube and i nto
a bottl e. The procedure i s compl eted when the aborti oni st cuts
the pl acenta l oose from the i nner wal l of the uterus and sucks i t
i nto the bottl e as wel l . Sucti on-aspi rati on aborti ons share the
ri sks of uri nary tract i nfecti ons, cervi cal trauma, sepsi s, peri ton-
i ti s, endometri ti s, and sal pi ngi ti s that are common to menstrual
extracti on aborti ons. But i n addi ti on, a number of other com-
pl i cati ons may al so resul t: uteri ne l acerati on, renal trauma,
pel vi c i nfl ammati on, embol i sm, thrombus, and even steri l i ty.sg
Martha Tol l esk’s di vorce had been fi nal just three days when
she di scovered that she was pregnant. “Everybody tol d me that I
shoul d just go out and get an aborti on,” she sai d. “I ’d just enrol l ed
i n ni ght courses at the l ocal communi ty col l ege. I had a great
new job. My l i fe was comi ng together fi nal l y. And then thi s!”
Martha’s fri ends tal ked her i nto vi si ti ng a Pl anned Parent-
hood center where she recei ved a fi stful of brochures and tracts
on the benefi ts and bl essi ngs of aborti on. “I t al l sounded so si m-
pl e and so secure. So I went ahead and schedul ed an appoi nt-
ment.” The doctor performed a sucti on-aspi rati on aborti on on
her three days l ater. “I t was i ncredi bl y pai nfhl . I t was just awful .
But they tol d me al l had gone wel l and they sent me on home.”
But al l was not wel l . After al most a week, Martha was ad-
mi tted to the hospi tal wi th a number of al armi ng symptoms:
swel l i ng of the abdomen, severe pai n, nausea, vomi ti ng, rapi d
heartbeat, chi l l s and fever, and shortness of breath. Her obstetri -
ci an di agnosed her as sufferi ng from peri toni ti s — an i nfl amma-
ti on of the membrane coveri ng the wal l of her peri toneum. Caused
by a smal l uteri ne puncture duri ng the aborti on, the bacteri al
i nfecti on had qui ckl y spread throughout her body cavi ty. “They
tel l me I ’m l ucky,” she sai d. “But I ’m not sure I cal l four days i n
the hospi tal and a cl ose cal l wi th death lucky. I cal l i t irresponsible.”
Bazk-Alley Butchers: The Medical Legacy 73
Dilatation and Curettage (ZX5C). Thi s once-favored method of
aborti on now accounts for onl y about fi ve percent of al l aborti ons
performed due to i ts poor medi cal track record.40 The procedure
i nvol ves the i nserti on of a curette — a very sharp l oop-shaped
kni fe– up i nto the uterus. The pl acenta and the chi l d are then
di smembered and scraped out i nto a basi n. I n addki on to al l of the
compl i cati ons of menstrual extracti ons and sucti on-aspi rati ons, D&C
aborti ons al so carry the ri sk of uteri ne perforati on, hemorrhagi ng,
pel vi c abscesses, geni tal tract i nfecti ons, bowel l acerati ons,
and thromboembol i sm. AI
Jared McCormi ck took hi s gi rl fi -i end, Susi e Gl anze, to Pl anned
Parenthood for a pregnancy test l ate l ast year. “She was real l y
scared, and so was 1,” he sai d. “I tol d her that we coul d go ahead
and get marri ed. We were pl anni ng on i t anyway. We’d just have
to move thi ngs up a l i ttl e, i s al l . But she wanted me to fi ni sh up
wi th school fi rst. So, there we were. At Pl anned Parenthood.”
The test was posi ti ve and Susi e made an appoi ntment for an
aborti on the next Saturday. “I real l y went berserk,” Jared sai d. “I
was dead set agai nst the aborti on. I begged her to marry me and
keep our baby. But she woul dn’t l i sten.”
The doctors performed a D&C. There was profuse bl eedi ng,
but si nce that i s qui te common wi th D&C aborti ons, the cl i ni c
personnel di dn’t thi nk anythi ng of i t.
That was a terri bl e mi stake. An hour l ater, Susi e was sti l l
hemorrhagi ng and had to be rushed to the nearest hospi tal
emergency room. There she was gi ven two uni ts of bl ood and
treated for severe l acerati ons of the cervi x and uterus. I t woul d
be al most two days l ater before she woul d be rel eased.
“I t’s amazi ng what can happen between two peopl e i n just a
coupl e days’ ti me,” Jared sai d. “Susi e was so gri eved over what
she’d done — over what they’d done — that she just coul dn’t stand
to be wi th me any more. Just l i ke that. I t was al l over between
us. I ’m convi nced that i f she’d known how ri sky the operati on
was we’d be together today. And our baby woul d sti l l be al i ve .“
Dilatation and Evacuation (D&E). Thi s parti cul arl y brutal
method of aborti on i s commonl y used when pregnanci es have
reached wel l i nto the second and thi rd tri mesters. Stri ps of l ami -
nar i a —a spongy seaweed — are pl aced i n the cervi x to stretch i t
open. A pl i ers-l i ke pai r of forceps i s then used to crush the chi l d’s
74 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
skul l and snap i ts spi ne. The now pl i abl e corpse i s wrenched
pi ece by pi ece out of the womb. Next, the aborti oni st must reas-
sembl e the body parts on the surgi cal tabl e i n order to make cer-
tai n that nothi ng was l eft behi nd i n the uterus. Fi nal l y, the raw
and empty womb i s swabbed wi th a di si nfectant and aspi rated
wi th a vagi nal vacuum. I n addi ti on to the compl i cati ons com-
mon to D&C aborti ons, the D&E method i s especi al l y prone to
i nfecti ons: pel vi c, renal , cervi cal , and peri toni tal . D&E abor-
ti ons are al so associ ated wi th cl i ni cal l y l ow-bi rth-wei ght i nfants,
sti l l bi rths, ectopi c i mpl antati on, neonatal deaths, and congeni tal
mal formati ons i n future pregnanci es. 44
Mel i nda Davi es and Cheryl Cook were best fri ends al l
through hi gh school . Duri ng the summer fol l owi ng graduati on,
both gi rl s became pregnant. “We deci ded to go i n to Pl anned
Parenthood together. We di dn’t want our parents to fi nd out,”
sai d Cheryl .
“Yeah, i t was ki nd of scary: Mel i nda tol d me, ‘%ut we
thought we coul d hel p each other through i t al l .”
Both gi rl s were gi ven D&E aborti ons. “Mi ne went just fi ne,”
sai d Cheryl . “But Mel i nda real l y had a l ot of troubl e.” For the
rest of the summer, i n fact, Mel i nda fought off one i nfecti on
after another.
“I had bl adder i nfecti ons, vagi nal i nfecti ons, and cervi cal i n-
fecti ons, and my doctor coul dn’t understand why. Fi nal l y, I had
to tel l hi m what I ’d done. Thank goodness he was then abl e to
treat the cause.” And what was the cause? “Wel l ,” Mel i nda sai d,
“apparentl y the doctor at Pl anned Parenthood di d the procedure
wi th unsteri l e i nstruments. The bacteri a just wreaked havoc on
my body.”
“Nobody tol d us that somethi ng l i ke thi s coul d happen,” sai d
Cheryl . “1 feel l i ke we were decei ved.”
“We were,” agreed Mel i nda. “We real l y were. Aborti on i s a
l ousy gambl e.”
Sal i ne Aznni ocente.si s. Thi s once-common method of aborti on
i s now used onl y when gestati on passes the si xteen-week mark.
Duri ng the procedure, a l ong needl e i s i nserted through the
mother’s abdomen and di rectl y i nto the chi l d’s amni oti c sac. A
sol uti on of concentrated sal t i s then i njected i nto the fl ui d there.
The chi l d breathes i n, swal l owi ng the poi sonous sal t. After
Back-Allty Butchers: TheMedical Legacy
about an hour of convul si ng and struggl i ng, the
75
chi l d i s over-
come and the mother goes i ~to l abor. Abou~ a day l ater she wi l l
del i ver a corpse. Not surpri si ngl y, compl i cati ons are common
and i ncl ude uteri ne rupture, pul monary thromboembol i sm, di s-
semi nated i ntravascul ar coagul ati on (a dangerous bl ood cl otti ng
di sorder), hypernatremi a, erosi ve gastri ti s, hemol yti c anemi a,
hemogl obi nuri a, and acute renal fai l ure.qs
Bethany de Grassi recei ved a sal i ne aborti on several years
ago. She was ni neteen at the ti me and a freshman at Auburn
Uni versi ty. “I was l i vi ng wi th a guy at the ti me,” she tol d me,
‘and I real l y thought we were i n l ove. When I got pregnant, I was
happy. I thought we’d just settl e down, rai se a fami l y, and pursue
the Ameri can dream. But he had other i deas. When I refused to
get an aborti on he just moved out. Boom. My whol e worl d caved
i n. I di dn’t know what to do. I was scared and confused.”
Bethany wai ted al most three months before she di d anythi ng
at al l . Fi nal l y, she went to a Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni c. “They
tol d me that they di dn’t do the procedure I needed there i n the
cl i ni c, so they referred me to one of thei r doctors that had a pri -
vate practi ce on the si de for l ate-term aborti ons. They gave me
al l ki nds of l i terature wi th charts and tabl es and footnotes and
al l , tel l i ng me that the techni que was perfectl y safe.”
Later, when Bethany was fi l l i ng out the l i abi l i ty rel ease form,
she had a change of heart. “The form had a l ong, l ong l i st of pos-
si bl e compl i cati ons i n ti ny pri nt and I started to get real l y ner-
vous. But the nurse came i n and sat by me, assuri ng me that
everythi ng was goi ng to be okay. I bel i eved her.”
She shoul dn’t have. Cl i ni c personnel are trai ned to cal m
thei r customers. Someti mes wi th smi l es. Someti mes wi th l i es.
Anythi ng, just to get the job done.l q
Bethany’s troubl es began wi th the del i very. “The baby was
gaspi ng when i t came out; she recal l ed. “I t was awful . I started
screami ng. The doctor was cursi ng. And the nurse di dn’t seem
to know what to do. I t was a ni ghtmare.”
The chi l d expi red qui ckl y and the cl i ni c personnel were abl e,
after a few moments of coaxi ng and consol i ng, to cal m Bethany
down. She went i nto recovery and was rel eased.
Two days l ater, she suffered a seri es of sei zures and l apsed i nto
a coma. At the hospi tal , her doctors found that she had hyperna-
76 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
tremi a— sal t poi soni ng. Her parents were noti fi ed and a l ong
si x-day struggl e for her l i fe ensued. Fi nal l y, the medi cal team at
the hospi tal was abl e to restore Bethany’s el ectrol yte bakm~e i n-
travenousl y and she was roused from the coma. “I shoul d have
pai d attenti on to my consci ence,” she now says. “I @ew better
than to tr y to come up wi th some easy fi x for my probl ems.
There’s just no such thi ng.”
Prostaglandin Abortion. Some twenty years ago, the Upjohn
Corporati on i ntroduced Prosti n F2-Al pha, a syntheti c hormonal
drug, desi gned to i nduce vi ol ent l abor and the premature del i very
of an unwanted chi l d. I n succeedi ng years, the company refi ned
i ts processes and i ntroduced a whol e seri es of new products: Prosti n
E2, Prosti n 15M, supposi tori es, i njecti ons, and urea sol uti ons.
For a ti me i t l ooked as i f Upjohn’s prostagl andi n trade woul d
corner the aborti on pharmaceuti cal market. But then evi dence
of seri ous si de effects and compl i cati ons dampened the gi ant
drug maker’s hopes. Al though the FDA had approved Upjohn’s
aborti on products for wi despread consumer use, prostagl andi ns
were qui ckl y shown to commonl y cause uteri ne rupture, sepsi s,
hemorrhagi ng, cardi o-respi ratory arrest, vomi ti ng and aspi rati on,
strokes, and acute ki dney fai l ure .4s The si de effects di d not occur
onl y occasi onal l y: As many as forty-two percent of al l prosta-
gl andi n aborti ons resul t i n one or more of these compl i cati ons.qG
Chri sti ne Aul en was shocked when her daughter Deana tol d
her one day after school that she was pregnant. ‘I deci ded to put
on my brave Mom’s-your-best-fri end-and-confi dante act ,“ she
tol d me. “So we sat down together and tal ked through our op-
ti ons. After much debate and di scussi on, we real i zed that we just
di dn’t have enough facts to make a rati onal deci si on. As i f ration-
ality was the i ssue.”
That i s when they deci ded to go to Pl anned Parenthood. “We
thought they coul d gi ve us the facts so that we coul d make an ob-
jecti ve deci si on. We were wrong.”
The counsel or at the cl i ni c i mmedi atel y recommended abor-
ti on. “She seemed to be so sweet and ki nd. She made the referral
for us and set up our appoi ntment .“
Sweet and ki nd or not, what happened was l i ke a scri pt from
a horror movi e. Once the procedure had begun, there were i m-
medi ate compl i cati ons. Deana went i nto shock and suffered a
Back-All~ Butchers: The Medical Lega~ 77
seri es of sei zures. Franti c, the cl i ni c personnel cal l ed for an am-
bul ance. But before i t coul d arri ve, Deana di ed. Chri sti ne, si t-.
ti ng out i n the wai ti ng room readi ng magazi nes, fi dgeti ng, and
worryi ng, never knew what was goi ng on behi nd cl osed doors.
That was several years ago, but for Chri sti ne i t seems l i ke
just yesterday. “Angry? You bet, I ’m angry: she says. “No one
warned us. No one tol d us. Tragedi es l i ke thi s shoul dn’t happen.
They don’t have to happen.”
The facts speak for themsel ves. Aborti on i s dangerous.
Pl anned Parenthood offi ci al s are not i ncogni zant of the facts.
They know that thei r aborti on procedures and techni ques are
unsafe. They know that tragedi es l i ke Chri sti ne and Deana
Aul en’s happen onl y because they persi st i n performi ng those
unsafe procedures and techni ques. As l ong ago as 1963, Pl anned
Parenthood publ i shed a bookl et sayi ng that ‘an aborti on ki l l s the
l i fe of a baby after i t has begun. I t i s dangerous to your l i fe and
heal th.”AT Nothi ng has changed i n the i nterveni ng years. And
they know i t.
Recentl y, pro-l i fe workers i n Houston di scovered several
thousand cl i ni c vi si t records, medi cal charts, i nternal mi nutes and
memoranda, l etters, confi denti al surveys, and fi nanci al state-
ments i n the trash at a Pl anned Parenthood abortuary.qg A com-
prehensi ve anal ysi s was made of each document and a database
was devel oped so that anal ysi s coul d be tabul ated systemati cal l y.qg
Thei r fi ndi ngs were astoni shi ng.
More than a thi rd of the medi cal charts recorded “severe” or
“very severe pai n” for the women duri ng thei r aborti on pro-
cedures .SI J Al most fi ve percent of the women were sai d to have
“screamed” duri ng thei r operati ons. 51 Another el even percent
“cri ed,” ten percent “overreacted,” and fi ve percent ‘compl ai ned .=52
Al most ten percent experi enced “nausea” or “vomi ti ng,” and
another ten percent “fai nted” or “fel l unconsci ous .“
53
One chart descri bed bl atantl y unsteri l e operati ng pro-
cedures .5* Another detai l ed a doctor’s brutal and abusi ve behav-
i or.ss Sti l l another cal l ed i nto questi on the raci al moti vati ons of
the cl i ni c personnel .5G
The evi dence i s i ndi sputabl e.
Pl anned Parenthood offi ci al s know preci sel y what they are
doi ng. They know ful l wel l that aborti on i s unsafe. They know
78 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
that women by the thousands are bei ng expl oi ted by the abor-
ti on trade. They see i t every day.
Even i f unborn chi l dren were not murderedsT by aborti on,
men and women of consci ence woul d sti l l have to stand un-
waveri ngl y opposed to i t. I t i s dangerous. Scandal ousl y so.
The Medi cal Ri sks of Bi rth Control
The dangerous propagati on of aborti on i s not the onl y medi -
cal scandal that Pl anned Parenthood has been i nvol ved i n over
the l ast several years. I ts bi rth control programs have al so been
terri bl y fl awed.
Al l bi rth control methods are subject to FDA approval ,, and
must be tested on l aboratory ani mal s and human subjects before
they can be marketed to the publ i c. Thi s process may take any-
where between three and ten years to compl ete. 58 At fi rst bl ush,
that appears to be a ponderousl y sl ow approval process, but i n
fact, i t i s far too hasty. I t may take as l ong as fi fteen to twenty
years for the compl i cati ons of vari ous bi rth control methods to
become apparent.sg Pl anned Parenthood and i ts bi rth control
al l i es i n the medi cal -i ndustri al compl ex GO have pressured the
FDA to rush products to market l ong before those compl i cati ons
can be known. 61 The resul t i s that women usi ng bi rth control are
l i ttl e more than gui nea pi gs — unwi tti ng subjects i n prol onged
and deathl y dangerous experi ments. 62 A number of i mportant
studi es have shown that, i ndeed, Pl anned Parenthood’s favored
contracepti ve programs are al l unwarranted medi cal ri sks —
from Depo-Provers and Ovrzd to Norpl ant and RU-486.GS
Dr . Fr eder i ck Robbi ns, a noted fi gur e i n popul ati on
research, justi fi ed Pl anned Parenthood’s dependence on unsafe
bi rth control products sayi ng, “The dangers of overpopul ati on
are so great that we may have to use certai n techni ques of con-
tracepti on that may entai l consi derabl e ri sk to the i ndi vi dual
woman.”G4 Once agai n, “choi ce” i s thrown to the wi nd.
T’e Pill. For Margaret Sanger, bi rth control was not si mpl y a
techni que, i t was a rel i gi on. And the Pi l l was the Ho@ Grai l of that
rel i gi on. 65 Begi nni ng i n the l ate twenti es and earl y thi rti es, she
hel ped fund a number of research projects that she hoped woul d
one day produce a safe and effecti ve chemi cal contracepti ve. 66 I n
1950 she met a bri l l i ant bi ol ogi st named Gregory Pi ncus. Hi s
stunni ng successes i n ovul ati on research wi th l aboratory ani mal s
Back-Allg Butchen: The Medical Legaqv 79
encouraged Margaret to i nvest over two mi l l i on dol l ars over a ten-
year span i n hi s wor k.G7 By 1954 the Pi l l was ready for human
testi ng. By 1958 Sanger and Pi ncus had persuaded G. D. Searl e,
the pharmaceuti cal gi ant, to begi n test marketi ng the product
i n the Uni ted States wi th provi si onal approval of the FDA. Then
fi nal l y, after an unprecedented medi a bl i tz and pol i ti cal l obbyi ng
campai gn, the Pi l l was gi ven ful l approval i n 1960.68
Uti l i zi ng syntheti c hormones – ei ther estrogen or pro-
gesterone or a combi nati on of both– the Pi l l i nterrupts the regu-
l ar menstrual cycl e, thus preventi ng ovul ati on i n most cases. I f
ovul ati on does occur, the Pi l l ‘has a number of fai l -safe features
that hel p the uteri ne l i ni ng resi st i mpl antati on, thus aborti ng
any human embryos. 69
The Pi l l , on the heel s of Pl anned Parenthood’s ecstati c publ i c
rel ati ons spl urge, qui ckl y became the most wi del y used prescri p-
ti on drug i n the worl d.TO I n the Uni ted States more than a mi l -
l i on women were usi ng i t wi thi n two years of i ts i ntroducti on. 71
A decade l ater, that fi gure had ri sen to more than ten mi l l i on.72
And then the troubl e began.
Women were reporti ng a number of mi nor si de effects:
mi grai ne headaches, depressi on, nausea, fati gue, ski n rashes,
i nfl ammati on of the gums, wei ght gai n, breast tenderness, and
i rregul ar menstruati on. 73
Al though medi cal research i s notori ous for contradi ctory data
and i nconcl usi veness, a number of studi es began to pour i n i ndi -
cati ng that the medi cal compl i cati ons di d not end there .74 They
showed that women who use the Pi l l are suscepti bl e to hyperten-
si on — abnormal l y hi gh bl ood pressure. They have an i ncreased
ri sk of heart attacks, thromboembol i sm, and strokes. They are
si gni fi cantl y more suscepti bl e to vari ous ki nds of growths, cysts,
and mal i gnanci es i ncl udi ng ovari an cancer, l i ver cancer, and ski n
cancer. I n addi ti on, i t appears that the Pi l l can make women more
suscepti bl e to di abetes, uri nary tract i nfecti ons, epi l epsy, asthma,
pl euri sy, arthri ti s, eczema, urti cari a, chl oasma, and ul cers.Ts
Margaret Sangefs Hol y Grai l has turned out to be a hol y terror.
Si nce the Pi l l has an i n-use fai l ure rate of as hi gh as el even
percent per annum,7G the percei ved benefi ts of contracepti on –
whatever they may be — hardl y outwei gh the ri sks. And yet
Pl anned Parenthood conti nues to push thi s dangerous drug on
80 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i ts cl i ents. Al most ei ghty percent of those who wal k i nto a Pki nned
Parenthood cl i ni c wal k out wi th the Pi l l .n
Li sa Godet, Patty Manfra, and Barbara Arnmunds deci ded
to vi si t the Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni c near thei r school together
i n order to obtai n bi rth control pi l l s. Li sa and Patty were al ready
sexual l y acti ve. Barbara was “sti l l just hopi ng,” she sai d. Thei r
sex educati on teacher had tol d them that the cl i ni c woul d pro-
vi de them wi th free contracepti ves and that thei r parents
woul dn’t have to fmd out. “I t sounded al most too good to be
true,” Li sa tol d me, “so we deci ded to check i t out .“
Sure enough, the staff personnel were very accommodati ng.
The gi rl s were al l schedul ed for after-school checkups and were
gi ven a three-month suppl y of Pi l l s.
Over the next several months, Li sa and Patty noti ced no
physi ol ogi cal changes to speak of. “Oh, I gai ned a l i ttl e bi t of
wei ght ,“ Patty sai d. “But I probabl y went on a chocol ate bi nge
or somethi ng.”
For Barbara, though, i t was a di fferent story. “My bl ood
sugar started to fl uctuate real l y wi l dl y. I ’d be r@l y up one mi n-
ute, and then the next, I ’d be total l y worn out.~ Her parents
noti ced the ups and downs but attri buted them to the fi ckl eness
of teenage emoti ons. Then the fl uctuati ons became more
dramati c. One eveni ng at the di nner tabl e, Barbara passed out
and went i nto a mi l d sei zure.
A battery of tests over the next several days yi el ded a di agno-
si s of di abetes. “My doctor suspected that I mi ght be on the Pi l l ,”
she sai d, “because of the unusual way my symptoms suddenl y
began. He tol d me that I needed to stop taki ng i t ri ght away. I
di dn’t need any further convi nci ng. I qui t.”
Li sa and Patty qui t, too. After seei ng Barbara’s trauma and
heari ng for the fi rst ti me about the medi cal ri sks of bi rth control
pi l l s, they deci ded that the best way to prevent unwanted preg-
nanci es i s absti nence. “I hope we’ve al l l earned,” Patty sai d,
“that sneaki ng around and doi ng the wrong thi ng can onl y l ead
to troubl e.”
The I ntrautmine Device (I UD). Li ke the Pi l l , the I UD seemed
to be the perfect bi rt% control devi ce when i t was i ntroduced i n
the earl y si xti es. I t was sai d to be nearl y ni nety percent effecti ve
per year and si nce i t di d not i ntroduce syntheti c hormones i nto
Back-Allty Butchers: The Medical Legacy 81
the woman’s system or al ter her body chemi stry, i t was supposed
to be safe as wel l . Wi thi n just a few years, nearl y si xty mi l l i on
women worl dwi de had begun usi ng the I UD, maki ng i t the most
popul ar contracepti ve al ternati ve to the Pi l l . 78
But, once agai n, Pl anned Parenthood and the pharmaceuti cal
i ndustry enthusi asti cal l y rushed the product to market and through
the approval process l ong before suffi ci ent research had confi rmed
i ts safety. 79 As a resul t, I UD users were for al l i ntents and pur-
poses the subjects of a vast program of human experi mentati on.
The devi ce i s a smal l and i rregul ar coi l of copper or pl asti c
wi th several trai l i ng fi l aments. I t i s i nstal l ed i n the uterus where
i t causes an i nfl ammati on or chroni c l ow-grade i nfecti on that i n-
hi bi ts i mpl antati on. Thus, the I UD does not prevent concepti on,
i t si mpl y di sl odges and aborts any human embryos that make thei r
way out of the fal l opi an tubes. What researchers fai l ed to detect
as they were devel opi ng the I UD i s that the enti re obstructi on
process i s terri bl y ri sky and terri bl y dangerous. The product has
been di rectl y l i nked to a hi gh number of cases of Pel vi c I nfl amm-
atory Di sease and spontaneous septi c mi scarri ages.s’J I t com-
monl y causes excessi ve bl eedi ng, crampi ng, perforati on of the
uteri ne wal l , ectopi c pregnancy, and endometri ti s. 81 I t has even
been i mpl i cated i n dozens of deaths .82 Currentl y there are more
than a thousand major l awsui ts pendi ng agai nst i ts manufac-
turers, and several model s have been removed from the Uni ted
States market .83
Sandra LaCazi o, a mother of four, began usi ng the I UD i n
1973. “My next-door nei ghbor was a nurse at Pl anned Parent-
hood,” she sai d, “and was constantl y urgi ng me to come i n and
be fi tted for an I UD. I ’d been havi ng a few probl ems wi th the
Pi l l , so I took her up on her offer. That was a bi g mi stake. A
r eal ~ bi g mi stake.”
Sandra had probl ems wi th her I UD ri ght from the start. “I t
was a constant i rri tant. I went back several ti mes and my nei gh-
bor just tol d me to be pati ent – I woul d get used to i t. But I
never di d.”
And no wonder. By the ti me Sandra fi nal l y sought hel p from
her regul ar obstetri ci an, the I UD had become embedded i n her
uteri ne wal l . She was sufferi ng from severe cases of peri toni ti s,
endometri ti s, and sal pi ngi ti s. Her fal l opi an tubes were scarred
82 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
,,

beyond repai r. And her enti re uterus was raw and i nfl a.i ned.
The doctor had no choi ce but to schedul e her for a compl ete
hyster ectomy.
“I ’m so thankful that my doctor knew just what to do,” she
l ater tol d me. “I coul d very easi l y have di ed. My nei ghbor, of
course, keeps i nsi sti ng that my probl ems were unusual and
i sol ated. But I know better. Everywhere I go, I hear horror stor-
i es from women who have been mi sl ed by Pl anned Parenthood
and suffered the consequences .“
Other Deoi ce.r. Al though the Pi l l and the I UD are Pl anned
Parenthood’s favored contracepti ve technol ogi es, several al ter-
nati ve methods are avai l abl e at i ts cl i ni cs as wel l .
Ever si nce Margaret Sanger began smuggl i ng di aphragms
i nto the country — i n l i quor bottl es through rum-runners —
Pl anned Parenthood has offered the soft rubber barri er devi ces
to i ts cl i ents.gA Used al one, the di aphragm’s effecti veness i s
dubi ous at best. Used i n conjuncti on wi th spermi ci dal foams,
creams, and jel l i es, i ts effecti veness i ncreases si gni fi cantl y, but i ts
safety pl ummets. Several spermi ci des have been forced off drug-
store shel ves due to seri ous medi cal compl i cati ons and a number
of mul ti -mi l l i on dol l ar l awsui ts .*S
Vagi nal contracepti ve sponges and cervi cal caps may share
that same fate.sG Al though both offer some contracepti ve protec-
ti on as a parti al barri er wi thi n the uterus, thei r real effecti veness
depends on suppl ementary spermi ci dal agents. And there i s the
rub. The spermi ci des have si mpl y not proven to be safe. They can
cause everythi ng from mi nor al l ergi c reacti ons to seri ous vagi nal
i nfecti ons, from cervi cal i rri tati on to seri ous hormonal i mbal -
ances, from a sl i ght geni tal abscess to chroni c endometri ti s. 8P
Robi n Cohen began to use a spermi ci drd jel l y after bei ng
fi tted for a di aphragm at a Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni c near her
home. Both she and her husband experi enced a good deal of i r-
ri tati on duri ng i ntercourse, so she changed brands. “Wi th the
second brand, both Bi l l and I broke out i n a pai nful geni tal
rash,” she sai d. “So I qui ckl y changed brands agai n. Thi s ti me,
I tri ed a cream. And that was even worse. I came down wi th a
seri ous vagi nal i nfecti on and had to take anti bi oti cs for al most
two weeks .“
Back-Alley Butchers: The Medical Legacy 8 3
Sti l l undeterred, Robi n’s counsel or at Pl anned Parenthood
had her try sti l l another spermi ci de. “I don’t know why I coul dn’t
get i t through my thi ck skul l that those thi ngs just aren’t safe.
When I got another i nfecti on – thi s ti me wi th fever, nausea,
headaches, and swol l en l ymph gl ands – I knew I ’d real l y bl own i t.”
I ndeed she had. The back-to-back i nfecti ons, though easi l y
treated, caused a good deal of scarri ng i n Robi n’s fal l opi an
tubes. Two years l ater when she and Bi l l deci ded that they
wanted to have chi l dren, she found that she coul dn’t get preg-
nant. A ferti l i ty speci al i st i nformed her that i f she ever wanted to
restore her ferti l i ty she woul d have to undergo reconstructi ve
surgery. “Can you bel i eve i t? I have to have surgery now because
those peopl e at the cl i ni c are handi ng out dangerous drugs. I t
makes you wonder how they can possi bl y stay i n busi ness.”
Medi ci ne and the Lost Legacy
The past one hundred years have been cal l ed “The Gol den
Age of Medi ci ne.”gs And for good reason. I t has been a peri od i n
whi ch manki nd has gai ned “unprecedented i nsi ghts i nto di seases
that for mi l l enni a have hel d mi l l i ons of peopl e i n a cruel and un-
rel enti ng grasp .“
89
Wi th a di zzyi ng array of new technol ogi es
and treatments at our every beck and cal l , we are now abl e to do
far more than our grandfathers coul d have ever i magi ned. The
mi racl es of organ transpl ants, software i mpl ants, and cyberneti c
repl i cants now make i t possi bl e for us to hel p the bl i nd to see, the
deaf to hear, and the l ame to wal k. Wi th the advent of bi omedi -
cal research, l aser surgery, macro-pharmacol ogy, fi ber opti c
scanni ng, and recombi nant DNA engi neeri ng, has come new
hope. The affl i cted are rai sed up, the broken and di stressed are
sustai ned, and those once l eft for dead are somehow restored.
We can now do al l thi s and more.
But sadl y, ami dst thk great hymn of vi ctory, a di ssonant chord
has sounded. The i mmoral , barbari c, backward, and scandal o-
usl y unsafe medi cal practi ces of Pl anned Parenthood have si dl ed
thei r way i nto mai nstream medi ci ne. And thus the vi ctory cel e-
brati on has been crashed wi th the shadowy fi gures of stati sti cs
that do not l i e– new di seases, new defects, new ways to di e.
Medi ci ne i s a tool for the preservati on of heal th and l i fe.
Technol ogy i s a tool for the enhancement of producti vi ty and
84 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fi tful ness. Whenever wi cked men try to wi el d those tool s for
the di ssemi nati on of death and destructi on, for broadcasti ng
barrenness and brutal i ty, di saster becomes i nevi tabl e.go
Frui tful ness i s a bl essi ng from God (Genesi s 17:20; Exodus
23:6; Deuteronomy 7:14). Li fe i s a gl ori ous gi ft of grace (John
10:10). And so whi l e fi -ui tfi dness and abundant l i fe bri ng joy and
jubi l ati on (Psal m 113:9), barrenness and death bri ng sadness and
sorrow (Job 24:21, 39:6; Jeremi ah 4:26).
Al l men are commanded to be fmi tful (Genesi s 9:1). We are
to be frui tful i n al l that we set our hands to do (Col ossi ans 1:10).
And we are to have nothi ng to do wi th the works of unfmi tful ness
(Ephesi ans 5:11). Now that does not mean that we are not to “
exerci se wi se stewardshi p over our l i ves, our fami l i es, and our
envi ronment. On the contrary, we are commanded to “exerci se
domi ni on” over these thi ngs (Genesi s 1:28). But the cl ear purpose
of that stewardshi p and domi ni on i s to enhance and mul ~i pl y
frui tful ness, not barrenness.
There can be no compromi se, no hedgi ng, and no capi tul a-
ti on on thi s matter: death i s the enemy that Chri st came to destroy
(1 Cori nthi ans 15:26; 2 Ti mothy 1:10). Barrenness i s the cur se that
He came to remove (I sai ah 32 :15; 2 Peter 1:8). Death and bamen-
ness nmer have been and newr wi l l be “rest ,“ “rel i ef,” “freedom,” or
‘natural .” Death and barrenness are the awful , obscene, and
wretched resul ts of the fal l (Genesi s 2:17, 3:16-19). They are the
torturous and unnatural shackl es of si n (Remans 6:23).
To shun fi -fi tful ness and l i fe for barrenness and death i s
utterl y i nsane (Remans 1:18-22). I t i s to i nvi te di saster (Deuter-
onomy 28:15-68).
One hundred years ago – before the Gol den Age – the medi -
cal establ i shment l ed a val i ant crusade to cri mi nal i ze the fl our-
i shi ng aborti on and bi rth control enterpri ses of the day.gl They
l ed that crusade not just because they thoug/zt they were i mmoral ,
but because they knew they were unsafe. They fought aborti on
and bi rth control because death and barrenness are the anti -
thesi s, not the ambi ti ons, of medi ci ne.
As a resul t of that cl ear and uncompromi si ng stand, thei r
professi on fl ouri shed– and the Gol den Age dawned.gz
Today, because the medi cal establ i shment has embraced
Pl anned Parenthood’s morbi d fasci nati on wi th death and barren-
ness, the Gol den Age i s comi ng to a cl ose, and we are seei ng many
Back-AllV Butchers: The Medical LegaV 85
of the gai ns of the l ast century sl i p out of our grasp: i ncurabl e
retro-vi ruses ravagi ng whol e sectors of the popul ati on i n pl ague
proporti ons,gs mutati ng strai ns of cancer cutti ng wi de swathes
through each new generati on,gq and surpri si ng reversal s i n un-
devel oped nati ons of once-conquered foes l i ke smal l pox, mal ari a,
and pol i o .95
But that’s not the worst of i t.
Horror story after horror story– a veri tabl e l i tany of abuse–
has begun to emerge from the hal l owed hal l s of medi ci ne i n our
l and: fetal harvesti ng,gG women servi ng as breeders i n surrogate
motherhood programs,gT euthanasi a,gg geneti c mani pul ati on
i n test tube baby experi ments,gg i nfanti ci de, 1°’J preprogrammed
i mpl ants and brai n-to-computer i nterfaci ng for i ntel l i gence
enhancements, 101 geneti c engi neeri ng, 102 vi ral memory mani p-
ul ati on to control psychoti c epi sodes i n mental pati ents, 10S
al geny, 104 the devel opment of fri ghteni ngl y powerful forms of bi -
ol ogi cal warfare, 10S dael i aforcati on, 10G the excl usi ve commerci al -
i zati on of servi ces by heal th care corporati ons, 10T bi ocl eati cs, 108
poor pati ents servi ng as gui nea pi gs i n bi zarre parti cl e bombard-
ment experi ments, l og neurocl atol ogy, 110 handi capped pati ents
faci ng compul sory steri l i zati ons, I l l arti fi ci al natal i zati on,l l z and
raci al l y moti vated Eugeni c programs. 113 They are stori es that
make the Nazi medi cal atroci ti es pal e i n compari son. 114
How coul d thi s come to be? How coul d modern medi ci ne –
fresh on the heel s of the Gol den Age – have gone so wrong?
The fact i s, medi ci ne has al ways been a speci al l egacy of
God’s peopl e.
Whenever and wherever Bi bl i cal fai thful ness has been prac-
ti ced, the medi cal arts have fl ouri shed. But whenever and wher-
ever Bi bl i cal fai thful ness has been shunned, medi ci ne has gi ven
way to supersti ti on, barbari sm, and shamani sm.
The earl i est medi cal gui l d appeared on the Aegean i sl and of
Cos, just off the coast of Asi a Mi nor. Around the ti me that
Nehemi ah was organi zi ng the post-exi l i c Jews i n Jerusal em to
rebui l d the wal l s, another refugee from the Babyl oni an occupa-
ti on, Aescul api us, was organi zi ng the post-exi l i c Jews on Cos
i nto medi cal speci al i sts —for the fi rst ti me i n hi story, movi ng
medi cal heal i ng beyond fol k remedi es and occul ti c ri tual s. I t was
not l ong before thi s el i te gui l d had become the wonder of the
Medi terranean worl d under the l eadershi p of Hi ppocrates, the son,
86 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
of Panacea, the son of Hygei a, the son of Aescul api us, the son of
Hashabi a the Hebrew, an exi l e of fal l en Jerusal em. 115
I n other words, the great Greek school of heal i ng that gave us
the Hi ppocrati c oath, that gave us the sci enti fi c standards for
hygi ene, di agnosi s, and systemati c treatment that form the basi s
for modern medi ci ne, wasn’t Greek at al l . I t was Hebrew, the
fi -ui t of Bi bl i cal fai th. 116
And so the story goes, al l throughout hi story.
Medi ci ne al ways has been and zdways wi l l be a speci al l egacy
of God’s peopl e — provoked by Scri ptural compassi on, fuel ed by
Scri ptural convi cti on, and gui ded by Scri ptural ethi cs.
When pl ague and pesti l ence convul sed the peopl es of the
past, i t was Chri sti ans who stood steadfast ami dst the terrors, es-
tabl i shi ng hostel s, cl i ni cs, and Basi l eas. I t was the Chur ch that
pi oneered the concept of hospi tal s. For i nstance, i n 372 Basi l the
Great, bi shop of Caesarea i n Cappadoci a, founded the fi rst non-
ambul atory hospi tal , attended by both nurses and doctors. 117
John Chrysostom opened a si mi l ar faci l i ty adjacent to hi s
Church i n Anti och i n 389.118 And Ambrose, Bi shop of Mi l an,
dedi cated a hospi tal model ed on those fi rst two i n hi s di ocese i n
393.119 Thereafter, wherever the Good News of Jesus Chri st
penetrated the darkness of pagani sm, the l i ght and l i fe of the
medi cal arts were qui ckl y establ i shed. l ZO
The emergence of medi ci ne’s Gol den Age came i n di rect cor-
respondence wi th the advancement of the Gospel . 121 Chri sti an
nati ons are havens of medi cal mastery, guardi ng the sancti ty of
l i fe. Where the Church of Jesus Chri st i s weak and fal teri ng,
however, medi cal technol ogy degenerates to crude and barbari c
supersti ti on. I t becomes just one more bl udgeon to expl oi t the
weak, the poor, and the hel pl ess. When Asi a Mi nor and Eastern
Europe converted to the fai th throughout the fi rst mi l l enni um
after Chri st, a revol uti on of compassi onate and professi onal ,car e
bl anketed those regi ons wi th a tenaci ous respect and protecti on
of al l human l i fe, from the womb to the tomb. 1*Z But when suc-
cessi ve waves of pagani sm, fi rst the Ottomans and Tartars and
then l ater the Fasci sts and Communi sts, snatched those real ms
from the fol d of Chri stendom, medi ci ne was reduced to a mor-
bi d and medi eval mal apropi sm of genoci de, tri age, atroci ty,
and perversi on. 123
Back-Ally Butchers: The Medical Legacy 87
Where true Chri sti ani ty i s not practi ced, true medi ci ne can-
not be practi ced. Where fai th degenerates i nto fai thl essness,
heal i ng of necessi ty degenerates i nto ki l l i ng. Where there are no
moral or ethi cal standards, there can be no basi s for the nurture
and protecti on of l i fe.
The great l esson of hi story i s that Proverbs 8:35-36 i s abso-
l utel y and i nescapabl y true: al l those who hate God l ove death,
but he who fi nds God l oves l i fe.
Sexual Bal ance
Sex i s good.
I n i ts proper pl ace. And i n i ts proper perspecti ve.
God created i t. He endowed i t wi th great val ue and benefi t.
He fi l l ed i t wi th beauty, di gni ty, gl ory, honor – and, of course,
l i je. He made i t a mul ti -di mensi onal bl essi ng, a l avi sh gi ft, and a
graci ous i nheri tance for al l those who have entered i nto the l i fe-
l ong covenant of marri age.
Sex i s good because i t affi rms and confi rms that covenant
wi th i nti macy and joy. The marri age bed i s ri ch wi th pl easure. I t
i s romanti c. I t i s l ush wi th merri ment and cel ebrati on. And thi s
recreati onal aspect of mari tal sex i s never to be despi sed.
Sex i s al so good because i t anoi nts the covenant wi th perpe-
tui ty. The great bl essi ng of chi l dren i s a speci al i nheri tance
bestowed by God’s own soverei gn hand. Thi s procreati onal
aspect of mari tal sex i s never to be despi sed.
Sex i s good. I t i s a cel ebrati on of l i fe.
Of course, sex can be defi l ed. When i t i s ri pped out of i ts
covenant context to be used and abused as an end i n i tsel f, i t i s
corrupted and pol l uted. Outsi de of the marri age covenant, sex
becomes a rude and crude parody of i tsel f. I t i s sul l i ed and
putrefi ed. I t becomes a specter of death. The fact that Pl anned
Parenthood’s aborti on and bi rth control programs create i ncen-
ti ves for premari tal sex shoul d be i ndi ctment enough.
But not onl y i s sex defded when i t i s stol en from the sancti ty
of marri age, i t i s al so defi l ed when i t l oses i ts del i cate bal ance
between recreati on and procreati on. Any attempt to dri ve an
absol ute wedge between those two God-ordai ned dynami cs
di mi ni shes the gl ory of the marri age bed. 12A
88 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Sex i s not frui tful just because i t’s fun –just because i t en-
hances i nti macy and communi on. Some coupl es who enjoy extra-
ordi nary bedroom expl oi ts never know the fi dl ness of fmi tfui ness.
Nei ther i s sex fi -ui tful just because i t produces babi es. Some
coupl es who are never abl e to have chi l dren are nonethel ess
bl essed wi th abundant fi -fi tful ness.
Frui tful ness i s a whol i sti c concern. I t encompasses both
recreati on and procreati on through a careful stewardshi p of
fai th, hope, l ove, ti me, money, resources, and ci rcumstances. I t
bal ances them, l i ke soverei gnty and responsi bi l i ty, i n a l i fe of
covenant fai thful ness.
But Pl anned Parenthood i s not too terri bl y i nterested i n bal -
ante. I nstead, i t promotes dangerous drugs and surgi cal proce-
dures that guarantee – or at l east @rPoti to guarantee – an absol ute
di vi si on between recreati on and procreati on. I t promotes con-
tracepti ve methods that attempt to usurp God’s desi gn for sex. I t
promotes bi rth control measures that reduce sex to mere sport.
Aborti on, then, i s nothi ng but a recreati onal surgery. A dan-
gerousl y l ethal recreati onal surgery. Si mi l arl y, the Pi l l – al ong
wi th most of the other forms of prescri pti on bi rth control — i s
nothi ng but a recreati onal drug. A dangerousl y toxi c recrea-
ti onal drug. Nei ther qual i ~ as l egi ti mate “heal th care.”
I sn’t i t about ti me we tol d Ameri can teens and si ngl e adul ts
to “just say no”? I sn’t i t about ti me we tol d them that there i s a
better way – God’s way? I sn’t i t about ti me modern medi ci ne
stopped toyi ng wi th the mi ni ons of perversi on and death and re-
turned to the sancti ty of l i fe? I sn’t i t?
Concl usi on
“Aborti on i n Ameri ca i s a commodi ty~ argues author Davi d
Reardon, “bought and sol d for the conveni ence of the buyer and
the profi t of the sel l er. Though aborti on uti l i zes medi cal knowl -
edge, i t i s not medical –that i s, aborti ons are not bei ng prescri bed
i n order to heal the body or cure i l l nesses. . . . Even i n the rare
cases where seri ous medi cal probl ems do exi st because of the
pregnancy, aborti on i s sti l l not good medi ci ne.” 125
Amazi ngl y, thi s dangerous and brutal procedure i s the on~
surgery whi ch i s l egal l y protected from any sort of governmental
Bmk-Allgy Butchers: The Medical Legacy 89
regul ati on. 126 There are l aws that di ctate how tonsi l s may and
may not be removed. There are l aws that di ctate how broken
bones may and may not be set. But there are no l aws that di ctate
how aborti ons may or may not be performed. 127 Even tort l i abi l i ty
restrai nts upon the aborti on i ndustry are bei ng di smantl ed by
the chi l d-ki l l i ng zeal ots i n government – from the Whi te House
to the courthouse. 128
Si mi l arl y, prescri pti on bi rth control has attai ned the status of a
sacred cow. Anyone who questi ons i ts vi abi l i ty i s i nstantl y vi l i fi ed
as a vi ol ator of ci vi l l i berti es and an i mbal ance Vi ctori an snoot.
But the fact i s that the Pi l l , the I UD, Norpl ant, Depo-Provera,
Ovral , RU-486, and a l arge number of spermi ci dal jel l i es,
creams, and foams are dangerous. They are not medical — they
are not bei ng prescri bed i n order to heal bodi es or cure i l l nesses.
They are recreati onal drugs. Dangerous recreati onal drugs.
Cl earl y, the medi cal practi ces of Pl anned Parenthood are not
medical at al l . They are scandal ous. 129
/
,,-
F I V E
A RACE OF
THOROUGHBREDS:
THE RACIAL LEGACY
homo homini lupust
Time ajkr time mankind is driven against the rocks of the hom”d reali~of a fallen
meation. And time a]er time munkind must learn the hard lessons of histo~ — the
lessons that for some dangerous and awfil rea.ron we cani seem to keep in our col-
lective memo~.
2
Hilaire Belloc
I t was a very good year. Ameri ca was boi sterousl y happy.
Wi th Cal vi n Cool i dge i n the Whi te House i n Washi ngton, Duke
El l i ngton at the Cotton Cl ub i n Harl em, and Babe Ruth at
home pl ate i n New York, thi ngs coul d hardl y be better. I t was
1927, and Ceci l B. DeMi l l e was putti ng the fi ni shi ng touches on
hi s cl assi c fi l m, The Ki ng of Kings, Henry Ford was rol l i ng hi s
fi fteen-mi l l i onth Model T off the assembl y l i ne, Abe Saperstei n
was recrui ti ng the razzl e-dazzl e pl ayers that woul d become the
Harl em Gl obetrotters, Al Jol son was wowi ng the publ i c i n The
J UZ Singer, and Thornton Wi l der was garneri ng accol ades for hi s
newest book, The Bri dge of San Luis Rey. The Great War was an
al ready di stant memory and the Great Depressi on was sti l l i n the
di stant fhtur e. I t was a zany, carefree ti me of zoot sui ts and fl appers,
speakeasi es and dance-a-thons. I t was i ndeed a very good year.
For most fol ks, anyway.
I t wasn’t a very good year for Carri e Buck. I n a deci si on
wri tten by Justi ce Ol i ver Wendel l Hol mes, the Supreme Court
uphel d a Vi rgi ni a State Heal th Department order to have the
ni neteen-year-ol d gi rl steri l i zed agai nst her wi l l .
91
92 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Carri e had recentl y been commi tted to a state i nsti tuti on for
epi l epti cs, where her mother Emma was al so a pati ent. Upon
admi ssi on she had been gi ven an 1.Q. test and was found to
have “a mental age of ni ne years.” Emma was sai d to have “a
mental age of sl i ghtl y under ei ght years ,“ and Carri e’s seven-
month-ol d baby was sai d to have “a l ook” that was “not qui te nor-
mal .”s That was evi dence enough for the state heal th offi ci al s.
They i nvoked a Vi rgi ni a Law that requi red steri l i zati on i n fami l -
i es where “heredi tary mental defi ci ency” and “feebl emi ndedness”
coul d be demonstrated over three successi ve generati ons.
Medi cal experts suppl i ed the court wi th deposi ti ons cl ai mi ng
that Carri e’s al l eged “feebl emi ndedness” was “unquesti onabl y
her edi tar y” — wi thout ever havi ng exami ned Carri e, her mother,
or her daughter i n person. 4 One of these l ong-di stance experts, a
renowned geneti c bi ol ogi st, asserted that Carri e’s fi uni l y bel onged
to “the shi ftl ess, i gnorant, and worthl ess cl ass,” that “modern
sci ence and benefi cent soci al l egi sl ati on i s obl i gated to eradi cate
for the greater good of the Whi te Ci vi l i zati on.ns
Apparentl y the court agreed. I n hi s opi ni on, Justi ce Hol mes
wrote, “We have seen more than once that the publ i c wel fare
may cal l upon the best ci ti zens for thei r l i ves. I t woul d be strange
i f i t coul d not cal l upon those who al ready sap the strength of the
State for these l esser sacri fi ces. . . . i n order to prevent our
bei ng swamped wi th i ncompetence.” He concl uded, “Three gen-
erati ons of i mbeci l es are enough.”G
So, one fi ne day i n 1927, when most. of the rest of the worl d
seemed to be cel ebrati ng Babe Ruth’s record-setti ng si xti eth
home run of the season, Carri e Buck entered a hospi tal i n
Lynchburg, Vi rgi ni a, and had her fal l opi an tubes severed.
Carri e, now seventy-ni ne, l i ves near her si ster Dori s i n
Charl ottesvi l l e, Vi rgi ni a.T Dori s had been steri l i zed under the
same l aw, onl y she never knew i t. “They tol d me,” she recal l ed,
“that the operati on was for an appendi x.” Later, when she was
marri ed, she and her husband tri ed to have chi l dren. They con-
sul ted wi th a number of speci al i sts at three hospi tal s throughout
her chi l d-beari ng years, but none of them detected the tubal
l i gati on. I t wasn’t unti l 1980, fi fty-two years after the fact, that
Dori s fi nal l y uncovered the cause of her l i fel ong sadness. I t was
onl y then that she was gi ven access to Carri e’s medi cal records,
where a crypti c margi nal note reveal ed that she shared her
si stei s fate.6 “I broke down and cri ed,” she sai d. “My husband
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial Lega~ 93
and me wanted chi l dren desperatel y. We were crazy about them.
I never knew what they’d done to me.”g
The Buck fami l y tragedy has been repeated thousands of
ti mes over the years. To thi s day, twenty-two states have steri l -
i zati on l aws on the books, and young women l i ke Carri e and
Dori s are subjected to the humi l i ati on of coerci ve barrenness. 1°
Those l aws are the frui t of a phi l osophi cal movement cal l ed
Eugeni cs — a movement that Pl anned Parenthood i s very much
a part of. 11
Whi te Supremacy
Eugeni cs – l i ke Darwi ni sm, Marxi sm, Fasci sm, Freudi an-
i sm, and any number of other revol uti onary pseudo+ i ci ences —
was an offshoot of Mal thusi ani sm. 12 Through hi s wri ti ngs,
Thomas Mal thus had convi nced an enti re generati on of sci en-
ti sts, i ntel l ectual s, and soci al reformers that the worl d was faci ng
an i mmi nent economi c cri si s caused by unchecked human ferti l -
i ty. 13 Some of those Mal thusi ans bel i eved that the sol uti on to the
cri si s was pol i ti cal : restri ct i mmi grati on, reform soci al wel fare,
and ti ghten ci ti zenshi p requi rements. 1A Others thought the sol u-
ti on was technol ogi cal : i ncrease a~i cul tural producti on, i m-
prove medi cal profi ci ency, and promote i ndustri al effi ci ency. i s
But many of the rest fel t that the sol uti on was geneti c – restri ct
or el i mi nate “bad” raci al stocks, and gradual l y “ai d” the evol u-
ti onary ascent of man. 16 Thi s l ast group became known as the
Eugeni ci sts. The Eugeni ci sts unashamedl y espoused Whi te
Supremacy. Or to be more preci se, they espoused Northern and
Eastern European Whi te Supremacy. 17 Thi s supremacy was to
be promoted both posi ti vel y and negati vel y.l s
Through sel ecti ve breedi ng, the Eugeni ci sts hoped to puri fy
the bl ood l i nes and i mprove the stock of the Aryan race. The “fi t”
woul d be encouraged to reproduce prol i fi cal l y. Thi s was the
posi ti ve si de of Mal thusi an Eugeni cs. 19
Negati ve Mal thusi an Eugeni cs on the other hand, sought to
contai n the ‘i nferi or” races through segregati on, steri l i zati on,
bi rth control , and aborti on. The “unfi t” woul d thus be sl owl y
wi nnowed out of the popul ati on as chaff i s from wheat .ZO
By the fi rst two decades of thi s century, accordi ng to femi ni st
author Ger mai ne Gr eer , “ the r el evance of Eugeni c con-
si derati ons was accepted by al l shades of l i beral and radi cal opi n-
i on, as wel l as by conservati ves .“21 Some forty states had enacted
94 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
restri cti ve contai nment measures and establ i shed Eugeni c asy-
I ums.zz Eugeni cs departments were endowed at many of the
most presti gi ous uni versi ti es i n the worl d.zs Fundi ng for
Eugeni c research was provi ded by the Rockefel l er, Ford, and
Carnegi e Foundati ons .24 And Eugeni c i deas were gi ven free
rei gn i n the l i terature, theater, musi c, and press of the day.zs
The crassest sort of raci al and cl ass bi gotry was thus embraced
agai nst the bosom of pop cul ture as readi l y and enthusi asti cal l y
as the l atest movi e rel ease from Hol l ywood or the l atest hi t tune
from Broadway. I t became a part of the col l ecti ve consci ousness.
I ts assumpti ons went al most enti rel y unquesti oned. Because i t
sprang from the sacrosanct templ e of “sci ence” — l i ke Aphrodi te
from the sea– i t was pl aced i n the modern pantheon of “truth”
and rendered due fai th and servi ce by al l “reasonabl e” men.
Of course, not al l men are “reasonabl e,” and so Mal thusi an
Eugeni cs was not wi thout i ts cri ti cs. The great Chri sti an apol o-
gi st G. K. Chesterton, for exampl e, fi red unrel enti ng sal vos of
bi ti ng anal ysi s agai nst the Eugeni ci sts, i ndi cti ng them for com-
bi ni ng “a hardeni ng of the heart wi th a sympatheti c softeni ng of
the head~zG and for presumi ng to turn “common decency” and
“commendabl e deeds” i nto “soci al cri mes .“27 I f Darwi ni sm was
the doctri ne of “the survi val of the fi ttest ,“ then he sai d, Eugeni cs
was the doctri ne of “the survi val of the nasti est .=28 I n hi s
rei narkabl y vi si onary book Eugeni cs and Oth Evils, Chesterton
poi nted out, for the fi rst ti me, the l i nk between Neo-Mal thusi an
Eugeni cs and the evol uti on of Prussi an and Vol ki sh Mo~i sm
i nto Fasci st Nazi sm. “I t i s the same stufi sci ence,” he argued,
“the same bul l yi ng bureaucracy, and the same terrori sm by
tenth-rate professors, that has l ed the German Empi re to i ts re-
cent conspi cuous tri umphs.”zg
But si ngul ar voi ces l i ke Chesterton’s were soon drowned out
by the di n of acceptance. Long l atent bi ases heretofore heI d at bay
by moral conventi on were suddenl y l i berated by “sci ence.” Men
were now justi fi ed i n i ndul gi ng thei r petty prejudi ces. And they
took perverse pl easure i n i t, as al l fal l en men are wont to do.so
The Pl anned Parenthood Connecti on
Margaret Sanger was especi al l y mesmeri zed by the sci enti fi c
raci sm of Mal thusi an Eugeni cs. Part of the attracti on for her was
surel y personal : her mentor and l over, Havel ock El l i s, was the
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial Lega~ 95
bel oved di sci pl e of Franci s Gal ton, the bri l l i ant cousi n of Charl es
Darwi n who fi rst systemi zed and popul ari zed Eugeni c thought .31
Part of the attracti on for her was al so pol i ti cal : vi rtual l y al l of
her Soci al i st fri ends, l overs, and comrades were commi tted
Eugeni ci sts as wel l – from the fol l owers of Leni n i n Revol u-
ti onary Soci al i sm, l i ke H. G. Wel l s, George Bernard Shaw, and
Jul i us Harnmer,sz to the fol l owers of Hi tl er i n Nati onal Soci al -
i sm, l i ke Ernest Rudi n, Leon Whi tney, and Harry Laughl i n. 33
But i t wasn’t si mpl y senti ment or pol i ti cs that drew Margaret
i nto the Eugeni c fol d. She was thoroughl y convi nced that the
“i nferi or races” were i n fact “human weeds” and a “menace to ci v-
i l i zati on.”sq She bel i eved that “soci al regenerati on” woul d onl y be
possi bl e as the “si ni ster forces of the hordes of i rresponsi bi l i ty
and i mbeci l i t y“ were repul sed. 35 She had come to regard organ-
i zed chari ty to ethni c mi nori ti es and the poor as a “symptom of a
mal i gnant soci al di sease” because i t encouraged the prol i fi cacy of
“defecti ve, del i nquents, and dependents.”sG She yearned for the
end of the Chri sti an “rei gn of benevol ence” that the Eugeni c
Soci al i sts promi sed, when the “choki ng human undergrowth” of
“morons and i mbeci l es” woul d be “segregated” and “steri l i zed .“s7
Her goal was “to create a race of thoroughbreds” by encouragi ng
“more chi l dren from the fi t, and l ess from the unfi t .=38 And the
onl y way to achi eve that goal , she real i zed, was through Mal thu-
si an Eugeni cs.
Thus, as she began to bui l d the work of the Ameri can Bi rth
Control League, and ul ti matel y, of Pl anned Parenthood, Margaret
rel i ed heavi l y on the men, women, i deas, and resources of the
Eugeni cs movement. Vi rtual l y al l of the organi zati on’s board
members were Eugeni ci sts. 39 Fi nanci ng for the earl y projects —
from the openi ng of the bi rth control cl i ni cs to the publ i shi ng of
the revol uti onary l i terature — came from Eugeni ci sts .
40
The
speakers at the conferences, the authors of the l i terature and the
provi ders of the servi ces were al most wi thout excepti on avi d
Eugeni ci sts.ql And the i nternati onal work of Pl anned Parenthood
were ori gi nal l y housed i n the offi ces of the Eugeni cs Soci ety —
whi l e the organi zati ons themsel ves were i nsti tuti onal l y i nter-
twi ned for years.qz
The Birth Control Review – Margaret’s magazi ne and the i mmed-
i ate predecessor to the P/ anneal Parenthood Reuiew – regul arl y and
openl y publ i shed the raci st arti cl es of Mal thusi an Eugeni ci sts. *S
I n 1920, i t publ i shed a favorabl e revi ew of Lothrop Stoddard’s
96 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fri ghteni ng book, The Ri si ng Ti de of Color Against White World
Su@maqy44 I n 1923, the Reoi ezo edi tori al i zed i n favor of restri cti ng
i mmi grati on on a raci al basi s.qs I n 1932, i t outl i ned Margaret’s
“Pl an for Peace,” cal l i ng for coerci ve steri l i zati on, mandatory
segregati on, and rehabi l ati ve concentrati on camps for al l “dys-
genic stocks.n46 In 1933, the Revi ew publ i shed “Eugeni c Steri l i za-
ti on: An Urgent Need” by Ernst Rudi n, who was Hi tl er’s di rector
of geneti c steri l i zati on and a founder of the Nazi Soci ety for
Raci al Hygi ene.qT And l ater that same year, i t publ i shed an arti cl e
by Leon Whi tney enti tl ed, “Sel ecti ve Steri l i zati on,” whi ch ada-
mantl y prai sed and defended the Thi rd Rei ch’s raci al programs. 48
The bottom l i ne i s that Pl anned Parenthood was sel f-consci ousl y
organi zed, i n part, to promote and enforce Whi te Supremacy.
Li ke the Ku Kl ux Kl an, the Nazi Party, and the Menshevi ks, i t
has been from i ts i ncepti on i mpl i ci tl y and expl i ci tl y raci st. And
thi s raci st ori entati on i s al l too evi dent i n i ts vari ous pro~ams
and i ni ti ati ves: bi rth control cl i ni cs, the aborti on crusade, and
steri l i zati on i ni ti ati ves.
Raci sm and Bi rth Control Cl i ni cs
Margaret Sangefs fi rst bi rth control cl i ni c was opened i n
1916. I t was l ocated i n the i mpoveri shed and densel y popul ated
Brownsvi l l e secti on of Brookl yn. The ramshackl e two-room
storefront was a far cry from Margaret’s pl ush Greenwi ch Vi l -
l age haunts. But si nce the cl i entel e she wi shed to attract – “i m-
mi grant Southern Europeans, Sl avs, Lati ns, and Jews” — coul d
onl y be found “i n the coarser nei ghborhoods and tenements,” she
was forced to venture out of her comfortabl e confi nes. 49
As her organi zati on grew i n power and presti ge, she began
to target several other “dysgeni c races” — i ncl udi ng Bl acks,
Hi spani cs, Ameri nds, and Cathol i cs– and setup cl i ni cs i n thei r
respecti ve communi ti es as wel l .50 Margaret and the Mal thusi an
Eugeni ci sts she had gathered about her were not parti al ; every
non-Aryan – Red, Yel l ow, Bl ack, or Whi te – al l were noxi ous
i n thei r si ght. They sought to pl ace new cl i ni cs wherever those
“feebl e-mi nded, syphi l i ti c, i rresponsi bl e, and defecti ve” stocks
“bred unhi ndered.”sl Si nce by thei r esti mati on as much as
seventy percent of the popul ati on fel l i nto thi s “undesi rabl e”
category, Margaret and her cohorts real l y had thei r work cut
out for them. S*
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial Legacy 97
They wasted no ti me i n getti ng started.
I n 1939, they desi gned a ‘Negro Project” i n response to “south-
ern state publ i c heal th offi ci al s” — men not general l y known for
thei r raci al equani mi ty.ss “The mass of Negroes,” the project
proposal asserted, “parti cul arl y i n the South, sti l l breed carel essl y
and di sastrousl y, wi th the resul t that the i ncrease among
Negroes, even more than among Whi tes, i s from that porti on of
the popul ati on l east i ntel l i gent and fi t .=54 The proposal went on
to say that “Publ i c Heal th stati sti cs merel y hi nt at the pri mi ti ve
state of ci vi l i zati on i n’ whi ch most Negroes i n the South l i ve.”55
I n order to remedy thi s “dysgeni c horror story; the project
ai med to hi re three or four “Col ored Mi ni sters, preferabl y wi th
soci al -servi ce backgrounds, and wi th engagi ng personal i ti es” to
travel to vari ous Bl ack encl aves and propagandi ze for bi rth con-
trol .sG “The most successful educati onal approach to the Negro,”
Margaret wrote someti me l ater, “i s through a rel i gi ous appeal .
We do not want word to go out that we want to extermi nate the
Negro popul ati on and the Mi ni ster i s the ‘man who can
strai ghten out that i dea i f i t ever occurs to any of thei r more re-
bel l i ous members.zs7 Of course, those Bl ack mi ni sters were to be
carefi dl y control l ed —mere fi gureheads. “There i s a great danger
that we wi l l fai l : one of the project di rectors wrote, “because the
Negroes thi nk i t a pl an for extermi nati on. Hence, l et’s appear to
l et the col ored run i t .=58 Another project di rector l amented, “I
wonder i f Southern Darki es can ever be entrusted wi th . . . a
cl i ni c. Our experi ence causes us to doubt thei r abi l i ty to work
except under Whi te supervi si on.”sg The enti re operati on then
was a ruse —a mani pul ati ve attempt to get Bl acks to cooperate i n
thei r own el i mi nati on.
The project was qui te successful . I ts genoci dal i ntenti ons
were careful l y camoufl aged beneath several l ayers of condescend-
i ng soci al servi ce rhetori c and organi zati onal experti se. Li ke the
ci ti zens of Hamel i n, l ured i nto capti vi ty by the sweet serenades
of the Pi ed Pi per, al l too many Bl acks al l across the country hap-
pi l y fel l i nto step behi nd Margaret and the Eugeni c raci sts she
had pl aced on her Negro Advi sory Counci l . Soon cl i ni cs
throughout the South were di stri buti ng contracepti ves to Bl acks
and Margaret’s dream of di scouragi ng “the defecti ve and di s-
eased el ements of humani ty” from thei r “recl dess and i rresponsi -
bl e swarmi ng and spawni ng” was at l ast bei ng ful fi l l ed.GO
98 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
The strategy was of course raci al and not geographi cal . The
Southern states were pi cked si mpl y because of the hi gh propor-
ti on of Bl acks i n thei r popul ati ons.Gl I n the 1970s, expansi on to
the North and West occurred. But the basi c gui del i nes re-
mai ned: the proporti on of mi nori ti es i n a communi ty was cl osel y
rel ated to the densi ty of bi rth control cl i ni cs. 62
Duri ng the 1980s when Pl anned Parenthood shi fted i ts focus
from communi ty-based cl i ni cs to school -based cl i ni cs, i t agai n
targeted i nner-ci ty mi nori ty nei ghborhoods.Ga Of the more than
one hundred school -based cl i ni cs that have opened nati onwi de
i n the l ast decade, none have been at substanti al l y al l -Whi te
school s.Gq None have been at suburban mi ddl e-cl ass school s. All
have been at Bl ack, mi nori ty, or ethni c school s.Gs
Fortunatel y, a number of Bl ack l eaders have seen through
these Eugeni c machi nati ons and have begun a counterattack.GG
I n 1987, for i nstance, a group of Bl ack mi ni sters, parents, and
educators fi l ed sui t agai nst the Chi cago Board of Educati on. The
pl ai nti ffs charged that the ci ty’s school -based cl i ni cs not onl y vi o-
l ated state forni cati on l aws, but that they al so were a form of
di scri mi nati on agai nst Bl acks. The cl i ni cs are a “cal cul ated, per-
ni ci ous effort to destroy the very fabri c of fami l y l i fe among
Bl ack parents and thei r chi l dren,” the sui t al l eged. They are “de-
si gned to control the Bl ack popul ati on” and are “sponsored by
the very governmental agency charged wi th the responsi bi l i ty of
reachi ng and promoti ng fami l y l i fe val ues .“GT
Tanya Crawford, one of the parents i n the group, was
shocked when her daughter Dedrea came home from school wi th
several pi eces of Pl anned Parenthood l i terature. “I never real -
i zed how raci st those peopl e were unti l I read the thi ngs they
were gi vi ng Dedrea at the school cl i ni c. They’re as bad as the
Kl an. Maybe worse, because they’re so sl i ck and sophi sti cated.
Thei r bi gotry i s al l dol l ed up wi th stati sti cs and surveys, but just
beneath the surface i t’s as ugl y as aparthei d. I t’s as ugl y as any-
thi ng I can i magi ne.”
Raci sm and Aborti on
Agai n and agai n Pl anned Parenthood has asserted that i ts
bi rth control programs and i ni ti ati ves are desi gned to “prevent
the need for aborti on.”Gs I ts cl ai m that contracepti ve servi ces
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial LegaV 99
l ower unwanted pregnancy rates i s enti rel y unfounded, however.
A number of studi es have demonstrated that as contracepti on
becomes more accessi bl e, the number of unwanted pregnanci es
actual l y ri ses, thus i ncreasi ng the demand for aborti on.Gg And
si nce mi nori ty communi ti es are the pri mary targets for con-
tracepti ve servi ces, Bl acks and Hi spani cs i nevi tabl y must bear
the brunt of the aborti on hol ocaust.
A raci al anal ysi s of aborti on stati sti cs i s qui te reveal i ng.
Accordi ng to a Heal th and Human Servi ces Admi ni strati on
report, as many as forty-three percent of al l aborti ons are per-
formed on Bl acks and another ten percent on Hi spani cs.T’J Thi s,
despi te the fact that Bl acks onl y make up el even percent of the
total U.S. popul ati on and Hi spani cs onl y about ei ght percent. 71
A Nati onal Academy of Sci ences i nvesti gati on rel eased more
conservati ve — but no l ess tel l i ng— fi gures: thi rty-two percent of
al l aborti ons are performed on mi nori ty mothers. 72
Pl anned Parenthood’s crusade to el i mi nate al l those “dysgeni c
stocks” that Margaret Sanger bel i eved were a “dead wei ght of
human waste” and a “menace to the race” has preci pi tated a
whol esal e sl aughter.’s By 1975, a l i ttl e more than one percent of
the Bl ack popul ati on had been aborted.TA By 1980 that fi gure
had i ncreased to nearl y two and a hal f percent.
75
By 1985, i t had
reached three percent .76 And by 1992 i t had grown exponenti al l y
a fi l l four and a hal f percent. 77 I n most Bl ack communi ti es today
aborti ons outstri p bi rths by as much as three-to-one. 78
Mi l l y Washi ngton, Lani ta Garza, and Deni se Rashad at-
tended hi gh school together i n Mi nneapol i s. Two years ago, the
di stri ct i nstal l ed an experi mental school -based cl i ni c on thei r
hi gh school campus. “At fi rst I thought i t was a real good i dea:
Deni se tol d me.
‘Yeah. Me too,” Lani ta chi med i n.
‘I mean, there’s been l otsa gi rl s that’s l eft school ‘cause they got
i n troubl e ,“ sai d Deni se, “and I bel i eved thi s mi ght hel p some .“
“But i t hasn’t ,“ Mi l l y sai d. “Al l i t’s done i s make i t so getti n’ i n
troubl e i s normal now.”
“And wi th an easy out ,“ Deni se added.
‘yeah. Aborti on. I t’s wei rd, but you know, a coupl e of years
ago I di dn’t know anybody who’d had an aborti on ,Z sai d Mi l l y.
“Now i t’s l i ke eue~bodyi had at l east one. Lots have had two. Or
even more than that .“
100 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
“I get scared someti mes,” Lani ta sai d “I t’s l i ke we’ve opened
up thi s Pandora’s Box or somethi ng, you know?”
“Real l y, man, that’s i t: Mi l l y agreed. “Pandora’s Box. One
gi ant mess.”
Raci sm and Steri l i zati on
I n order to real i ze Margaret Sanger’s Eugeni c i deal of el i mi -
nati ng the “masses of degenerate” and “good-f or-nothi n~ races,
Pl anned Parenthood has not onl y emphasi zed contracepti on and
aborti on, i t has al so carri ed the banner of steri l i zati on.Tg And, of
course, that steri l i zati on vendetta has been pri mari l y l evel ed
agai nst mi nori ti es.
The steri l i zati on rate among Bl acks i s forty-fi ve percent
hi gher than among whi tes.so Among Hi spani cs the rate i s thi rty
percent hi gher .Bl As many as forty-two percent of al l Ameri nd
women and thi rty-fi ve percent of al l Puerto Ri can women have
been steri l i zed.BZ
As was the case wi th Carri e and Dori s Buck, many of these
steri l i zati ons have been performed coerci vel y. ‘Women i n the
Uni ted States are often pressured to accept steri l i zati on i n order
to keep getti ng wel fare payments,” says femi ni st wri ter Li nda
Gordon.ss And non-Whi te wel fare reci pi ents are apparentl y
pressured at a si gni fi cantl y hi gher l evel than Whi tes, resul ti ng i n
a di sproporti onate number of steri l i zati ons .
84
The ‘Associ ati on for Vol untary Steri l i zati on has esti mated
that between one and two mi l l i on Ameri cans a year are sur-
gi cal l y steri l i zed.ss But there maybe another two hundred fi fty
thousand coerci ve steri l i zati ons di sgui sed i n hospi tal records
as hysterectomi es. sG
A hysterectomy — the removal of the femal e reproducti ve
system —shoul d onl y be performed when i ts organs and ti ssues
become severel y darnaged, di seased, or mal i gnant. Never shoul d
i t be performed to achi eve sexual steri l i zati on, says Dr. Charl es
McLaughl i n, presi dent of the Ameri can Col l ege of Surgeons.
That woul d be “l i ke ki l l i ng a mouse wi th a cannon.”B7 I t i s al so
much more l ethal than si mpl e tubal l i gati on steri l i zati on opera-
ti ons. Currentl y, some twel ve thousand women a year di e re-
cei vi ng hysterectomi es .
88
Neverthel ess, si nce Pl anned Parenthood’s Eugeni c hysteri a
was unl eashed, the annual number of hysterectomi es has sky-
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial Legacy 10I
rocketed, so that the operati on now ranks wi th aborti on, ap-
pendectomy, and tonsi l l ectomy as one of the most frequentl y
performed surgi cal procedures i n the l and.8g
Predi ctabl y, the chi ef vi cti ms of these medi cal l y needl ess hys-
terectomi es are poor and mi nori ty women. Over a decade ago,
the New Ybrk Times reported that:
A hysterectomy whi ch renders a pati ent steri l e costs up to ei ght
hundred dol l ars, whi l e a tubal l i gati on, whi ch does the same
thi ng, pays onl y two hundred fi fty dol l ars to the surgeon, i n-
creasi ng the moti vati on to do the more expensi ve operati on.
Medi care, Medi cai d, and other heal th pl ans – for the poor and
the afi l uent both– wi l l rei mburse a surgeon up to ni nety per-
cent for the costs of any steri l i zati on procedure, and someti mes
wi l l al l ow nothi ng for aborti on. As a consequence, hy.ster-sten”l-
ization.s -so common among some groups of i ndi gent Bl acks
that they are referred to as Mississippi Appendectomies – are i n-
creasi ng y popul ar among surgeons, despi te the ri sks. 90
Lydi a Jones, a Ti tl e X and Medi cai d-el i gi bl e wel fare mother
of four, went to the Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni c near her home
and di scovered that “free” government programs can be a good
news-bad news proposi ti on. “They tol d me that i f I wanted to
take advantage of thei r medi cal servi ces I woul d have to undergo
steri l i zati on ,“ she sai d. “The counsel or just kept l ecturi ng me
about how I needed to do thi s, and that I shoul d have done i t a
l ong ti me ago. She tol d me that my chi l dren were a burden to
soci ety. Wel l , l et me tel l you, I l ove my chi l dren. And they’re a
burden to no one. My two ol dest are i n col l ege, worki ng thei r
way through. The other two are strai ght-A students and bound
for schol arshi ps. I maybe poor, and I may be Bl ack, but I ’m not
gonna be bul l i ed by these peopl e i nto despi si ng the heri tage God
has gi ven me.” Lydi a wal ked out – a rare excepti on.
I n Houston, Pl anned Parenthood di stri butes di scount cou-
pons to mi nori ty women i n order to l ure them i nto thei r cl i ni cs.gl
I n Fort Wayne, i t di stri butes pop records and sponsors dances.gz
I n other ci ti es, cl i ents are bri bed wi th cash or pri zes.g3 Al most
every gi mmi ck i n the book has been tri ed to keep the Eugeni c
desi gns of Margaret Sanger on track.
“1 real l y don’t know how Pl anned Parenthood ever got the
reputati on for bei ng an advocate for poor and mi nori ty women ,“
102 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
says Mari a Cefuentes, a soci al worker i n Al buquerque. “Every
chance they get, the cl i ni c personnel here remi nd poor and
Hi spani c women that they can’t rai se a fami l y, that to have chi l -
dren i s i rresponsi bl e, and that they aren’t capabl e of deci di ng for
themsel ves. They are constantl y pushi ng for steri l i zati on, even
for very young gi rl s. I t’s reprehensi bl e to see that ki nd of raci sm
go unchal l enged.”
“There i s no way you can escape the i mpl i cati ons,” argues
Bl ack fi nanci al anal yst Wi l l i am L. Davi s. “When an organi za-
ti on has a hi story of raci sm, when i ts l i terature i s openl y raci st,
when i ts goal s are sel f-consci ousl y raci al , and when i ts programs <
i nvari abl y revol ve around race, i t doesn’t take an expert to real -
i ze that the organi zati on i s i ndeed mci st. Real l y now, how can
anyone bel i eve anythi ng about Pl anned Parenthood except that
i t i s a hi ve of el i ti st bi gotry, prejudi ce, and bi as? Just because the
organi zati on has a smatteri ng of mi nori ty staffers i n key posi -
ti ons does nothi ng to di spel the pl ai n facts.”
Sci en ti fi c Raci s m ‘
Fact: Bl acks, Jews, Hi spani cs, and other ethni c mi nori ti es
are wel l represented i n the upper echel ons of the Pl anned
Parenthood organi zati on.
Fact: Even the hi gh-profi l e former presi dent of the Ameri can
Federati on i s Bl ack.
Fact: Aggressi ve mi nori ty hi ri ng practi ces have been stand-
ard operati ng procedure for Pl anned Parenthood at every l evel
for more than two decades.
Fact: The vast majori ty of our nati on’s ethni c l eadershi p
sol i dl y and acti vel y supports the work of Pl anned Parenthood.
Therefore: The charge of raci sm i n the organi zati on i s anec-
dotal at best, enti rel y l udi crous at worst.
Ri ght?
Wrong.
Because Pl anned Parenthood’s pecul i ar brand of prejudi ce i s
rooted i n Sci ent@ Raci sm, the i ssue i s not “col or of ski n” or “di al ect
of tongue” but “qual i ty of genes.”g* As l ong as Bl acks, Jews, and
Hi spani cs demonstrate “a good qual i ty gene pool ”gs – as l ong as
they “act whi te and thi nk whi te”gG – then they are esteemed
equal l y wi th Aryans. As l ong as they are, as Margaret Sanger
sai d, “the best of thei r race,”g’ then they can be accounted as val -
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial Legacy 103
uabl e ci ti zens. I f, on the other hand, i ndi vi dual Whi tes demon-
strate “dysgeni c trai ts ,“ then thei r ferti l i ty must be curbed ri ght
al ong wi th the other “i nferi ors and undesi rabl es.”98
Sci enti fi c Raci sm i s an equal opportuni ty di scri mi nator. I n
other words, anyone with a “defecti ve gene pool ” i s suspect. And any-
one who shows promi se may be admi tted to the ranks of the el i te.
The Theol ogy of Raci sm
Raci sm i s a vi l e and detestabl e si n (Deuteronomy 23:7).
Accordi ng to the Bi bl e, bi gots are “wi cked” and “proud” (Psal m
94:1-6). They are accursed (Deuteronomy 27:19). They are
under the judgment of God (Ezeki el 22:7, 29-31). And they face
Hi s stern i ndi gnati on (Mal achi 3:5).
The stranger, the al i en, and the sojourner are to be cared for
and sustai ned (Deuteronomy 24: 20), not vexed and oppressed
(Exodus 22:21). They are to be l oved (Deuteronomy 10:19) and
protected (Exodus 23:9). They are to be rel i eved (Levi ti cus
25:35) and sati sfi ed (Deuteronomy 14:29). They are to recei ve
equal protecti on under the l aw (Exodus 12:49, Levi ti cus 24:22,
Numbers 15: 16) and speci al attenti on i n ti mes of need (Levi ti cus
23:22, Deuteronomy 24:17-19). They are to share ful l y i n the
bl essi ngs that God has graci ousl y poured out on us al l (Deuter-
onomy 14:29, 16:11-14).
When Jesus was asked what men must do to i nheri t eternal
l i fe, He responded by gui di ng Hi s i nterrogator to the Scri ptures
(Luke 10:26). On the questi on of eternal l i fe the Scri ptures are
qui te expl i ci t: “You shal l l ove the Lord your God wi th al l your
heart, and wi th al l your soul , and wi th al l your strength, and
wi th al l your mi nd; and you shal l l ove your nei ghbor as yoursel f”
(Luke 10:27).
“Do thi s,” Jesus sai d, “and you wi l l l i ve” (Luke 10:28).
Not sati sfi ed wi th thi s answer, the i nterrogator pressed the Lord
to cl ari fy: “And who i s my nei ghbor?” he asked. “No sense i n l ov-
i ng someone I don’t have to,” he must have thought (Luke 10 :29).
Ever pati ent, ever wi se, Jesus responded wi th a parabl e – the
bel oved parabl e of the Good Samari tan:
A certai n man was goi ng down from Jerusal em to Jeri cho; and
he fel l among robbers, and they stri pped hi m and beat hi m,
104 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
and went off l eavi ng hi m hal f dead. And by chance a cer tai n
pri est was goi ng down on that road, and when he saw hi m, he
passed by on the other si de. And l i kewi se a Levi te al so, when
he came to the pl ace and saw hi m, passed by on the other si de.
But a certai n Samari tan, who was on a journey, came upon
hi m; and when he saw hi m, he fel t compassi on, and came to
hi m, and bandaged up hi s wounds, pouri ng oi l and wi ne on
them; and he put hi m on hi s own beast, and brought hi m to an
i nn, and took care of hi m. And on the next day he took out two
denari i and gave them to the i nnkeeper and sai d, ‘Take care of
hi m; and whatever more you spend, when I return, I wi l l repay
you” (Luke 10:30-35).
Jesus then concl uded Hi s l esson sayi ng: “Go and do l i kewi se”
(Luke 10:37).
Certai nl y thi s was not what the i nterrogator was expecti ng.
A Samari tan! How odd!
Seven hundred years earl i er, Assyri a had overrun and
depopul ated the northern ki ngdom of I srael , i ncl udi ng Samari a.
The conquerors had a cruel pol i cy of popul ati on-transfer that
scattered the i nhabi tants of the l and to the four wi nds. Then, the
empty countrysi de was repopul ated wi th a ragtag col l ecti on of
vagabonds and scal awags from the dregs of the Empi re (2 Ki ngs
17: 24-41). I nstead of regardi ng these newcomers as prospects for
Jewi sh evangel i sm, the peopl e of Judah, who conti nued i n i nde-
pendence for another ful l century, turned away i n contempt,
and the raci al di vi si on between Samari tan and Jew began i ts bi t-
ter course.
Samari tans were uni versal l y despi sed by good Jews. They
were raci al “hal f-breeds” who observed a ‘hal f-breed” rel i gi ous
cul tus. Worse than the pagan Greeks, worse even than the bar-
bari an Remans, the Samari tans were si ngl ed out by Jewq as a
perfect exampl e of despi cabl e depravi ty.
And now, Jesus was el evati ng a Samaritan, of al l thi ngs, to a
posi ti on of great respect and honor. A Samaritan was the good
nei ghbor, the hero of the parabl e.
Jesus was sl appi ng the rel i gi ous l eaders of I srael i n thei r col -
l ecti ve faces.
After demandi ng a cl ari fi cati on of Chri st’s textbook answer,
the i nterrogator mi ght have expected a parabl e that encouraged
A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Racial Lega~ 105
hi m to show condescendi ng justi ce to al l men, even. to Samari tans.
But never i n a thousand years woul d he have guessed that Chri st
woul d show how such a despi sed one coul d actual l y be hi s nei gh-
bor – to be l oved even as he l oved hi msel fl Even for eternal l i fe,
thi s surel y was aski ng too much!
Jesus shattered the pretense of pi ous prejudi ce once and for
al l . “God i s no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34) and so, nei ther
shoul d men be (1 Ti mothy 5:21, James 3:17). He breaks the bar-
ri ers between “Jew and Greek, bond and free, mal e and femal e”
(Gal ati ans 3:28). I n Hi m there i s nei ther “ci rcumci si on nor un-
ci rcumci si on, Barbari an nor Scythi an” (Col ossi ans 3:11).
There are no “bad stocks,” no “dysgeni c races,” and no “chok-
i ng human undergrowth.” No matter what Pl anned Parenthood
says or does, “al l men are created equal ,” and are endowed “wi th
certai n i nal i enabl e ri ghts .999
Behol d, how good and how pl easant i t i s for brothers to dwel l
together i n uni ty! I t i s l i ke the preci ous oi l upon the head, com-
i ng down upon the beard, even Aaron’s beard, comi ng down
upon the edge of hi s robes. I t i s l i ke the dew of Hermon, com-
i ng down upon the mountai ns of Zi on; for there the Lord com-
manded the bl essi ng– l i fe forever (Psal m 133 :1-3).
Concl usi on
c
Recentl y, Republ i can pol i ti cal organi zer and cabl e tel evi si on
mogul Pat Robertson caused a nati onwi de sti r when he charged
that the l ong-range goal of Pl anned Parenthood i s the creati on of
a “master race .“ 100 He al so asserted that Margaret Sanger was an
advocate of Eugeni cs and vari ous coerci ve steri l i zati on prograrns.l ”l
Pl anned Parenthood’s response was i mmedi ate. And vehement.
Faye Wattl eton, who was at the ti me the stunni ngl y attracti ve and
arti cul ate Bl ack presi dent of Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of
Ameri ca, sai d that “Al l the charges are unfounded and, frarddy,
ri di cul ous.~ 102 She said ~at Robe~son>s contentions were ~with-
out any basi s, any substance, or even any remnants of facts .“ 1’JS
Margaret Sanger’s “phi l osophi es were not based on Eugeni cs,”
she argued. “Her phi l osophy was based on peopl e bei ng al l owed
to choose for themsel ves .”104 She then di smi ssed the charges of
raci sm as “the same rhetori c we’ve heard from tel evangel i sts for
ten years.”1°5
106 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
I nteresti ngl y, just four years earl i er
Wh.s/zi n.@n Times journal i st .John Lofton
n an i ntervi ew wi th
Wattl eton admi tted
that S~ger di d i ndeed advoc~te “Eugeni cs and the advancetnent
of the perfect r ace.
~ 106 And though Wattl eton tri ed to di stance
hersel f and her organi zati on from those vi ews, she was forced to
confess that Pl anned Parenthood had never oficial~ repudi ated
them. And i nteresti ngl y, she di d not make use of the opportuni ty
to do so then. 10T
I t appears that Robertson was ri ght after al l . The cl oud of
rhetori c from Pl anned Parenthood notwi thstandi ng.
S I X
SELLING SEX: THE
EDUCATIONAL SCANDAL
akre$ama’nam 1
The accursed evay&y lfe of the modernist is instinct with the four sins c~ing
to heaven for vengeance, and there is no humani~ in it, and no simplicip, and
no recollection.
2
Hilaire Belloc
Set i nto the mi dst of an urban Negev, the school backed up
to an ol d weather-stai ned overpass i n a gri my tangl e of narrow
streets and al l eyways. I t was a preposterous oasi s of qui et, sur-
rounded by the gari sh cacophony of the i nner ci ty. Parents,
pupi l s, and woul d-be vi si tors had to turn sharpl y just at the base
of the overpass, and then careful l y negoti ate thei r fat Ponti acs
past di l api dated apartments and conveni ence stores to reach the
crumbl i ng asphal t dri ve that ci rcl ed the fl agpol e and swept up
toward the grand red bri ck facade.
Four successi ve generati ons had sent thei r chi l dren through
that i l l -tempered nei ghborhood, around the turn, up the dri ve,
past the fl agpol e, and i nto the school to learn. Catheri ne Tol eson
refl ected on that l ong unbroken l i neage as she stood at her l ocker
between cl asses. The crowded hal l s reverberated wi th the
wheedl i ng ji ve of the ei ghti es. But i t smel l ed of powerful fl oor
wax and di si nfectant — the age-ol d smel l of tradi ti on. And there
were i nscri pti ons scratched i nto the smal l metal door of the l ocker
that several l ayers of repai nti ng over the years had fai l ed to
erase: “John L. l oves Gaye Lynn,” “Go Rai ders, beat Jefferson !“
“Seni ors ’67: “Jesus saves, Moses i nvests,” “9021O,” and ‘Frodo
l i ves.” Catheri ne had al ways before fel t that she was parti ci pati ng
i n a sacred and undi sturbed conti nui ty when she heard those
107
108 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
sounds, smel l ed those smel l s, and saw those si ghts. I t was as i f she
had been i n the topmost branches of the deepl y pl anted tree of
ti me, resti ng on i ts gi ganti c gi rth and revel i ng i n i ts unobst~cted
vantage. Knowi ng that fathers and forbearers had wal ke~ the
same di m and di ngy hal l s she di d, that they had sat i n the same
marred and wobbl y desks, and that they had stared out the same
tal l , doubl e-gl azed wi ndows, had gi ven her a sense of securi ty
and stabi l i ty.
But that was before.
Now, Catheri ne was terri bl y unsettl ed. She was confused.
She was embarrassed. She fel t i sol ated and al one. Connected to
nothi ng — past, present, or future — she had been torn from the
free and easy conti nuum she had known. The school ’s anci ent
remi nders had suddenl y become mocki ng, decei vi ng ghosts.
Second peri od on Tuesdays and Thursdays was her “Heal th”
cl ass. Her teacher, a matronl y woman i n her l ate fi fti es, often
brought i n outsi de speakers to di scuss vari ous topi cs of i nterest
wi th the students. Thi s week, a representati ve from Pl anned
Parenthood had come to tal k about sex, contracepti on, preg-
nancy, and aborti on.
“I was shocked; Catheri ne tol d me l ater. “Not by the~acts of
l i ji e, but by the way those ~acts were presented. My parents had
al ready had pl enty of di scussi ons wi th me about the bi rds and bees
stuff. I fi gured I knew just about al l a fi fteen-year-ol d shoul d need
to know.”
Apparentl y, Catheri ne’s “Heal th” teacher and the Pl anned
Parenthood speaker di sagreed. Thei r brazen di sregard of
decorum was unconsci onabl y unctuous.
“The woman from Pl anned Parenthood was so sl eek and
sophi sti cated,” Catheri ne recal l ed. “She was beauti ful and soft-
spoken. Her cl othes were gorgeous. Li ke a model al most, onl y
real l y professi onal l ooki ng. And she was ki nda funny and wry
arti cul ate. When she wal ked i n, she had our attenti on i mmedi -
atel y – I mean, she was so confi dent and assured and rel axed,
the whol e cl ass just fel l under her spel l .”
Wi th her di sarmi ng presence, she stri pped away the young-
sters’ i nhi bi ti ons. Si tti ng on the edge of the teacher’s desk, she
joked, ki dded, wi nked, and bandi ed wi th them.
“At fi rst, I coul dn’t tel l where al l thi s was l eadi ng,’ Catheri ne
sai d. “But then i t became real~ obvi ous. She started aski ng us
.
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 109
personal questi ons. 142y personal questi ons. Li ke about our feel -
i ngs. About sex. And even about . . . wel l , about . . . mastur-
bati on! I t was so di sgusti ng. Al l the boys were ki nda gi ggl i ng.
But you coul d tel l , even thy were embarrassed.”
I f that had been al l , i t woul d have been bad enough. But the
speaker di dn’t stop wi th mere ti ti l l ati ng and perverse conversa-
ti on. She pul l ed a stai ned and mottl ed screen down over the ol d
dusty bl ackboard, cl osed the l ong-tattered shades over the wi n-
dows, turned off the bri ght, hummi ng fl uorescent l i ghts, and put
a short fi l m on the school ’s wheezi ng, rattl i ng projector.
“I ’ve never seen pornography before: Catheri ne admi tted.
“But thi s fi l m was worse than what I coul d have ever i magi ned
hard-core pornography to be.”
The fi l m was extremel y expl i ci t. An unashamedl y brash cou-
pl e fondl ed each other i n preparati on for i ntercourse. At appro-
pri atel y pruri ent moments of i nterest, the camera zoomed i n for
cl ose-up shots – sweaty body parts rubbi ng, caressi ng, ki ssi ng,
stroki ng, cl aspi ng, petti ng, and embraci ng. At the hei ght of pas-
si on, the camera i i xed on the woman’s hands, trembl i ng wi th
ecstasy, as she tore open a condom package and began to sl owl y
unrol l i ts contents onto her partner.
“I wanted to l ook away or cover my eyes, but I coul dn’t:
Catheri ne sai d. “I just stared at the screen – i n horror.”
When the l i ghts came back on, the enti re cl ass was vi si bl y
shaken. Wi th eyes as wi de as saucers, the youngsters sat speech-
l ess and amazed.
But thei r guest was enti rel y unperturbed.
“She began to tel l us that everythi ng that we’d just seen was
total l y normal and total ~ good,” Catheri ne remembered. “She
sai d that the coupl e obvi ousl y had a cari ng, /ovi ng, and responsible
rel ati onshi p – because they took proper precauti ons agai nst con-
cepti on and di sease .“
At that, the speaker passed several packages of condoms
around the room — one for each of the gi rl s. She i nstructed the
boys to hol dup a fi nger so that the gi rl s coul d prmtice contracep-
ti ve appl i cati on.
Al ready shel l -shocked, the students di d as they were tol d.
Afterwards, several of the gi rl s began qui etl y sobbi ng,
another ran out of the room and threw up, sti l l another fai nted.
Merci ful l y, the cl ass ended just a moment l ater.
110 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
“I have never been more humi l i ated i n al l my l i fe,” Catheri ne
sai d. “I fel t di rty and defi l ed after seei ng the fi l m. But then,
when I had to put that thi ng on Bi l l y’s fi nger — wel l , that was just
awful . I t was horri bl e. I t was l i ke I ’d been raped. Raped i n my
mi nd. Raped by my school . Raped by Pl anned Parenthood. I
thi nk I was – that we al l have been – betrayed.”s
The Shocki ng Betrayal
Pl anned Parenthood-styl e sex educati on i s shocki ng. I t
seems to be desi gned to break down sexual i nhi bi ti ons, i nval i d-
ate sexual taboos, and undermi ne sexual val ues. q I t i s al most as
i f i t purposeful l y betrays parental and communi ty trust, i nci ti ng
youngsters to an emoti onal and sensual frenzy.s
Spawned out of the psycho-sexual morass – the bastard chi l d
of Havel ock El l i s,G Si gmund Freud,T Bertrand Russel l ,s i ?i l fred
Ki nsey,g Wi l l i am Masters, 10 Vi rgi ni a Johnson, 11 Al ex Comfort, 12
Al an Guttmacher,l s Warden Pomeroy, 14 Mary Cal derone, 15
Shere Hi te, 16 Ruth Westhei mer, 17 Sol Gordon, 18 Sheri Tepper, 19
and, of course, Margaret %ngerzo — Pl anned Parenthood’s sex
educati on programs and materi al s are brazenl y perverse. They
are frequentl y accentuated wi th crudel y obscene four-l etter
wordszl and i l l ustrated by expl i ci tl y ri bal d nudi ty.zz They openl y
endorse aberrant behavi or — homosexual i ty y, masturbati on, for-
ni cati on, i ncest, and even besti al i ty — and then they descri be
that behavi or i n excruci ati ng detai l .zs
Catheri ne Tol eson’s dreadful cl assroom experi ence was by
no means an i sol ated i nci dent. 24 Thi s, the crassest brand of
moral hedoni sm and sexual rel ati vi sm, i s consi stent~ presented to
mi l l i ons of teens evti y day i n the gui se of academi c objecti vi ty and
cosmopol i tan neutral i ty. 25 Any resi stance thei r consci ences may
offer at fi rst i s, thus, sl owl y but surel y overwhel med.
“Our goal ,” one Pl anned Parenthood staffer wrote, “i s to be
ready as educators and parents to hel p young peopl e obtai n sex
sati sfacti on before marri age. By sancti oni ng sex before mar-
ri age, we wi l l prevent fear and gui l t .“ZG
Accordi ng to a Pl anned Parenthood pamphl et for teens: “Sex
i s too i mportant to gl op up wi th senti ment. I f you feel sexy, for
heaven’s sake, admi t i t to yoursel f. I f the feel i ng and the teti si on
bother you, you can masturbate. Masturbati on cannot hurt you
and i t wi l l make you feel more rel axed .“ZT
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 111
Another Pl anned Parenthood publ i cati on for teens asserts:
“There are onl y two ki nds of sex: sex wi th vi cti ms and sex wi thout.
Sex wi th vi cti ms i s al ways wrong. Sex wi thout i s al ways ri ght.”Z8
“Rel ax about l ovi ng,” admoni shes sti l l another Pl anned
Parenthood bookl et, “sex i s fun and joyful , and courti ng i s fun
and joyful , and i t comes i n zdl types and styl es, al l of whi ch are
Okay. Do what gi ves pl easure, and enjoy what gi ves pl easure,
and ask for what gi ves pl easure. Don’t rob yoursel f of joy by
focusi ng on ol d-fashi oned i deas about what’s normal or ni ce. Just
communi cate and enjoy !“*9
That i s a far cry from di spel l i ng chi l di sh myths about storks
and cabbage patches. But that i s what Pl anned Parenthood’s sex
educati on programs and materi al s are l i ke. They are not
desi gned to si mpl y provi de accurate bi ol ogi cal i nformati on. I n-
stead, they are desi gned to change the mi nds, moral s, and moti -
vati ons of an enti re generati on. They are desi gned to compl etel y
reshape the posi ti ons, perspecti ves, and personal i ti es of chi l dren
everywhere — i ncl udi ng yours and mi ne. One former Pl anned
Parenthood medi cal di rector, Mary Cal derone, has forthri ghtl y
admi tted that, i n sex educati on, “Mere facts and di scussi on are
not enough. They need to be undergi rded by a set of val ues.”so
But who~e val ues? Why, Pl anned Parenthood’s, of course: the
val ues of Margaret Sanger; the val ues of Revol uti onary Soci al -
i sm; the val ues of Eugeni c Raci sm; and the val ues of unfettered
sensual i ty. Thus, accordi ng to Cal derone, curri cul a need to,
fi rst, se@nzte ki ds from thei r parents; second, establish a new sex-
ual i denti ty for them; thi rd, hel p them determi ne new val ue sys-
tems; and, fi nal l y, hel p them conznn vocati onal deci si ons.a*
I n addi ti on to uti l i zi ng tradi ti onal i nducti ve and deducti ve
teachi ng techni ques, Pl anned Parenthood uti l i zes several
di fferent experi mental methodol ogi es i n i ts sex educati on pro-
grams i n order to accompl i sh these four ai ms: Val ues Cl ari fi ca-
ti on, ,Peer Faci l i tati on, Sensi ti vi ty Trai ni ng, Rol e Pl ayi ng, and
Posi ti ve I magi ng.
Values Clarification. Based on the noti on that everyone shoul d
“do what i s ri ght i n hi s own eyes,”s* Val ues Cl ari fi cati on i s a
strategy desi gned to hel p chi l dren “choose” thei r own val ue sys-
tem from a wi de vari ety of al ternati ves.ss The i dea, accordi ng to
Val ues Cl ari fi cati on pi oneer Si dney Si mon, i s to stop parents and
teachers from defi ni ng for chi l dren “thei r emoti onal and sexual
112 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i denti ti es” and to keep them from “fosteri ng the i mmoral i ty
of moral i ty.”34
I n Val ues Cl ari fi cati on, “deci si on-maki ng scenari os” are
pl aced before the chi l dren and they are asked to make a seri es of
“l i fe and death deci si ons” where the “onl y absol ute” i s that “there
are no absol utes.”ss
Mi ssy Gal l agher and Tom Bl atten are “hi gh school sweet-
hearts” who recentl y endured a Pl anned Parenthood Val ues
Cl ari fi cati on course i n Los Angel es. I n one exerci se, Mi ssy and
Tom were brought to the front of the cl ass and gi ven a “deci si on-
maki ng scenari o” that they, and the rest of the cl ass, were sup-
posed to respond to.
“The way the teacher set i t up: Mi ssy expl ai ned, “was, that
Tom was supposed to have gotten me pregnant. On top of ~at,
we both were supposed to have been ki cked out of our homes by
our parents, threatened wi th the l oss of col l ege schol arshi ps, and
faci ng the possi bi l i ty of seri ous physi cal probl ems due to
venereal di sease. On that basi s, we were supposed to deci de,
wi th the hel p of the rest of the cl ass, whether or not we shoul d
have an aborti on.”
“Of course, everyone i n the cl ass got a bi g ki ck out of al l thi s:
Tom sai d. “They knew that Mi ssy and I are both Chri sti ans and
that the whol e premi se of the si l l y charade was an i nsul t to us.”
‘When Tom expl ai ned ri ght off that we’d have to accept the
consequences of our si n, i f we ever did fi dl i nto such rebel l i on, wel l
the teacher got real l y mad at us, made fun of us, and then had the
gal l to gi ve us a fai l i ng grade for the exerci se,” Mi ssy recal l ed.
“The whol e thi ng was a real eye-opener for me,” Tom sai d.
“I t seems there i s room i n Pl anned Parenthood’s pl ural i sm for
anyone and everyone except Chri sti ans .“
Peer Facilitation. I f word of mouth i s the best adverti si ng and
sati sfi ed customers are the best endorsement, then i t onl y stands
to reason that the best propaganda i s peer propaganda. That i s
the i dea behi nd Pl anned Parenthood’s Peer Faci l i tati on strategy.
Teens who di spl ay “l eadershi p qual i ti es” are recrui ted to be “sex
educators of thei r peers” and even of “younger chi l dren wi th
whom they may come i nto contact .“SG These l eaders are gi ven
“i ntensi ve personal i zed trai ni ng” so that they wi l l l ater be abl e to
“faci l i tate heal thy sexual messages and behavi ors” among other
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 113
teens.sT I n one “l earni ng acti vi ty” for these ‘l eaders-i n-trai ni ng,”
Pl anned Par enthood re~mmends “ Br ai nstor mi ng al l the terms
used for peni s, breast, i ntercourse, vagi na, homosexual i ty, and
VD . . . . Thi s wi l l fami l i ari ze group members wi th al l forms of
sexual terms they mi ght hear from thei r peers and shoul d l ower
thei r shock val ue. Thi s exerci se al so hel ps set an atmosphere for
questi ons i n trai ni ng sessi ons, i n effect gi vi ng students permi ssi on
to di scuss sexual i ty i n whatever terms they are most fami l i ar.”38
Wal t Maxwel l was a teen trai nee i n a Peer Faci l i tator pro-
gram sponsored by Pl anned Parenthood i n Northern Vi rgi ni a.
Bri efl y. “I onl y l asted a week i n the program: he tol d me. “1 just
coul dn’t handl e i t. Watchi ng porno fi l ms and tal ki ng di rty i s not
exactl y my i dea of a heal thy extra-curri cul ai acti vi ty.”
After he dropped out of the program, he was cal l ed i n to tal k
to hi s school counsel or and two assi stant pri nci pal s. “They
wanted to know why I had such a bad attitude about the cl ass, and
why I was bei ng so uncooperative. I tol d them that I thought the
whol e program was disgusting. They just l ooked at me l i ke I was
from another pl anet or somethi ng.”
Semi ti Ui ~ Trai ni ng. Pl anned Parenthood often uses smal l , ‘
i nformal di scussi on groups to “rai se the sexual i ty awareness of ‘
chi l dren.”sg Usi ng the “soci al pressure” of careful l y desi gned
cl assroom si tuati ons, teachers are abl e to break down “home
trai ni n< and then to i nsti l l the pr ecepts of “ the new
moral i t y“ — the amoral moral i ty of Margaret Sanger’s sexual
revol uti on .40
I n one Sensi ti vi ty Trai ni ng program, the “teacher-change
agent” i s i nstructed to di vi de students i nto smal l groups, gi vi ng
each an envel ope contai ni ng cards wi th topi cs to be di scussed:
‘Vi rgi ni ty, Oral -Geni tal Sex, I ntercourse, Masturbati on, Steri l -
i t y, Group Sex, Homosexual i ty, Extra-Mari tal Rel ati ons, Abor-
ti on, and Nudi ty — wi th acquai ntances, wi th fami l y, wi th the
opposi te sex, wi th the same sex, and wi th cl ose fri ends.”41
The students are “to ident~y and ex@.u thei r present attitudes
andji eel i ngs about these matters and to practi ce ~tiue listening and
honest se~-disclosure.
’42 Once this “sel f-di scl osure” process i s com-
pl ete, the group i s to “bri ng consensus by winning over other
members .243 Those members of the group who refuse to change
“are considered non-conformi sts or devi ants .“4
4
114 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Gl ori a Frankel was recentl y suspended from her hi gh school
near Dal l as because she refused to parti ci pate i n a Pl anned
Parenthood-sponsored Sensi ti vi ty Trai ni ng cl ass.
“After I was ri di cul ed for my Chri sti an stance on aborti on and
pre-mari tal sex, I just coul dn’t conti nue goi ng to the cl ass,” Gl ori a
sai d. “I asked for an exempti on. I asked to be pl aced i n a study
hal l . I asked for anythi ng but the sex cl ass. But the teachers and
admi ni strati on refused. They sai d the cl ass was mandatory. So I
tal ked to my parents, and they agreed that I woul d just ski p the
cl ass. That’s when I got i n troubl e and fi nal l y was suspended.”
Outraged, Gl ori a’s parents took the i ssue up wi th school ad-
mi ni strators and wi th the school board. “They were tol d ,“ Gl ori a
sai d, “that the /aw i s the law and everyone has to obey i t whether
they l i ke i t or not.” The fami l y’s onl y recourse was to sue. That i s
an awful l y hi gh pri ce to pay for moral puri ty and fami l i al l i berty.
Role Playing. Another psycho-therapeuti c techni que Pl anned
Parenthood uses to effect “personal i ty changes” i n students i s rol e
pl ayi ng. Accordi ng to one psycho-educator: “Rol e pl ayi ng i s a
natural method of l earni ng and unl earni ng vari ous reacti ons to
compl ex l i fe probl ems. . . . I t seems to have some advantages
. . . over other methods of psychotherapy si nce i t si mul tan-
eousl y attacks modes of thi nki ng, feel i ng, and behavi or — the en-
ti re provi nce of psychotherapy.”As
Thus, sex educati on expert Sandal yn McKasson says that
rol e pl ayi ng “i s an i ndi rect, mani pul ati ve method of transform-
i ng atti tudes and behavi or. Hence, i t i s a method of coercion, not
i nstructi on.”4G
I n fact, she argues that i t i s a methodol ogy that “has i ts roots
i n the occul ti c mani pul ati on. I t bypasses the wi l l and rel i es on
spontaneous reacti ons .“
47
To i l l ustrate, she ci tes a typi cal sexed
rol e-pl ayi ng exerci se from Values in Sexuality, a wi del y recom-
mended resource for Pl anned Parenthood teachers and counsel ors.AS
I n the exerci se, seven students are asked to act out a parti cul ar
pre-determi ned rol e:
Roommate 1: You have i nvi ted a l oveT to spend the weekend
wi th you i n your room. You tel l your roommates .49
Roommate 2: You area devout Cathol i c and feel homosexual -
i ty i s a seri ous si n .
50
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 115
Roommate 3: You feel whatever anyone does sexual l y i s thei r
busi ness, but you feel very sad that your fri end has cl osed off
l ots of opti ons.51
Roommate 4: You’re a psychol ogy major, and try to help by
gi vi ng advi ce and di agnosi ng why your roommate mi ght be gay.5Z
Roommate 5: You feel threatened by the knowl edge that your
roommate i s gay. You try to reason wi th hi m and argue hi m i nto
heterosexual good sense.ss
Roommate 6: You are shocked by the announcement and out-
raged that a fag wi l l be on your dorm fl oor.s4
Roommate 7: You al ready know about your@end\ gay l i festyl e.
The two of you have tal ked some about i t. You have no seri ous
di ffi cul ti es wi th thi s and sti l l feel comfortabl e wi th hi m.5s
After pl ayi ng thei r rol es, the seven students are then asked to
‘come to a consensus” about whi ch of the roommates’ atti tudes i s
‘the most constructi ve.”
Marti n Campbel l was forced to parti ci pate i n that very
scenari o i n a Pl anned Parenthood-sponsored cl ass at hi s hi gh
school near Chi cago. “After we pl ayed our parts; he tol d me,
%e had to de-rol e and then anal yze our feel i ngs i n a group di s-
cussi on. The teacher asked us what stereotypes of homosexual i ty
had emerged i n the ski t. And then we were supposed to tal k
about why those stereotypes were wrong and based on i gnorance
and fear. Wel l , I was real l y hacked off by the whol e deal . I fel t
l i ke I was bei ng set up.”
When the teacher found that Marti n was acti ng a bi t recal ci -
trant, she began to l ecture hi m about bei ng open, tolerant, accePt-
ing, mature, re.spectjul, and honest. “I just kept tel l i ng her that I
di dn’t agree, and wouldn’t a~ee, but she woul dn’t l etup on me:
Marti n sai d. “I t’s pretty bad when a teacher i sol ates one ki d l i ke
that. I fel t l i ke I was getti ng ganged up on. I t wasn’t at al l jai r.”
%itiue I maging. Very si mi l ar to rol e-pl ayi ng techni ques i s
Pl anned Parenthood’s fantasy, or Posi ti ve I magi ng, methodol -
ogy. Accordi ng to one school “mental heal th” proponent: “The
concept of educati onal i magery i s used to approxi mate a de-
scri bed behavi or, deci si on or outcome through gui ded i magi na-
ti on or fantasy i n the consci ous mi nd of the i ndi vi dual . I n
116 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
theory, educati onal i magery can bri dge the gap between maki ng
the deci si on and behavi oral l y i ncorporati ng the deci si on. The
theory i s that i f the deci si on i s cl earl y i magi ned and acted out re-
peatedl y, then when the opportuni ty comes to enact the deci si on,
the process wi l l be faci l i tated.”sG
And what fantasi es and deci si ons are the curri cul a faci l i -
tati ng? One government-sponsored program used wi del y by
Pl anned Parenthood educators tol d teens that they coul d have
fantasi es whi ch i nvol ved “sexual feel i ngs about peopl e of the
same or opposi te sex, parents, brothers and si sters, ol d peopl e,
ani mal s, nature, i nani mate objects, and al most anythi ng you
can i magi ne. I t i s unu.n.d for a person not to have some strange
sexual fantasi es .“
57
Carri e Li pscombe and Laura Gi bbs parti ci pated i n a Posi -
ti ve I magi ng exerci se i n a Pl anned Parenthood-sponsored cl ass
at thei r nei ghborhood YWCA. “The teacher tol d us to cl ose our
eyes,” Carri e remembered. ‘We were to i magi ne oursel ves stand-
i ng on the end of a di vi ng board.”
“She went i nto a l ot of detai l , hel pi ng us to i magi ne the crys-
tal cl ear water, the bri ght bl ue sky, and the warm, dry sunshi ne
on our ski n,” Laura sai d. “She asked us to~eel oursel ves bounci ng
off the board and spl ashi ng i nto the cool , refreshi ng pool .”
“Then she tol d us that that feel i ng was very much l i ke an
orgasm ,“ Carri e sai d. “After that, we were supposed to i magi ne
al l ki nds of si tuati ons where we coul d reliue that feel i ng of goi ng
off the di vi ng board sema@”
“I was pretty shook up by that,” admi tted Laura.
“Me, too,” Carri e sai d. “The whol e deal was pretty mani pu-
l ati ve. I di dn’t l i ke i t. Not a bi t.”
“The objecti onabl e feature of these programs now bei ng
promoted by Pl anned Parenthood,” says economi st and soci al
anal yst Jacquel i ne Kasun, “i s not that they teach sex, but that
they do i t so badl y, repl aci ng good bi ol ogi cal educati on wi th ten
to twel ve years of compul sory consciousness raising and ~sycho-
sexud dwraf.y, and usi ng the publ i c school s to advance thei r own
pecul i ar worldview.”sa
Li ke Catheri ne Tol eson, Carri e Li pscombe, and the others,
Rhonda Wi l l i ams was shocked by the foul and i ndecent mate-
ri al s Pl anned Parenthood was di stri buti ng i n her juni or hi gh
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 117
school , She was especi al l y di stressed by one brochure that openl y
attucked Chri sti an moral i ty and the i nsti tuti onal Church. “I can’t
bel i eve that they can get away wi th thi s ki nd of thi ng,” she tol d
me. “You’d thi nk that someone —a teacher, a pri nci pal , a coun-
sel or, an admi ni strator, a parent, or son-wone — woul d put a stop
to i t.”
Rhonda showed me the brochure. I l l ustrated wi th grotesque
cartoon cari catures of Chri sti an l eaders, i t sai d: “Some rel i gi ous
and semi -rel i gi eus groups domi nated by el derl y men, si mpl y
cannot deal rati onal l y wi th sex. They can’t tal k about i t rati on-
al l y, can’t thi nk about i t rati onal l y, and, above al l , can’t gi ve up
the power whi ch control l i ng other peopl e gi ves them. They con-
trol other peopl e through sex.”sg
“Di d you know that they were handi ng stuff l i ke thi s out i n
the school s?” Rhonda asked me.
‘Yes,” I had to admi t. “I di d.”
“Then why don’t you do somethi ng?”
“I ’l l try; I tol d her.
“I ’m not sure that just tying i s good enough. A whol e genera-
ti on i s at ri sk here.”
I ndeed, i t i s.
The Busi ness of Revol uti on
Pl anned Par enthood sel l s sex.GO I ts h.si ness i s to assaul t
youngsters l i ke Catheri ne Tol eson, Carri e Li pscombe, and
Rhonda Wi l l i ams wi th an unhol y barrage of vul gar and l i cen-
ti ous temptati on.Gl I ts avocation is to l ure them i nto dependence
on i ts l ucrati ve contracepti on and aborti on servi ces. 62
And i t does what i t does very wel l .
Wi th a passi onate, evangel i sti c zeal and a shrewd entrepre-
neuri al effecti veness, Pl anned Parenthood has transl ated i ts
sordi d sex busi ness i nto a mul ti -mi l l i on dol l ar monopol y: i t
publ i shes sex-ed books, pamphl ets, and curri cul a; 63 i t de-
vel ops model sex-ed programs for communi ti es, school s, and
a.i %l i ates;G4 i t creates pre-servi ce, i n-servi ce, and enri chment
programs for sex-ed trai ners; 65 i t provi des a nati onal resource
cl eari nghouse as a condui t for the di ssemi nati on of sex-ed i nfor-
mati on and materi al s; 66 i t di stri butes journal s, magazi nes, and
newsl etters to sex-ed professi onal s; G’ i t catal ogues and eval uates
118 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
al l avai l abl e sex-ed materi al s and publ i cati ons;Gs i t produces
fi l ms, vi deos, and adverti sements that broadcast sex-ed themes
far and wi de; 69 i t advocates unrestri cted sex-ed propagati on –
ki ndergarten through twel fth grade –through pol i ti cal l obbyi ng
and the courts; 70 and i t sends an army of sex-ed speakers i nto
school s, churches, and publ i c forums every day — day i n and
day out.Tl
Pl anned Parenthood has not gone unrewarded for al l i ts efforts.
Wi th al l the hype of a Wi l d West Mi racl e Medi ci ne Show–
cl ai mi ng that sex educati on woul d cur e vi rtual l y every soci etal
ai l ment: from chi l d abuse to teen pregnancy, from juveni l e
del i nquency to i nfant mortal i ty, from bi rth defects to wel fare de-
pendency, from drug abuse to venereal di sease, and from sexual
abuse to academi c decl i ne — Pl anned Parenthood has hawked i ts
wares to a ready market of concerned parents, educators, and
ci vi c l eaders. 72 And they have proved to be ready buyers.
As a resul t, vi rtual l y every man, woman, and chi l d i n Ameri -
ca has been exposed to Pl anned Parenthood’s l uri dl y i mmoral
noti ons of l ove, sex, and i nti macy. Al most seventy-fi ve percent
of the nati on’s school di stri cts have i nsti tuti onal i zed sex-ed pro-
grams. 73 And untol d mi l l i ons of tax dol l ars have been poured
i nto Pl anned Parenthood’s al ready overstuffed coffers. 74 I t has
done such a convi nci ng job of sel l i ng i ts obscene servi ces and
products that, now, anyone who dhres to questi on the val ue of
Pl anned Parenthood’s sex-ed monopol y i s i mmedi atel y casti -
gated as “some sort of unenl i ghtened crank.”7s
But, l i ke the ol d medi ci ne show poti ons, el i xi rs, and toni cs,
Pl anned Parenthood’s programs don’t actual l y do what they are
advertised to do.TG They don’t sol ve the probl ems posed by the
teen sexual i ty cri si s .77 I f anythi ng, they aggravate them— sti r-
ri ng up unheal thy passi ons, i nspi ri ng unnatural affecti ons, su~-
gesti ng untamed concupi scence, and defi l i ng nai ve i nnocence. 78
The fact i s, the prol i ferati on of Pl anned Parenthood-styl e sex
educati on al l across the country has coi nci ded wi th an unprece-
dented i ncrease i n teen promi scui ty.7g For nearl y two decades,
the nati on’s school s have fai thful l y fol l owed Pl anned Parent-
hood’s prescri pti ons onl y to see the number of teen pregnanci es
swel l to more than a mi l l i on each yearg’J — an i ncrease of al -
most ni nety percent. gl The number of teen aborti ons has ri sen
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 119
to nearl y hal f a mi l l i on each yearsz — an i ncrease of more than 230
Percent.as And the number of reported cases of venereal di sease has
sky-rocketed to al most fourteen mi l l i on each year sq — an i ncrease
of neady 140 Percent.gs Study after study has shown that sex educa-
ti on i s anythi ng but an effecti ve remedy for the teen sex epi demi c.gG
As a resul t, a number of voi ces have begun to cry out i n the
wi l derness. Scott Thompson, executi ve di rector of the Nati onal
Associ ati on of Secondary School Pri nci pal s, has sai d that such
programs are a “charade; borderi ng on “educati onal fraud.”sT
Wi l l i am Leatherton, presi dent of the Ameri can Bureau of
Educati onal Research, has cal l ed them “a scandal of i mmense
pr opor ti ons.
%8 TheY are Si mpl y a “fai l ure ,“ accordi ng to Jacki e
Manl ey, a program associ ate at the Center for Popul ati on
Opti ons.sg And Senator Jesse Hel ms has argued:
One and a hal f bi l l i on dol l ars i n the hands of terrori sts coul d
not have i nfl i cted the l ong-term harm to our soci ety that these
programs’ expendi tures have. . . . No one can deny the fact
that they do i ndeed subsi di ze teenage sexual acti vi ty. I t i s on
the basi s of thi s fact that some argue that the programs di rectl y
and posi ti vel y i ncrease the i nci dence of venereal di sease, teen-
age pregnancy, and aborti on. At a mi ni mum, they tend to
create an atmosphere i n whi ch teenage promi scui ty i s vi ewed
as normal and acceptabl e conduct and whi ch i n turn fosters the
very probl ems we are tryi ng to sol ve .90
Despi te thi s, Pl anned Parenthood remai ns unconcerned.gl
As l ong as i t can keep i ts customers l i ni ng up wi th don’t-confuse-
me-wi th-the-facts gri ns spread across thei r faces, i t can bl i thel y
i gnore the negati ve fi gures and ful mi nati ons. Busi ness i s i ts busi -
ness. And busi ness coul dn’t be better. Sex sel l s.
From i ts i ncepti on, Pl anned Parenthood’s goal has been to
change the world. And to do i t at a substanti al profi t. To foment
the revol uti on i s good. To do i t at a forty percent mark-up i s
even better. So forget the stati sti cs, the studi es, and the state-
ments — from Pl anned Parenthood’s perspecti ve, the “fai l ure” of
i ts sex educati on programs has been i ts greatest “success.=gz
Thi s Phoeni x-l i ke abi l i ty of Pl anned Parenthood– to not
onl y survi ve, but thri ve, i n the face of i ts programs’ i mpotence
and i ncompetence — i s due al most enti rel y to i ts ski l l i n control -
l i ng and defi ni ng the terms of the debate.
120 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Defi ni ng the Terms
The i rrepressi bl e John Sel den once qui pped that “syl l abl es
govern the worl d.”gs I f that i s true, then the defi ners of words are
the most powerful of men.
George Orwel l expl ored that noti on, wi th chi l l i ng effect, i n
hi s cl assi c 1984.94 The book tel l s the story of a soci ety where a re-
pressi ve bureaucrati c el i te attempts to mani pul ate the very
thoughts of men by control l i ng thei r l anguage. Ol d words, wi th
comfortabl e, fami l i ar meani ngs, are ei ther scuttl ed i nto di suse,
or are redefi ned to fi t the el i te’s perni ci ous perspecti ve. They are
ei ther sl yl y si dl ed, or are empti ed of thei r common si gni fi cance,
onl y to be fi l l ed wi th some al i en denotati on. Thus, accordi ng to
thi s Newspeak, words l i ke honor,justice, morali~, science, and religion
cease to exi st al together, whi l e words l i ke war, peace, j%-eedom, slav-
ery, and ignorance have thei r meani ngs compl etel y transposed.gs
Orwel l meant the book to be a warning.gG Li ke Rudyard
Ki pl i ng, he bel i eved that “words are the most powerful drugs
used by manki nd.”g’ Li ke Ti -i stram Gyl berd, he bel i eved that
“whoever control s the l anguage control s the cul ture.”gs And, l i ke
John Locke, he bel i eved that “whoever defi nes the words defi nes
the worl d.’gg Thus, he i mpl ored hi s readers to beware of l ogo-
gogues – word tyrants. He warned w to resi st the seducti ve
al l ure of l exographi c mol esters.
Sadl y, we have fai l ed to heed that warni ng. I t seems that we
are presentl y wi tnessi ng the emergence of our own Newspeak.
Al l an Bl oom, author of The Cl osi ng Of the American Mind, argues
that we have begun to devel op “an enti rel y new l anguage of good
and evi l , ori gi nati ng i n an attempt to get bgond good and evi l ,
and preventi ng us from tal ki ng wi th any convi cti on aboui good
and evi l .”l oo
Not surpri si ngl y, Pl anned Parenthood has been one of the
pri mary practi ti oners of thi s Newspeak. 101 By mani pul ati ng cer-
tai n words, Pl anned Parenthood has attempted — and, i n al l too
many cases, succeeded — to mani pul ate real i ty.
The word responsible was once synonymous wi th tmst-
worthy. A responsi bl e person coul d be counted on to uphol d hi s
commi tments and ful fi l l hi s obl i gati ons. 10Z Now, though, accord-
i ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s Newspeak, responsible si mpl y means
“to use bi rth control ” duri ng i l l i ci t sexual l i ai sons. 10S
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 121
The word chasti ~ was once synonymous wi th purity. A person
who practi ced chasti ty coul d general l y be consi dered vi rtuous and
modest. 104 Now, though, accordi ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s New-
speak, chasti ty i s just “a stage i n l i fe,” a temporary “i mmaturi ty.” 105
The word neutr al was once synonymous wi th objective. A per-
son who took a neutral posi ti on on a subject coul d be counted on
to be i mparti al and teachabl e. 10G Now, though, accordi ng to
Pl anned Parenthood’s Newspeak, neutra/ refers to an “open-
-mi nded,” and “amoral ” relatiuisrn. loT
The word choi ce was once synonymous wi th j$eedom. The
ri ght to choose protected men from every assaul t of l i fe and
l i mb. 10S Now, though, accordi ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s New-
speak, choi ce i s “the ri ght” of one person “to prevai l ” over another —
even to the poi nt of death — whenever the fancy stri kes. 109
The word jetw was once synonymous wi th unbor n child. A
fetus was uni versal l y recogni zed as a baby, a bte.ssing from
Al mi ghty God. l l ’J Now, though, accordi ng to Pl anned Parent-
hood’s Newspeak,Jetus i s nothi ng more than ‘disposable tis.sue~ or,
.
worse, a uni que form of “venereal disease.
~
111
The word gay was once synonymous wi th happy. I f someone
was gay, he was chee@id, jd~, and content. 112 Now, though, ac-
cordi ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s Newspeak, gay i s a noun, not an
adjecti ve, meani ng a sodomi zi ng homosexual. 113
The word morali~ was once synonymous wi th virtue. A moral
person coul d be counted on to act upright~ and wi th al l
integri~. 114 Now, though, accordi ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s
Newspeak, znorali~ i s an “outdated” and “judgmental ” val ue sys-
tem rooted i n “fear,” “prejudi ce,” and “i gnorance .”l l s
The word relationship was once synonymous wi th friendship.
A person who had a rel ati onshi p wi th another si mpl y had a rap-
port with them. 116 Now, though, accordi ng to Pl anned Parent-
hood’s Newspeak, a relatiomhip i s an adulterous aflair, or an occa-
si onal opportuni ty for fornication. 117
Thi s i s the vocabul ary that Pl anned Parenthood has grafted
i nto thei r sex educati on programs and l i terature. 118 Even i f those
books, pamphl ets, fi l ms, and curri cul a di d not openl y en-
dorse perversi on, promi scui ty, and pruri ence, they woul d still be
damni ngl y destructi ve just because of the way they use and con-
trol the l anguage.
122 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Accordi ng to Orwel l , the ori gi nal purpose of Newspeak was
‘to make al l other modes of thought i mpossi bl e.” 119 Certai nl y,
Pl anned Parenthood’s sex-ed Newspeak has accompl i shed M. l ZO
What teenager woul dn’t rather be re.sponsib/ e and ojmwni nded
than immature and i gnor ant ? How do you tel l your son or daugh-
ter not to be fu&lled ? Does the Bi bl e ever say: ‘Thou shal t not
evacuate uteri ne ti ssue” ? 121 The fact i s, the l anguage of sex edu-
cati on —the l anguage that has been systemati cal l y taught to our
chi l dren – makes i t i mpossi bl e to entertai n any other mode of
thought than Pl anned Parenthood’s mode of thought.
Mark Twai n once asserted that “the di fference between the
ri ght word and the almost ri ght word i s l i ke the di fference be-
tween l i ghtni ng and the l i ghtni ng bug.”l zz There can be l i ttl e
doubt that Pl anned Parenthood has chosen i ts words very care-
fi dl y and, as a resul t, i t has struck an enti re generati on dumb,
l i ke a bol t from the bl ue. Not content to rake and strafe our chi l -
dren’s bodi es wi th dangerous drugs, devi ces, and procedures, 123
Pl anned Parenthood has l aunched a blitzkrieg agai nst thei r mi nds
as wel l . 124
Backwards Deal
Lucy Lommers, Deborah Sul l i van, Sarah Bakker, and
Jacki e Landry were al l chosen to parti ci pate i n a uni que educa-
ti omd experi ment at thei r school i n the nati on’s capi tal . Spon-
sor ed by Pl anned Parenthood, the “Peer Educati on i n Human
Sexual i ty” program was desi gned to trai n teens to become “peer
faci l i tators” and “responsi bl e i nformati on gi vers.”l zs
“The i dea; Lucy tol d me, “was to take a few of us and reczl ~
teach us everythi ng that a sex educati on teacher knows. Al l the
techni ques, al l the methods, al l the i deas, al l the strategi es: we
got al l of i t. And then we were supposed to l ead group di s-
cussi ons wi th our fri ends so that we coul d i nzuence them.”
“The trai ni ng was mostl y just di scussi on between oursel ves,”
Sarah sai d. “And they were usual l y pretty wild di scussi ons.”
‘Wi l d i s ri ght,” Jacki e i nterjected.
“Yeah, see, the Pl anned Parenthood counsel ors who wor ked
wi th us woul d open up a topi c and get us to share our personal
experi ences and feel i ngs about i t ,“ Deborah expl ai ned. “Some-
ti mes we’d see a fi l m — man, were they ever expl i ci t — and then
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 123
we’d tal k about our reacti ons.“ “I al ways fel t a tremendous
amount of Pressure i n those sessi ons ,“ Jacki e sai d. “1 thought that
maybe I was the onl y one i n the group that wasn’t hoppi ng i nto
the sack wi th some guy every weekend. Li steni ng to the stori es
my fri ends started tel l i ng made me wonder i f I real l y knew them
at al l . And i f I real l y fi t i n wi th them.”
“Course, what none of us real i zed at the ti me,” Lucy sai d,
“was that we were all feel i ng the same thi ngs. We were just too
scared to admi t i t. I mean, who wants to come ri ght out and say
that they’re real l y not al l that keen on sex! That’s just not normal.
Nobody wants peopl e to thi nk that they’ve got some sort of wei rd
hang-ups or that they’re some sorta prude.”
“So we al l just lied: Sarah sai d. ‘We made up al l these ki nky
stori es about wi l d sex parti es and stuff.”
‘Wel l ,” admi tted Lucy, “we di dn’t just l i e. We al so started
fool i ng around some. I got on bi rth control . Most of us di d. But
we were doi ng i t mostl y to be normal and accepted.”
“And to l i ve up to the reputati ons we were creati ng for our-
sel ves i n the trai ni ng sessi on,” added Sarah.
‘Yeah, that, too,” Deborah pi ped i n.
“The thi ng was, the dirtier our di scussi ons got, the more
bizarre our stori es were, the better the Pl anned Parenthood coun-
sel ors seemed to l i ke i t ,“ Jacki e sai d.
“1 know! I sn’t i t wei rd?” Lucy sai d. “They woul d say stuff
l i ke, ‘Now we’re real l y getti ng somewhere; or ‘I t’s very i mpor-
tant to be abl e to communi cate l i ke thi s.’ I ’d al ways thi nk to
mysel f, Yeah. Ri ght. What a pi l e of crock. But then, of course, I
woul dn’t say anything.
>
“The whol e mess began to fal l apart, though, when one of
the other gi rl s i n our group got pregnant and had to have an
aborti on,” Deborah sai d.
“She was probabl y the qui etest person i n the program: Lucy
expl ai ned. “Real pretty. Got great grades. But she ki nda just
kept to hersel f. Ti na was her name. Anyway, she was on the Pi l l .
She tol d me that she was pretty freaked out that she coul d do
somethi ng as radical as take bi rth control wi thout her parents ever
fi ndi ng out. I mean, we have to cal l home and get permi ssi on to
get an aspin”n from the school nurse, but we can get an I UD, or
bi rth control pi l l s, or even an aborti on, wi thout an.boa$ knowi ng
124 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
about i t. Ki nda crazy, i sn’t i t? Wel l , the poi nt i s, Ti na was a l i ttl e
amazed by the whol e deal .”
‘When she found out she was pregnant, she seemed to take i t
real wel l . Al l i n stri de,” Sarah noted. “She even tal ked about i t i n
our group meeti ng. The Pl anned Parenthood counsel ors set up
an appoi ntment for her to get an aborti on and that was that .“
“Onl y that wasn’t the end of the story: Jacki e sai d.
“Not by a l ong shot,” agreed Lucy.
“No, after the aborti on, we al l got together for our regul ar
meeti ng. And Ti na was there. She’d had the aborti on three days
earl i er,” Lucy sai d.
“She real l y l ooked awfi d,” commented Jacki e.
“The counsel or asked her to tal k about i t,’ Lucy went on.
‘But she just sat there not sayi ng anythi ng at al l . The counsel or
then went i nto thi s /ong l ecture about how i mportant i t i s to get
al l your feel i ngs out, to communi cate, to be honest – you know,
al l that ~.ycho-thera~y stuff. Wel l , before any of us knew what was
happeni ng, Ti na just went berserk.”
“Yeah, she started screami ng and cryi ng and throwi ng stuff
around,” Jacki e sai d.
“She sai d that the ‘peer’ trai ni ng project had pushed her i nto
sex, fi l l ed her mi nd wi th al l sorts of obscene i deas, and then
forced her i nto an aborti on: Deborah remembered. “She sai d
she’d l earned ever-thi ng except the ri ght thi ngs and that she hated
what she’d become .“
“After a whi l e, she was just sobbi ng uncontrol l abl y; Lucy
sai d. “And none of us knew what to do.”
“I thi nk we were al l pretty confused,” agreed Jacki e.
“And, what was worse, for m anyway; Sarah sai d, “was that
I knew she was ri ght. We’d been sol d a bi l l of goods. None of us
wanted to l earn al l that stuff about l esbi ani sm and masturbati on
and orgi es and aborti on and bi rth control and ki nky feti shes and
stuff. And the thi ngs we did need to know we never even tal ked
about — thi ngs l i ke a baby’s devel opment, gui l t, venereal di s-
eases, the heal th hazards of bi rth control , al ternati ves to abor-
ti on, PMS, and depressi on. None of that .“
%fter a mi nute or two, Ti na l eft: Jacki e conti nued wi th the
story. ‘We were pretty stunned. But one of the Pl anned Parent-
hood counsel ors, wel l , she just started rattl i ng on about how good
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 125
i t was that Ti na was ‘abl e to ventilate her frustrati ons,’ and how
the group was ‘obvi ousl y growi ng i n honesty toward one
another,’ and rdl that stuff.”
“That ni ght, Ti na commi tted sui ci de; Lucy concl uded.
The gi rl s were al l qui et now. Heads bowed i n sadness and
shame.
“When that happened, we al l got together,” Deborah sai d
fi nal l y, “wi t/zout anybody from Pl anned Parenthood to l ook over
our shoul ders. And we just tal ked.”
‘And cri ed,” added Lucy.
“For al l that hype about /tones@” Jacki e admi tted, “that was
the jirst ti me we actual l y were honest .“
After another l ong pause, Deborah noted, “I thi nk we l earned
a tot of l essons out of thi s, but two real l y ki nda stand out. Fi rst,
Pl anned Parenthood was tryi ng to~or ce us to l earn about – and
thi nk about, tal k about, and experi ment about – thi ngs none of
us wanted to. And, second, Pl anned Parenthood ski pped over the
stuff that we did want — and need— to know.”
“Yeah, the whol e deal was real l y hdward, wasn’t i t?” Lucy
sai d.
“I ’m just glad i t’s over, and I ’m gl ad that I ’m out of i t – that
we’re al l out of i t,” Deborah si ghed.
“Real l y!” the other gi rl s nodded. “Real l y!”
Accordi ng to Pl anned Parenthood’s own nati onal survey,
conducted by the Loui s Harri s pol l sters, most teens agree wi th
Lucy, Deborah, Sarah, and Jacki e. 126 More than ei ghty-seven
percent sai d that they di d not want comprehensi ve sexual i ty ser-
vi ces i n thei r school s. 127 Si xty percent sai d they di dn’t even want
such servi ces near thei r school s. 128 Onl y twenty-ei ght percent of
the teens had actual l y become i nvol ved i n sexual acti vi ti es, 129
but ni nety percent of those admi tted that they had become pro-
mi scuous si mpl y because of a perceived peer pressure. l SO Nearl y
ei ghty percent of them fel t that they had been drawn i nto sexual
acti vi ty far too soon. 131
The teens i n the pol l admi tted that thei r comprehensi ve sex
educati on courses had affected thei r behavi or. There was a fi fty
percent higher rate of sexual acti vi ty for them ajler the cl asses. 132
Sadl y, thei r understandi ng of the consequences of such acti vi ty
was not cor r espondi ngl y enhanced. ‘
126 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Accordi ng to another nati onal study, no l ess than ni nety per-
cent of al l women who recei ve aborti ons experi ence moderate to
severe emoti onal and psychi atri c stress fol l owi ng the proce-
dures.l ss Up to ten percent requi re psychi atri c hospi tal i zati on or
other treatment. 134 Teens are not tol d that.
Al most ei ghty percent fel t that thei r teachers and counsel ors
di scouraged, avoi ded, or tri vi al i zed thei r questi ons about impor-
kmt i ssues – the hard i ssues — especi al l y the trut/z about aborti on. 135
Ei ghty-ni ne percent confessed that thei r Pl anned Parenthood
contacts were “strongl y bi ased.” 136 The organi zati on’s cl ai m to
offer gi rl s ‘good, non-di recti ve counsel i ng and educati on’’l sT was
overwhel mi ngl y denied by the gi rl s who actual l y used those ser-
vi ces. I ss Ni nety-fi ve percent sai d that the counsel ors gave them
“l i ttl e or no bi ol ogi czd i nformati on,” and over ei ghty percent sai d
that they gave “l i ttl e or no i nformati on about the potenti al heal th
ri sks” i nherent i n bi rth control and aborti on products and pro-
cedures. 139 Over si xty percent sai d they had yearned for an al tern-
ati ve to the Pl anned Parenthood programs, but di d not know
where to turn. l AO
I t appears that Pl anned Parenthood’s sex educati on pro-
grams are, as Lucy Lommers and the other gi rl s from Washi ng-
ton put i t, “a backwards deal .” Wi cked i deas, couched i n wi cked
terms, to achi eve wi cked ends — that i s the educati onal scandal of
Pl anned Parenthood. That i s how Pl anned Parenthood sel l s sex.
Brazen Li ps
The wi cked are not onl y unsavory, they are unrel i abl e as
wel l .
There i s nothi ng rel i abl e i n what they say; thei r i nward part i s
destructi on i tsel fi thei r throat i s an open grave; they fl atter wi th
thei r tongue (Psal m 5:9).
Perversi ty and decei t go hand i n hand (Proverbs 17:4). You
can’t have one wi thout the other (Proverbs 6:12; I sai ah 59:3).
That i s why men are warned agai n and agai n to avoi d at al l
costs froward speech and obscene l i ps (Job 27:4; Proverbs 4:24;
Psal m 34:13; Ephesi zms 4:2; Col ossi ans 3:8; 1 Peter 3:10).
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 127
There are si x thi ngs whi ch the Lord hates, yes, seven whi ch
are an abomi nati on to Hi m: haughty eyes, a l yi ng tongue,
and hands that shed i nnocent bl ood, a heart that devi ses
wi cked pl ans, feet that run rapi dl y to evi l , a fal se wi tness who
utters l i es, and one who spreads stri fe among brothers (Prov-
erbs 6:16-19).
Al though i ndi screet tal k i s “sweet i n the mouths” of fal l en
men (Job 20:12), i t i s terri bl y destructi ve (James 3:6). I t dejles
the fl esh (Jude 1:8). I t i nvi tes corrupti on, untowardness, crook-
edness, and perversi ty (Deuteronomy 32: 5). I t contri butes to the
del i nquency of mi nors (Proverbs 7:6-23). I t creates stri fe and
di ssensi on (Proverbs 16:28). I t devi ses evi l i n the mi dst of i n-
nocence (Proverbs 16: 30). I t unl eashes mi schi evous destructi on
(Proverbs 17:20). I t perverts justi ce (Deuteronomy 16:19). And i t
wreaks hamc, ‘l i ke a sharp razor, worki ng decei tful l y” (Psal m
52:2), even to the poi nt of overthrowi ng an enti re cul ture (Prov-
erbs 11: 11). “A soothi ng tongue i s a tree of l i fe, but perversi on i n i t
crushes the spi ri t” (Proverbs 15:4).
Foul speech i s i nescapabl y~raudzdent (Psal m 10: 7), just as i t i s
i nescapabl y vi ol ent (Proverbs 10:11; 12: 6).
Because such brazenness is an abomination to both God and
man (Psal m 109: 2; Proverbs 4:24; 8:7), al l men who i ndul ge i n
i t, of necessi ty “have thei r consci ences seared as wi th a hot brand”
(1 Ti mothy 4:2). Thei r hearts are hardened (Proverbs 28:14).
Thei r necks are sti ffened (Proverbs 29:1). Thei r soul s are i mpov-
eri shed (Matthew 16:26). And, thei r l i ves are cheapened (Prov-
erbs 6:26).
Pl anned Parenthood cl ai ms to teach our chi l dren the “jacts
of l i fe.” 141 But detai l s about unspeakabl e perversi ons, conceal ed
horrors, and obscene ti ti l l ati ons are not the “jacts of l i fe.” 142
The “jacts of l i fe” can onl y be found i n the Word of Li fe. And
that i s one source of i nspi rati on that Pl anned Parenthood studi -
oudy avoi ds.
Wi th the fmi t of a man’s mouth hi s stomach wi l l be sati sfi ed; he
wi l l be sati sfi ed wi th the product of hi s l i ps. Death and l i fe are
i n the power of the tongue, and those who l ove i t wi l l eat i ts
frui t (Proverbs 18:20-21).
128 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Concl usi on
I n hi s remarkabl e arti cl e enti tl ed “The Fraud of Educati onal
Reform,” Samuel L. Bl umenfel d has stated, “The more I read
what secul ar educators wri te these days, the more convi nced I
become that thei r grasp of real i ty has sl i pped beyond retri eval .”l qq
The school s have fai l ed so mi serabl y i n accompl i shi ng thei r basi c
tasks — teachi ng our chi l dren how to read and wri te and com-
pute and compl ete and compete – that Bl umenfel d says those
educators know that they wi l l have to reform thei r preci ous sys-
tem. But what wi l l that reform be l i ke? Bl umenfel d tel l s us that
we shoul d “expect the next phase of educati onal reform to be
domi nated by radi cal i deas di sgui sed i n @o!hgogi c cl othes. Such
phrases as critical thinking, emancipator pedagogy, and master teath-
ers wi l l sound beni gn to the publ i c but wi l l convey the ri ght
message to the radi cal s.
=144 Certai dy that i s what we saw i n ti e
now defunct Ameri ca 2000 reform proposal s. 145
Thus, reformi ng the present educati onal system i s not the
answer. Pl anned Parenthood and the other radi cal educati onal
acti vi sts are so deepl y entrenched i n the publ i c school machi nery
that reform can onl y mean more of the same: more debauchery,
more brazenness, more humani sm, and more wi ckedness.
The earl y promoters of publ i c, state-control l ed educati on
/
ral l i ed around the sl ogan, “I t costs l ess money to bui l d school -
houses than jai l s.“146 The great patri ot-theol ogi an of the South,
Robert L. Dabney, responded to thi s i n 1876, sayi ng, “But what i f
i t turns out that the state’s expendi ture i n school -houses i s one of
the thi ngs whi ch necessi tates the expendi tures i n jai l s?”l q7 To
whi ch we mi ght add: W1.at ZJ that expenditure also necessitates the
expenditure in AI DS hospitals, nationalized child care, and an euer-
burgeoning abortion indu-sty?
The onl y hope for our chi l dren– and thei r chi l dren, and
thei r chi l dren’s chi l dren –to escape these horrendous hazards
.
are uncompromi si ng, unwaveri ng, unmi ti gati ng Chri sti an
school s: Chri sti an day school s and Chri sti an home school s. 148
Chri sti an educator Robert Thoburn has argued, “Sal vati on i s by
grace, not by educati on.
9 l W Even SO, h e says we have a “moral
obl i gati on” I s” to work hard, bui l di ng up Chri sti an school s 151 and
restori ng moral sani ty to our nati on. 152
Selling Sex: The Educational Scandal 129
Certai nl y, we need to battl e the bl azi ng concupi scence of
Pl anned Parenthood’s sex educati on programs by soundi ng the
al arms i n PTA meeti ngs, communi ty forums, and school board
heari ngs. But, i n the meanti me, i t i s essenti al that we rescue our
own chi l dren from the fl i ckeri ng fl ames of promi scui ty and per-
di ti on. At al l costs.
S E V E N
ROBBER BARONS: THE
FINANCIAL SCANDAL
argumentum ad crumenam 1
As always happens to miradous things, the vitiue has all gone out with tk iupse
of tinw.
2
Hilaire Belloc
Ski mmi ng the streets on a razor-sharp hi gh of adrenal i ne and
paranoi a, Roxanne Robertson ci rcl ed the cl i ni c’s concrete for-
tress hal f a dozen ti mes before she fi nal l y screwed up enough
courage to pul l i nto the parki ng l ot. An aci d rai n, the si ns of her
fathers, bl ew down hard and col d, etchi ng obscure messages i nto
the surface of the gracel ess asphal t. As she stepped out of the car
and moved toward the bui l di ng, a scrap of rubbi sh, pl ucked up
by the wi nd, di d a carel ess pi rouette before bei ng carri ed away.
She stepped qui ckl y under the parapet, around the corner,
through gl ass doors, al ong a carpet mapped wi th stai ns shaped
l i ke dark conti nents ami d a si enna sea, and i nto a l ong narrow
l obby. Hunched behi nd the recepti on desk sat a gnomi sh and di s-
hevel ed woman wi th a beaked nose and tufts of frowzy brown hai r
remi ni scent of a l ark’s nest. I t seemed that upon her forehead the
engraved wordjnahl y woul d not have been at al l i nappropri ate.
The room was cl ose and warm. From wi thi n dri fted the
smel l of bodi es pressed together, ci garette smoke, di si nfectant,
perfume, and somethi ng el se – the al most metal l i c scent of fear.
“I bel i eve I have an appoi ntment,” Roxanne sai d.
The woman handed her a cl i pboard. “You’l l need to fi l l thi s
out .“ She smi l ed a ragged smi l e. I t was a hol l ow, haunti ng ges-
ture — a feebl e attempt to vei l her i ntenti ons wi th an unspoken
cant of compassi on.
132 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Roxanne took a seat next to a peti te teen– a gi rl about her
own age, she guessed — and across from an ol der woman, an un-
settl i ng vi si on of frustrated resi gnati on. Nei ther of them seemed
to noti ce her as Roxanne sat on the edge of her seat scratchi ng bi ts
of bi ographi cal i nformati on onto the form on her l ap — l i fe, l ove,
and hope hemorrhagi ng from her soul wi th each compl eted l i ne.
Saturday morni ng at Pl anned Parenthood. Day of deci si on.
Val l ey of deci si on.
Roxanne handed the compl eted form to the haggard recep-
ti oni st and returned to her seat. Tossed to and fro on waves of
doubt, weak from resi sti ng swel l s of gui l t, and hel pl ess i n the
face of a fl ood of l onel i ness, she fel t as i f she were drowni ng.
But then the ti de rol l ed out and resol ve rushed i n when she
heard her name cal l ed.
She fol l owed a tal l and el egant woman down a di ml y l i t hal l
to a smal l offi ce cubi cl e. Spare and unfurni shed, save for a smal l
round tabl e and two strai ght-backed chai rs, the room bore the
unmi stakabl e mark of bureaucrati c i mpersonal i sm. And the
woman’s expressi onl ess features di d l i ttl e to di spel that i nsti tu-
ti onal gl oom. A shi ver ran up and down Roxanne’s spi ne.
After a bri ef exchange of rote pl easantri es the woman turned
her attenti ons to a smal l fol der of paperwork. “Tel l me, Ms.
Robertson: she i ntoned wi thout l ooki ng up, “what i s your actual
monthl y i ncome?”
“Wel l , I ’m goi ng to school ful l -ti me ri ght now; Roxanne re-
pl i ed. “1 work at the Student Uni on about fi fteen hours a week –
or whenever they need me. That comes out to about $50.00.
And then my parents send me about $150.00 a month for other
expenses, cl othes, suppl i es, gas for the car, and stuff. Course,
they pay tui ti on, books, and my room and board at the dorm.”
‘So then, the onl y money that actual l y passes through your
hands i s the $50.00 a week from your part-ti me job and the
$150.00 a month from your parents?” the woman asked.
‘Yeah, I guess so.”
“Wel l , then accordi ng to state gui del i nes, you qual i fi for gov-
ernment subsi dy for your care today. You wi l l onl y be responsi -
bl e for co-pay of twenty percent .“
“Oh wel l , I don’t need to do that. My parents have sent me
the money I need.”
“You qual i fy. You mi ght as wel l take advantage of your
benefi ts.”
Robb~ Barons: The Financial Scandal 133
“Gee, I don’t know. I ’d feel ki nda di shonest doi ng that .“
“Oh don’t be si l l y, hon. I t’s for just thi s ki nd of thi ng we al l
pay our taxes.”
“Hmmm. Wel l . . .“
“Besi des, from the l ooks of your chart here, you’re goi ng to
need a ful l battery of tests and servi ces. That can get to be qui te
expensi ve.”
‘But . . . al l I needi s a pregnancy test. Andauh . . . uh . . .“
“I know, hon. Don’t worry about i t.”
“But . . .“
The conversati on went back and forth l i ke that for al most ten
mi nutes: the Pl anned Parenthood counsel or doi ng everythi ng
she coul d to si gn on Roxanne as a government-subsi dy cl i ent,
Roxanne weakl y resi sti ng the offer of “chari ty.” I n the end,
though, the counsel or prevai l ed.
“Al l ri ght then. What do I have to do?” Roxanne fi nal l y sai d
i n surrender.
“Just si gn here.” The woman handed a sheet across the tabl e.
Her eyes qui ckl y took i n the two ri ngs that adorned Roxanne’s
hands – one wi th rubi es and di amonds, the other wi th a l arge
fi re opal set i n an ornate gol d band. As those hands took the
sheet and si gned, the woman smi l ed for the fi st ti me. The deed
was as good as done.
Hours l ater, Roxanne stepped out i nto a sti l l damp, browni sh
haze that made a ghost of the hori zon, and began rushi ng after
an ever-recedi ng desti nati on –her chi l d now dead, her consci ence
now seared, and her worth now reduced to a ji ngl e i n the ti l l .
“I never coul d understand,” she recentl y tol d me, “why the
counsel or was so i nsi stent. She refused to take m for an answer.
I t was al most l i ke I was gonna si gn up for Ti tl e XX benefi ts
whether I wanted to or not. I onl y wi sh that I ’d resi sted her argu-
ments and wal ked out the door.’ I ’d have saved mysel f a l ot of
gri ef. And of course, I ’d have saved a l ot of money– tax money–
that went to pay for my fool i sh si n.”
Soaki ng the Taxpayer
Roxanne Robertson i s just the ki nd of customer that Pl anned
Parenthood i s l ooki ng for: young, Bl ack, uni nformed, fri ght-
ened, unmarri ed, pregnant, and best of al l , government sub-
si dy el i gi bl e.3
,. ,,
134 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Nearl y forty years ago Congress began pouri ng mi l l i ons of
dol l ars i nto Pl anned Parenthood’s draconi an programs i n a
desperate attempt to hol d down the burgeoni ng costs of wel fare
dependency.q Lobbyi sts for Pl anned Parenthood argued that
wi thout a comprehensi ve, nati onwi de, tax-funded aborti on and
bi rth control network, thousands, i f not mi l l i ons of gi rl s l i ke
Roxanne woul d be abandoned to an i rrevocabl e spi ral of pov-
erty.s They woul d become a chroni c strai n and drai n on the
system. “Every dol l ar i nvested i nji -nni ~ pl anni ng,” they argued,
“woul d save two to three dol l ars i n heal th and wel fare costs .“6
That l ogi c — you’ve got to spend money i n order to save
money — sounded l ogi cal enough to Congress. So, anxi ous to dem-
onstrate a fi scal responsi bi l i ty heretofore i ni mi tabl e to i ts char-
acter, i t authori zed several wel l -heel ed~am+y planning measur es.
I n 1964, the Economi c Opportuni ty Act was passed, whi ch
i ncl uded a number of bi rth control and maternal heal th and
hygi ene provi si ons for the very poor.
7
For the fi rst ti me the fed-
eral government became i nvol ved i n regul ati ng fhrni l i es and
pol i ci ng thei r bedroom behavi or.
I n 1968, the Center for Popul ati on Research was establ i shed
i n order to coordi nate federal acti vi ti es i n “popul ati on-rel ated
matters.”s A si gni fi cant appropri ati ons commi tment was passed
at that ti me to provi de for contracepti ve and aborti faci ent
research, pl acement, and servi ce. g
I n 1970, Presi dent Ri chard Ni xon si gned i nto l aw the
Tydi ngs Act, consol i dati ng the fundi ng base for the Center, and
granti ng servi ce contracts and subsi dy support for i ndependent
provi ders. 10 The bi l l created Ti tl e X of the Publ i c Heal th Servi ce
Act and set fundi ng precedents for Ti tl e V, Ti tl e XI X, Ti tl e
XX, and a whol e host of other~anzi ~ planning and soci al wel fare
spendi ng programs that came al ong i n l ater years. 11
I nteresti ngl y, Secti on 1008 of the Tydi ngs l egi sl ati on sti pu-
l ated that “none of the funds appropri ated under thi s ti tl e shal l be
used i n programs where aborti on i s a method of~anzi ~ planning.” 12
The strong wordi ng of thi s provi si on i ndi cates that Congress not
onl y wi shed to prohi bi t the use of tax dol l ars for aborti on pro-
cedures, but to excl ude the fundi ng of programs and organi zati ons
that counsel ed or referred for aborti on as wel l . 13 Such wordi ng
became essenti al l y moot as successi ve “pro-l i fe” Republ i can ad-
mi ni strati ons al l owed ~ami~ planning enti tl ements to grow to
Robber Baromr: The Financial Scandal 135
Babyl oni an proporti ons. 14 Of course, now that expl i ci tl y pro-
aborti on Democrats control the budgetary process, even such
moot restri cti ons have become utterl y exti nct. 15
But even the most pro-aborti on negati on of the ori gi nal
Tydi ngs i ntent makes i t cl ear that the grants, i nvestments,
awards, gi fts, and servi ce contracts provi ded by the enti tl ement
are to be spent excl usi vel y on programs for l ow- and margi nal -
i ncome adul ts. 16
Pl anned Parenthood has been qui ck to note that even those
mi ni mal restri cti ve provi si ons are vi rtual l y unenforceabl e. 17
I t has al so di scovered that di ppi ng i nto the deep wel l of publ i c
fundi ng coul d be phenomenal l y profi tabl e. The mi nd-boggl i ng
growth of Pl anned Parenthood si nce the heady days when the
Great Socie~ was just bei ng l aunched i s a l esson on how to expl oi t
appropri ati ons for personal and i nsti tuti onal gai n — or how to
turn the hard-earned tax dol l ars of the average Ameri can i nto
what the Bi bl e cal l s “fi l thy l ucre .“ l a
A comprehensi ve stati sti cal , cl i ni cal , and demographi c anal -
ysi s of several thousand randoml y sel ected Pl anned Parenthood
cl i ent records recentl y provi ded evi dence that the organi zati on
was not onl y si desteppi ng the Tydi ngs provi si ons as a matter of
pol i cy, but that i t was del i beratel y i nfl ati ng government charges. 19
The fact i s, “Pl anned Parenthood bi l l s more servi ces and charges
more fees when taxpayers are footi ng the bi l l than when a cl i ent
pays cash.”zo As demographer Robert Ruff has sai d, “To put i t
bl untl y, Pl anned Parenthood i s soaki ng the taxpayer.”zl
For exampl e, i f a young gi rl goes to a Pl anned Parenthood
af%l i ate for a si mpl e pregnancy test and pays cash, her bi l l wi l l
total , on the average, just over si xteen dol l ars.zz I f, however, she
qual i fi es for a government subsi dy, her bi l l wi l l total , on the aver-
age, just over fi fty-seven dol l ars .23 For the very same servi ce ! I n
the very same cl i ni c! At Pl anned Parenthood, a procedure that i s
free at most cri si s pregnancy centers and communi ty heal th
cl i ni cs, and whi ch can be done at home for l ess than ten dol l ars,
has become a remarkabl y profi tabl e enterpri se, thanks to gov-
ernment fundi ng.
But i t i s not just subsi di zed pregnancy tests that Pl anned
Parenthood has i nfl ated beyond the stratosphere. I t bi l l s more
servi ces and charges hi gher fees for government-pai d cl i ents
than for cash cl i ents i n every area of i ts repertoi re. The average
136 GILAND ILLUSIONS
cost of an i ni ti al cash-pai d bi rth control vi si t i s just over thi rty-
two dol l ars. 24 But when the taxpayer foots the bi l l , Pl anned
Parenthood charges an average of just over seventy-seven dol -
l ars.= An annual bi rth control check-up costs a cash cl i ent ap-
proxi matel y forty dol l ars.ZG But when the government pays,
Pl anned Parenthood charges more than ei ghty-fi ve dol l ars.ZT A
repeat vi si t costs a cash cl i ent just over twenty-fi ve dol l ars. 28 For
the same servi ce, the taxpayer i s charged al most thi rty-si x dol -
l ars.zg A bi rth control suppl y vi si t costs an average of under
el even dol l ars cash.so But when that same vi si t i s pai d for out of
publ i c funds, the cost averages more than thi rty-fi ve dol l ars.sl
When publ i c hospi tal s, l ocal communi ti es, school di stri cts,
county heal th departments, and state governments contract wi th
Pl anned Parenthood to perform aborti ons, the same pattern of
pri ce i nfl ati on hol ds true.sz The cost ofj%nzi ~ planning services at
Pl anned Parenthood i s di rectl y rel ated to who pays the bi l l – the
cl i ent or the taxpayer. When the taxpayer pays, the servi ces are
between two and four ti mes more expensi ve.ss
I f a defense contractor can get two hundred dol l ars out of the
Pentagon for a common bal l peen hammer, then by gol l y i t wi l l –
al l moral compuncti on asi de.sq I t i s si mpl y a matter of suppl y
and demand. Li kewi se, i f Pl anned Parenthood can get si xty dol -
l ars out of the wel fare establ i shment for a cheap l i ttl e rabbi t test,
be assured i t wi l l .ss And just as the defense contractor robs the
treasury i n the name of patri oti sm, so Pl anned Parenthood soaks
the taxpayer i n the name of phi l anthropy.
I s i t any wonder then that Pl anned Parenthood i s so i ntent
on qual i fyi ng gi rl s l i ke Roxanne Robertson for government
grants and subsi di es?
Hi ghway Robbery Made Easy
Pri or to 1981, states and organi zati ons that wanted to parti ci -
pate i n the vari ous federd~anzi ~ planning programs provi ded by
the Tydi ngs l egi sl ati on and i ts prol i fi c progeny were requi red to
submi t a detai l ed spendi ng proposal to the Department of
Heal th and Human Servi ces. Onl y i f and when they coul d dem-
onstrate l egi ti mate need were funds approved. I n addi ti on, they
were obl i gated to report back to the department on a regul ar
basi s how they spent the fi nds and how effecti ve those expen-
di tures wer e.sG
Robber Barons: The Financial Scandal 137
A number of conservati ve spendi ng watchdog groups fought
those stri ct accountabi l i ty requi rements on the basi s that they
were fi scal l y counterproducti ve. They argued that the states and
organi zati ons were onl y usi ng the restri cti ons as an annual excuse
to request ever-hi gher fundi ng l evel s. Provi ders l i ke Pl anned
Parenthood woul d report that they spent two hundred mi l l i on
dol l ars on~ani ~ planning but that teen pregnancy rose another ten
percent. And thus, accordi ng to thei r convol uted l ogi c, rmwe federal
fi ndi ng was needed to combat the teen sexual i ty cri si s.sT Such
pl eas became an i nescapabl e hurdl e at the annual budget negoti -
ati ons. Not surpri si ngl y program costs began to skyrocket.
The sol uti on proposed by the watchdog groups was to el i mi -
nate accountabi l i ty al together. The funds woul d be di spensed as
no-stri ngs-attached gi fts known as bl ock grants.ss There woul d
be no federal supervi si on. No federal control . No federal eval ua-
ti on. There woul d not even be federal requi rements to establ i sh
el i gi bi l i ty gui del i nes: the states and organi zati ons woul d be free
to di spense the funds to anyone — ri ch or poor — for any purpose,
however they saw fi t.sg The Department of Heal th and Human
Servi ces woul d onl y be abl e to recommend that the funds be used
i n a parti cul ar fashi on. 40
Remember, ~ami ~ planning programs began as a “money sav-
i ng-” strategy for the wel fare system. Now, i n order to save the
economy from that “money savi ng” strategy, a new “money sav-
i ng” strategy had to be devi sed. Congress coul dn’t resi st.
Defi ci t consci ous, i t rushed to i mpl ement the new measures.
And i n so doi ng, i t gave Pl anned Parenthood what was for al l i n-
tents and purposes a bl ank check.ql
Now, thoroughl y obscured wi thi n the bel l yfol ds of Washi ng-
ton’s ponderous soci al servi ces bureaucracy, Pl anned Parenthood
qui ckl y transformed Congress’ new “money savi n~ strategy i nto
a tax-dol l ar bl ack hol e. I ts metabol i sm was such that i t was con-
stantl y i n search of new ki ngdoms to consume, and Washi ngton
was onl y too happy to compl y. I n short order, Ti tl e X fundi ng
for fami~ planning servi ces rose from about one hundred thi rty
mi l l i on dol l ars to al most one hundred forty-three mi l l i on dol l ars.4z
And then i n the hyper-i nfl ati onary l ast days of the Republ i can
rul e, the enti tl ements actual l y tri pl ed.qs Maternal and chi l d heal th
fundi ng programs rose from about si xty-ei ght mi l l i on dol l ars to
nearl y seventy-two mi l l i on dol l ars .44 Soci al Servi ces bl ock grant
138 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fundi ng rose from just over two and one hal f bi l l i on dol l ars to
nearl y three bi l l i on dol l ars .*S Popul ati on Research fundi ng rose
from about ei ghty-seven mi l l i on dol l ars to more than one hun-
dred four mi l l i on dol l ars.qG And Communi ty Servi ces Bl ock
Grant fundi ng rose from three hundred twenty mi l l i on dol l ars to
three hundred thi rty-fi ve mi l l i on dol l ars.A7 Wi thout excepti on,
Pl anned Parenthood has pressed for, and won i ncreases i n each
of i ts federal tax enti tl ements i ncl udi ng Ti tl e V, Ti tl e XI X, and
Ti tl e XX.*8
Pl anned Parenthood has been abl e to have i ts cake and eat
i t too.
A reputati on for consci enti ous economy and humani tari an
phi l anthropy– however wel l deserved or undeserved – i s a most
effecti ve means of overcomi ng resi stance to the use of vast un-
checked power for l ooti ng the publ i c treasury.
49
To thi s day,
Pl anned Parenthood’s spendi ng juggernaut remai ns unchecked.s”
And to thi s day, i t has a free hand i n determi ni ng how that
spendi ng i s to be mi sappropri ated.
Program el i gi bi l i ty i s determi ned at the cl i ni c l evel , by cl i ni c
personnel , accordi ng to cl i ni c standards, at cl i ni c pri ces, gov-
erned by cl i ni c gui del i nes .51 Thus, al most anzme can qual i fy for
the subsi di es.sz I f Pl anned Parenthood says you are Poor , then
you are poor. I f Pl anned Parenthood says you qual i fy, then you
real l y do qual i fi . And Uncl e Samuel has to ante up — at a prem-
i um rate. No questi ons asked. No veri fi cati on process requi red.
No accountabi l i ty necessary. No checks. No bal ances. No rul es.
No regul ati ons.
I t’s a perfect con game.
Just ask Roxanne Robertson.
I f At Fi rst You Don’t Succeed . . . Sue
Admi ttedl y, Pl anned Parenthood’s path to bureaucrati c Ni r-
vana has not been wi thout i ts tri al s, tri bul ati ons, and temporary
Bdi sattzds. Despi te i ts tenured pl ace on the l i beral l egi sl ati ve
agenda of Congress, pro-l i fe and pro-fami l y forces have not
yi el ded the i deal s of ‘l i fe, l i berty, and the pursui t of happi ness”
wi thout a fi ght. I n 1976, the Hyo2 Anumdment prohi bi ted Pl anned
Parenthood’s use of Medi cai d funds for aborti ons.sq I n 1981, a
comprehensi ve federal audi t reveal ed that the organi zati on had
mi sused publ i c fi nds and engaged i n i l l egal acti vi ti es, jeopardi zi ng
Robber Barons: The Financial Scandal 139
i ts tax exempt chari tabl e status.s4 I n 1982, the Nati onal El i gi bi l i ty
Commi ttee for the Combi ned Federal Campai gn, whi ch sol i ci ts
chari tabl e contri buti ons from federal empl oyees, was abl e to
temporari l y remove Pl anned Parenthood from i ts l i st of benefi ci -
ari es. 55 I n 1983, the Hatch Amendnumt was i ntroduced i n the
Senate and came wi thi n ei ghteen votes of overturni ng Roe v.
Wtie3 l egal i zed aborti on.sG I n 1984, fundi ng for i nternati onal
aborti on programs i n devel opi ng countri es was temporari l y cur-
tai l ed by Presi dent Ronal d Reagan’s Mexi co Ci ~ Policy.s7 I n
1986, conservati ves nearl y ambushed Pl anned Parenthood’s I RS
non-profi t exempti on wi th the Tu Exemption Equio Act. 58 I n
1987 and agai n i n 1991, Ti tl e X regul ati ons were temporari l y
sti ffened to excl ude any and al l programs that performed, coun-
sel ed for, or referred for aborti on — what the medi a and the abor-
ti on i ndustry deri si vel y dubbed the “gag rul e.”sg
I n al most every i nstance, however, Pl anned Parenthood was
abl e to reverse i ts setbacks through a masterful use of the courts.
I t fi l ed i nnumerabl e l awsui ts, restrai ni ng orders, bri efs, tacti cal
del ays, and judi ci al pl oys, and, as a resul t, was abl e to emerge
vi ctori ous ti me after ti me after ti me. Go Regardl ess of what
executi ve orders the admi ni strati on handed down, or what
manageri al deci si ons the program coordi nators made, Pl anned
Parenthood was abl e to control the outcome through the courts.
George Wi l l has sai d that “when pol i ti cal movements be-
come anemi c, they abandon l egi sl ati on for l i ti gati on, usi ng
courts as shortcuts around democrati c processes. . . . As l i ber-
al i sm became l azy and arrogant, and then weak and unpopu-
l ar, i t retreated from pol i ti cal arenas to courts.”Gl
I n any case, the combi nati on of fl abby and unrestri cted
~anzi ~ planning appropri ati ons and bri l l i ant judi ci al maneuver-
i ng has enabl ed Pl anned Parenthood to hol d the Ameri can tax-
payer hostage and to i ndul ge i ts every whi m and fancy. The
combi nati on of l egi sl ati ve and l i ti gal manipulation has enabl ed i t
to conti nue and even expand i ts medi cal , raci al , and educa-
ti onal malpractice. The combi nati on of Congressi onal and Court
contumacy has, very si mpl y, made i t ri ch. And that i s a fi nan-
ci al scandal that makes Charl es Ponzi ’s famous “ Roar i ng
Twenti es Securi ti es Sti ng” pal e by compari son.Gz
140 GMND ILLUSIONS
At Mammon’s Shri ne
From i ts earl i est days, the Pl anned Parenthood movement
has been i nvol ved i n fi nanci al scandal . Despi te the fact that she
recei ved generous donati ons from some of the ri chest phi l an-
thropi es i n the worl d, Margaret Sanger kept her organi zati on on
the bri nk of bankruptcy for years, fhi l i ng to pay her bi l l s and
refusi ng to gi ve an account of her mi smanagement .63
Fi nanci al di scl osure woul d have brought di saster upon
Margaret and her fl edgl i ng operati on. She often spent Pl anned
Parenthood money for her own extravagant pl easures.G4 She
i nvested organi zati onal funds i n the bl ack market .65 She
squandered hard-won bequests’on fri vol i ti es. 66 And she wasted
the money she’d gotten “by hook or by cr ook”GT on unrestrai ned
vani ti es.’8
Because of her wastrel i ndi screti ons, she was removed from
the Pl anned Parenthood board several ti mes,Gg but the organi za-
ti on found that i t si mpl y coul d not survi ve wi thout her.TO I n the
end, Pl anned Parenthood was forced to take on the character
and attri butes of i ts founder. “The l ove of money i s the root of al l
evi l ” (1 Ti mothy 6:10). Vi ol ence and greed are i nseparabl e
(Proverbs 1:8-19). Thus, Pl anned Parenthood’s evi l agenda of
vi ol ence to women and chi l dren cannot be cut l oose from the
deep tap root of avari ce and materi al l ust that Margaret pl anted.
Sexual i mmoral i ty, theft, adul tery, covetousness, greed,
mal i ce, wi ckedness, decei t, l ewdness, l asci vi ousness, arrogance,
bl asphemy, pri de, ruthl essness, and fol l y are al l rel ated si ns
(Mark 7:21-22). They commonl y coexi st (Remans 1:29-31). Cer-
tai nl y they di d i n the tortured concupi scence of Margaret
Sanger. And they sti l l do, i n the organi zati on that honors her as
pi oneer , 71 champi on, ‘z and patron sai nt.’s
For exampl e, i n 1981, the congressi onal audi ti ng agency, the
General Accounti ng Offi ce, i nvesti gated the fi nanci al records of
Pl anned Parenthood and uncovered numerous gl ari ng di screp-
anci es. 74 Fol l owi ng i n the footsteps of i ts founder, the organi za-
ti on had abused the publ i c trust, spendi ng tax dol l ars wi th a
total di sregard for decorum, di screti on, or l egal i ty. I t had used
publ i c funds to engage i n parti san pol i ti cs.Ts I t had mi sappropri -
ated ‘federal money to pay dues to l obbyi ng organi zati ons.7G And
i t had di verted tax dol l ars to advocate i ts l egi sl ati ve and judi ci al
Robber Barons: The Financial Scandal 141
prograrns.TT Al l thi s on top of i ts pri ce fi xi ng, el i gi bi l i ty ti ri keri ng,
and appropri ati ons mani pul ati on.
I t appears that graft and corrupti on are endemi c to the
Pl anned Parenthood movement. They al ways have been.
Apparentl y, they al ways wi l l be.
Today, government fundi ng provi des the majori ty of revenues
at more than hal f of Pl anned Parenthood’s afhl i ates. T* Ni neteen
di fferent federal appropri ati ons measures pour mi l l i ons of dol l ars
i nto i ts cankered coffers every year through dozens of agenci es,
programs, and projects.Tg And as a resul t several of those affi l i ates
have accumul ated vast hol di ngs i n stocks and real estate, and
bank accounts wi th ready cash reserves i n excess of a mi l l i on
dol l ars each.BO Not bad for a “pri vatel y funded,” “soci al servi ces
chari ty organi zati on.”*1
Sti l l , that i sn’t even the hal f of i t. The real fi nanci al l egacy of
Pl anned Parenthood becomes evi dent onl y as i ts establ i shment,
expansi on, and recrui tment scheme i s exposed.
Money Launderi ng: Establ i shment
Tax dol l ars are not supposed to be spent for aborti ons.*z
They can pay for the bui l di ng where aborti ons are done.*t They
can pay for the personnel that counsel , refer, and perform those
aborti ons .84 And they can pay for the programs that teach, pro-
tect, encourage, and support those aborti ons.Bs But, they cannot
actual l y provi de for the aborti ons themsel ves.
At l east, not yet.
I n real i ty, however, tax dol l ars are used al l the ti me to brutal -
i ze women and butcher thei r chi l dren.
Pl anned Parenthood not onl y fl eeces the Ameri can taxpayer
for i ts educati onal and bi rth control servi ces, i t has cl everl y fer-
reted out ways to fl eece them for aborti on as wel l . Dozens of ways.
You see, many of the federal jami~ planning programs are
admi ni stered through the states and through l ocal communi -
ti es.BG Someti mes Washi ngton offers matchi ng funds to those
l ower magi strates .87 Someti mes i ts bequests ar e si mpl e
grants.BB But ei ther way, how the funds are to be spent i s deter-
mi ned l ocal l y.
I n effect, Pl anned Parenthood i s abl e to funnel federal appro-
pri ati ons through state bureaucraci es, county heal th departments,
142 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
communi ty school di stri cts, and ci ty counci l admi ni strati ons
for i ts aborti on programs.
I n el even states the use of tax dol l ars for aborti on i s qui te
open and up front .89 I n others i t i s rather cl andesti ne.g’J I n onl y a
very few i s i t compl etel y outl awed.’1 But i n al l , Pl anned Parent-
hood i s acti vel y i nvol ved i n funnel i ng new tax i ncome sources
i nto i ts bank accounts.
Mac Lawton l i ves i n North Carol i na where state matchi ng
fi -mds and servi ce provi der grants to Pl anned Parenthood hav~
been cut off. Despi te i nnumerabl e l awsui ts brought by the fi ve
afl l i ates i n the state, l awmakers have stood fi rm i n denyi ng ac-
cess to state-control l ed tax dol l ars.
But l ast year when Mac was el ected to a county commi ssi on-
ers seat he made a startl i ng di scovery. Hi s county had been
coerced i nto a revenue shari ng program that benefi ted Pl anned
Parenthood to the tune of ei ghty-fi ve thousand dol l ars a year.
“I just coul dn’t bel i eve i t when I fi rst saw those fi gures,” he
tol d me. “Here we are i n the mi ddl e of the most conservati ve sec-
ti on of the most conservati ve state i n the whol e country. Who’d
have ever guessed that we’d be pouri ng any money i nto that
aborti on busi ness? Much l ess tkat nwch money? Frankl y, I was
shocked. And outraged.”
Mac went to wo~k ri ght away to defund the county’s ~azvdy
planning pr ogr am. “The more I got i nto i t the more I real i zed
that the whol e thi ng was a wi cked perversi on of the l aw; he sai d.
“Deal s had been struck. Favors had been cal l ed i n. Heads had
been turned. Money had been exchanged under the tabl e. I t was
a mess .“
Needl ess to say, when Mac began to turn over a few stones
and ask a few questi ons, he began to feel a good deal of pol i ti cal
heat. “Several of my col l eagues were up to thei r eyebal l s i n graft,
and my i nvesti gati ons were a real threat to them,” he expl ai ned.
“Thei r pol i ti cal survi val was on the l i ne. They were afrai d that I
was goi ng to bl ow the whi stl e on them. Then al l thei r di rty l i ttl e
deeds woul d be exposed and the publ i c woul d di scover that thei r
taxes were bei ng used to support Pl anned Parenthood and to
ski rt the l aw.”
When he began to recei ve threateni ng phone cal l s and l et-
ters, Mac onl y stepped up hi s efforts. “I f they wanted to pl ay
hardbal l I was ready,” he sai d. “Or at l east I thought I was.”
Robber Barons: The Financial Scandal 143
A coal i ti on of pro-aborti on groups began a publ i c smear
campai gn, desi gned as much to stymi e Mac’s efforts as to mi re
hi s character i n controversy and confl i ct. I n l ess than three
months he deci ded to resi gn rather than to subject hi s fami l y to
any further harassment. “I hated to back out of the fi ght; he ad-
mi tted, “but I was out there practi cal l y on my own. The thi ng i s,
they’ve got so much money and so many peopl e on the aborti on
si de that i t just doesn’t seem to matter any more what i s ri ght,
what i s true, what i s l egal , or what i s moral . Money i s power. Of
course, the maddeni ng thi ng i s that the money they used to
dri ve me out of offi ce was my own. znon~. I t was tax money.”
Two months after Mac resi gned, the other county commi s-
si oners voted to i ncrease thei r fundi ng of the program.
Sadl y, Mac Lawton’s experi ence i s al l too typi cal .
That i s the fi nanci al l egacy of Pl anned Parenthood.
Pl anned Parenthood and Parents: Expansi on
As many as one thi rd of Pl anned Parenthood’s cl i ents are
youngsters l i vi ng at home.gz Most of them are not the l east bi t
needy, but because they do not have i ncomes i ndependent of thei r
parents, they are cl assi fi ed as needy by cl i ni c personnel .gs Veri fi -
cati on i s verbal onl y, so the matter i s l eft enti rel y to the di screti on
of Pl anned Parenthood .9A Not surpri si ngl y then, ni nety-seven
percent of them are approved for government subsi di es, thus
provi di ng a massi ve i nfusi on of new i ncome for the cl i ni cs.
By funnel i ng federal money through state and l ocal govern-
ments behi nd the taxpayers’ backs, Pl anned Parenthood i s abl e
to establish i ts programs. By appl yi ng i t to teens behi nd thei r par-
ents’ backs, i t i s abl e to expand those programs.
That i s why over the years, Pl anned Parenthood has been
the si ngl e most vi gorous opponent of parental consent l aws for
bi rth control and aborti on servi ces.gs I t has fought the ri ght of
parents to know i n the courtsgG and i n the medi a,gT through
l obbyi ngs and through l egi sl ati on,gg wi th curri cul um i n the
school s 1’JO and wi th campai gns i n the communi ti es. 101
Thi s despi te the fact that agai n and agai n, parental consent
l aws have been shown to be an effecti ve deterrent to teen prom-
i scui ty, pregnancy, aborti on, and venereal i nfecti on. 10Z
144 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
After i t enacted a parental noti fi cati on l aw, Mi nnesota saw a
twenty-three percent decl i ne i n the number of teen bi rths. 10S I t
saw a forty percent decrease i n the number of aborti ons. 1°*
I n Rhode I sl and the aborti on rate dropped forty-four per-
cent and the number of teen pregnanci es decl i ned thi rty percent
after the state enacted a parental consent l aw.l os
Massachusetts saw a fi fteen percent decl i ne i n both i ts total
teen pregnancy rate and i ts total teen aborti on rate fol l owi ng the
enactment of a parental consent statute. 1°G
Pl anned Parenthood’s opposi ti on to parental consent then i s
purel y sel fi sh. As demographer Robert Ruff has argued, “Pl anned
Parenthood si mpl y cannot afford to have parents i nterfere wi th
i ts secreti ve provi si on of bi rth control and aborti on to thei r chi l -
dren. To al l ow such parental i ntrusi on upon i ts fundamental ri ght
to profi t from teen promi scui ty woul d cri ppl e i t fi nanci al l y.” 107
Onl y a handfi d of states have been abl e to pass parental consent
l aws that have effecti vel y stood the test of Pl anned Parenthood’s
judi ci al barrage – despi te the supposed boost that the Webster,
Rust, and Ca.sg Supreme Court cases afforded state staus. 1’JS But
as Lesl i e Forrester recentl y di scovered, even those “vi ctori es”
may ri ng hol l ow.
Lesl i e fought hard to get the parental consent l aw passed i n
her home state, Rhode I sl and. Pro-l i fers there, anxi ous to just
get anything on the books, compromi sed the bi l l to i ncl ude ajudi-
cial bypass cl ause. “Our l awyers and l obbyi sts tol d us that wi thout
the cl ause, the bi l l si mpl y coul dn’t pass, much l ess stand judi ci al
i nspecti on,” Lesl i e tol d me. “So we put i t i n as an exception.
Basi cal l y i t sai d that teens had to get thei r parents’ permi ssi on to
recei ve bi rth control or aborti on servi ces unless a judge si gned a
hardshi p wai ver for her.”
When the bi l l passed and then succeeded i n getti ng through
the courts unscathed, most pro-l i fers, i ncl udi ng Lesl i e, were
ecstati c. “We al l fel t l i ke we’d won a tremendous vi ctory,” she sai d.
Then about three months l ater, Lesl i e recei ved a di sturb-
i ng phone cal l . “I t was my nei ghbor down the street ,“ she tol d
me. “Her thi rteen-year-ol d daughter had gotten a three-month
suppl y of bi rth control pi l l s at Pl anned Parenthood wi thout her
permi ssi on, consent, or knowl edge. The gi rl had gotten her judi -
ci al bypass wi th a si mpl e phone cal l i n l ess than fi fteen mi nutes. I t
i s al most as i f l aw doesn’t matter any more. Groups l i ke Pl anned
Robber Barons: The Financial Scandal 145
Parenthood al ways seem to fi nd a way to do whatever they jol l y
wel l pl ease. And to make a buck whi l e doi ng i t .“
Sadl y, Lesl i e Forrester’s experi ence i s al l too typi cal .
And that i s the fi nanci al l egacy of Pl anned Parenthood.
Through the Back Door: Recrui tment
Pl anned Parenthood does not offer cozn@ehemi ue heal th care
at any of i ts ei ght hundred cl i ni cs, two hundred affi l i ates, or fi fty “
chapters i n thi s country. l og I t i s i n the sex busi ness. I t does not
treat the fl u, or gi ve heari ng tests, or perform vacci nati ons, or
set broken bones, or cl ean teeth, or check for heart murmurs, or
assuage coughs. I f a treatment, or procedure, or prescri pti on, or
therapy, or exami nati on, or remedy, or medi cati on, or regi men,
or cure i s unrel ated to sex, then Pl anned Parenthood doesn’t
offer i t. I t wants nothi ng to do wi th i t. 110
Whi ch makes i ts l atest strategy to pl ace sex cl i ni cs i n hi gh
school s al l the more i ntri gui ng. 111
Si nce i t i s tough to sel l parents at the l ocal PTA or school
board meeti ng on confi denti al bi rth control and aborti on ser-
vi ces for thei r chi l dren, Pl anned Parenthood has resorted to
other tacti cs. 112 I nstead of aski ng those parents to ante up sev-
eral hundred thousand addi ti onal tax dol l ars every year to cor-
rupt communi ty standards and teen moral s, i t si mpl y asks them
to provi de “good conzprehemi ve heal th care.”113 Then l ater, when
no one i s l ooki ng, i t sl i ps i ts sex servi ces i n on the sl y. 114
One school -based sex cl i ni c supporter wri ti ng i n Pl anned
Parenthood’s journal reported: “Most school -based cl i ni cs begi n
by offeri ng comprehensi ve heal th care, then add~arni ~ planning
services l ater, at l east partl y i n order to avoi d l ocal controversy.
. . . A cl i ni c l i mi ted to provi di ng~anzi ~ planning semices, preg-
nancy testi ng, prenatal , and post-partum care, and testi ng for
and treatment of sexual l y transmi tted di seases wi l l be unaccept-
abl e even to many of the students .“ 115
Another cl i ni c advocate wrote: “The most common strategy
adopted to avoi d controversy i s to mai ntai n a l ow profi l e — gen-
eral l y by keepi ng programs out of si ght . . . by rel yi ng on word
of mouth for recrui tment, and by gi vi ng names to programs that
obscured thei r functi ons .“ 116
Thus, to the students, to the parents, and to the taxpayi ng
communi ty at l arge, the “cl i ni cs general l y are presented as com-
146 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
prehensi ve, mul ti -servi ce uni ts that emphasi ze physi cal exam-
i nati ons and treatment of mi nor i l l nesses.~ 117
But that i s hardl y thei r real purpose. Pl anned Parenthood re-
member, i sn’t i nterested i n scrapes and brui ses or sni ffl es and
sneezes. I t i s i nterested i n sex.
That i s why Pl anned Parenthood advi ses that “when a stu-
dent comes to the cl i ni c ostensi bl y for other reasons, the cl i ni c
staff can take that opportuni ty to see i f the student wants to di s-
cuss sexual behavi or and bi rth control .“ 118
Pl anned Parenthood’s former medi cal di rector Loui se Tryer
urges that, “every medi cal contact shoul d be uti l i zed as an
opportuni ty to offer the opti on of contracepti on.”l l g
The pl an i s to encourage the cl i ni c personnel “to become ag-
gressi ve counsel ors to young women. I f, for exampl e, a young
pati ent comes i n for tenni s .d/xxq the physi ci an shoul d manage to
i ntroduce bi rth control . . . . The conversati on shoul d then be
di rected to use of aborti on i n the fi rst tri mester i f tradi ti onal
methods fai l .“ 1*0
Thi s ki nd of decepti on i s the thi rd prong of Pl anned Parent-
hood’s scheme to scal p the Ameri can taxpayer. By funnel i ng
federal money through state and l ocal governments behi nd the
taxpayers’ backs, i t i s abl e to establ i sh i ts programs. By appl yi ng
the money to teens behi nd thei r parents’ backs, i t i s abl e to expand
those programs. And by pl anti ng covert cl i ni cs i n the school s
behi nd eueybodyi back, i t i s abl e to recrui t for those programs.
Wi thout the school -based cl i ni c network, Pl anned Parent-
hood’s ambi ti ous pl an to achi eve “the perfect contracepti ng soci -
et y“ becomes l i ttl e more than a pi pe dream. 1*1 Wi thout that
recrui tment program, the fi nanci al foundati ons that the organi -
zati on has l ai d over the years through arduous i njusti ce woul d
be washed away by the ti des of ti me.
So the decepti on i s essenti al . For both the short run and the
l ong run.
Kel l ey Fri as and Roma Rati gl i a are cl assmates i n the ni nth
grade at a l arge hi gh school i n the upscal e Orange County
suburbs of Los Angel es. When they both deci ded to try out for
the school ’s swi m team, they went together to the heal th cl i ni c
for a mandatory physi cal exam.
“One of the fi rst thi ngs the nurse asked me,” Kel l ey rel ated
“was whether I was on bi rth control . When I tol d her I wasn’t she
Robber Barons: The Financial Scandal 147
proceeded to l ecture me about responsibili~ and healt/ z and hygiene
and al l that.”
“I t was real l y embarrassi ng; Roma agreed. “I mean, here I
was, just tryi ng to get an okay to swi m, and thi s l ady I ’ve never
even seen before starts to tal k about al l thi s real l y @i z)ate stuff.”
“Yeah, and then i t was l i ke we were some ki nda bad ki ds i f we
di dn’t get on the Pi l l ,” Kel l y sai d.
“I went ahead and took a whol e bunch of Pl anned Parent-
hood brochures and stuff, just to get her off my back,” Roma
sai d. ‘Man, you shoul da seen my parents’ reacti on when I
showed i t al l to ‘em. They hi t the roof.”
“Mi ne di d too; Kel l y sai d.
“But then when they went to tal k to the pri nci pal ; Roma
sai d, “they just got the run-around.”
“Yeah, wel l , that’s pretty typi cal : Kel l y i nterjected.
“I ts pretty wei rd to thi nk we had to go through al l that mess
just to get a physi cal for the swi m team,” Roma sai d. “Remi nd
me never to do that agai n.~
Sadl y, the experi ence of Kel l y Fri as and Roma Rati gl i a i s al l
too typi cal .
And that i s the fi nanci al l egacy of Pl anned Parenthood.
The Day Draws Ni gh
Pl anned Parenthood has pl otted i ts course careful l y. I t has
devel oped fool proof strategi es. I t has put together an i roncl ad
get-ri ch-qui ck scheme. I t has made every conti ngency. I t has
covered every base.
But l i ke the ri ch fool who bui l t ever-l arger storehouses to
contai n hi s weal th onl y to di scover afterward that hi s soul was
requi red of hi m that very ni ght, Pl anned Parenthood’s day i s
qui ckl y comi ng to an end (Luke 12:15-21). I n one hour thei r
ri ches wi l l come to nought (Revel ati on 18:17). For thei r judg-
ment shal l not l ong l i nger, nor wi l l thei r damnati on sl umber
(2 Peter 2:3).
The Bi bl e makes i t cl ear that the wi cked are “greedy dogs;
they “never have enough” (I sai ah 56:11). They are “l i ke wol ves
ravagi ng thei r prey to shed bl ood, and destroyi ng soul s to get
di shonest gai n” (Ezeki el 22:27). They oppress the poor (Prov-
erbs 22:16) and expl oi t the weak (Proverbs 22: 22), choki ng out
148 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
the truth (Matthew 13:22) and trusti ng i n a l i e (Mark 4:19). And
yet thei r gol d and si l ver qui ckl y becomes cankered, the rust of
them becomes a wi tness agai nst thei r unri ghteousness (James 5:3).
For God Hi msel f wi l l smi te them (Ezeki el 22:13). He Hi msel f wi l l
avenge al l those who have been defrauded (1 Thessal oni ans 4: 6).
“Ri ches profi t not i n the day of wrat%” (Proverbs 11:4). And
“He that trusts i n ri ches shal l fal l ” (Proverbs 11:28).
The best l ai d pl ans at Pl anned Parenthood wi l l come to rui n
si mpl y because i l l -gotten gai n cannot, wi l l not, and does not l ast.
The organi zati on may attempt to fi x pri ces, mani pul ate l egi sl a-
ti on, i ni ti ate l i ti gati on, l aunder money, expand markets, and de-
vel op recrui tment, but i n the end, the whol e scandal ous affai r
wi l l be exposed. And the peopl e of God wi l l ari se and be exal ted
i n thei r stead.
Gi ve to them accordi ng to thei r deeds, and accordi ng to the
wi ckedness of thei r endeavors; gi ve to them accordi ng to thei r
hands; render to them what they deserve. Because they do not
regard the works of the Lord, nor the operati on of Hi s hands,
He shal l destroy them and not bui l d them up (Psal m 28:4-5).
Concl usi on
Honore de Bal zac once qui pped that “behi nd every great for-
tune there i s a cri me .“ 122 That i s certai nl y true of Pl anned
Parenthood’s great fortune. I ts vast weal th has been bui l t not
onl y on the broken bodi es of i ts unborn vi cti ms and the ghoul i sh
tortures of i ts unsuspecti ng cl i ents, but on the perverse mani pu-
l ati on of the Ameri can fami l y and the Ameri can taxpayer as
wel l . I n short, i t has commi tted unspeakabl e cri mes. 123
Exposed to the l i ght of day, these cri mes woul d surel y el i ci t a
publ i c outcry — a cry for justi ce, a cry for resti tuti on, and a cry
for repentance. Exposed to the l i ght of day, these cri mes woul d
surel y provoke a groundswel l of i ndi gnati on agai nst Margaret
Sanger’s cause.
The onl y questi on i s, wi l l we demonstrate the courage neces-
sary to actual l y expose Pl anned Parenthood’s cri mes? Wi l l we
bri ng i ts fi nanci al l egacy to the l i ght of day? Or wi l l we conti nue
to al l ow i t to cower under the dark shade of the forbi dden tree?
E I G H T
STRANGE BEDFELLOWS:
THE INSTITUTIONAL
SCANDAL
minus asinum &cat 1
One can on~ say to am”ent sophistical dt@culties, that the sense of men estublisha
J % itse~ the truz limits of any object, as ~fieedom. Z
Hiiaire Belloc
Beyond the tal l , ei ghth-fl oor wi ndows, the Houston ci ty-scape
darkened to a drab December twi l i ght, then bl ossomed i nto the
gl i tteri ng and sparkl i ng gem that i s the ci ty’s trademark. Bel ow,
the crowds had begun thi nni ng al ong Mi l am Street. The l i ght
changed at Rusk and headl i ghts began movi ng agai n, poki ng
through the thi n, sl anti ng wi nter rai n. Across the street, a l ong,
weary’ l i ne of pedestri ans dodged puddl es and pothol es — some
straggl i ng home after a ful l day’s gri nd, some catchi ng a bi te to
eat before taki ng on the snarl ed freeways, others goi ng to assi g-
nati ons over cocktai l s i n boi sterous corner bi stros. They moved
past the endl ess upward thrust of new, gri ml y skel etal con-
structi ons that seemed to punctuate each bl ock. Stoppi ng, even
i n the rai n, to peer through hol es cut i nto the wooden wal kways,
they stared at now-qui et earthmovers and watched the arcs, pi nk
and orange, of the hel meted wel ders up among the gi rders.
Dana Mei er squi nted i nto the ni ght. Rai n bl ew streaks
agai nst the wi ndow. The nervous gl are of neon and hal ogen
refracted a pul si ng ni mbus of come-on col ors.
I t was a fami l i ar scene — a dai l y ri tual for her. Over the l ast
several months, Dana had watched the Republ i c Bank compl ex,
di rectl y across from her wi ndow, ri se magni fi centl y from the
149
150 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
deep square excavati on pi t, foot by foot, taki ng i ts shape – a
gui l d-hal l raki shness i n fi re-fl ecked I tal i an grani te. Fasci nated by
the odd mi x of Ol d Worl d appoi ntments and space-age technol -
ogy, she noted each day’s progress on the bui l di ng wi th a cat-l i ke
curi osi ty and a chi l d-l i ke ardor.
“I t’s an archi tectural i con: she whi spered to hersel f, breath
frosti ng on the col d, damp gl ass. “A contradi cti on i n terms. A
post-modern anomal y. Beauti ful , but fri ghteni ng. Confusi ng.
Li ke me.”
‘That’s the fi rst si gn of the onset of seni l i ty, you know– tal k-
i ng to yoursel f i nto the wee hours of the ni ght.” Bi l l Maxwel l ,
from accounti ng, had poked hi s head through the doorway of
her offi ce. “Posi ti vel y forebodi ng.”
“Seni l i ty!” she chuckl ed, taki ng off her smart, horn-ri mmed
gl asses and turni ng sl owl y away from the wi ndow. “Thanks a l ot,
Bi l l . You know, you have an unfai l i ng abi l i ty to i nfl i ct a veni al
wound i n passi ng whenever I l east expect i t. Charmi ng.”
‘Wel l , you know what Wodehouse used to say. When he was
past ni nety?”
“I ’m not sure I ’m i n the mood. I doubt I ’l l fi nd thi s too ter-
ri bl y amusi ng.”
“Oh, sure you wi l l . He sai d that as l ong as you’re goi ng to get
ol d, you mi ght as wel l get as ol d as you can.’
Very funny.”
“I thought SO.”
She turned toward her desk. A dri l l i ng l ease and several con-
tracts l ay there, l oungi ng i n a puddl e of soft l i ght.
“Come on,” Bi l l beckoned. “Enough al ready. You’ve been at
i t al l day. Let’s go grab some supper at Ni nfa’s. Maybe see i f we
can get ti ckets for the theater after. What do you say?”
“Thanks, but no thanks, Bi l l . I ’ve got a coupl e of thi ngs to ti e
together and then I ’ve got to get home. I ’m utterl y bushed.”
“Oh, bal oney. Come on. Loosen up a l i ttl e, wi l l ya?”
“Real l y, I ’m sorry, Bi l l . Another ti me.”
“Okay, okay. Ti y not to make i t a l ate one.” He pul l ed on hi s
trench coat. “Good ni ght. And don’t forget to l ock up.” He went
away whi stl i ng.
She heard the door cl ose out i n the recepti on area and breathed
a deep si gh of rel i ef. She just wanted to be al one. To thi nk.
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scandal 151
She shoved the contracts and the l ease asi de and pul l ed out
the memo she’d recei ved just before l unch. “One hundred per-
cent parti ci pati on thi s year,” i t read. ‘No excepti ons .“
Apparentl y, the battl e that she’d been wagi ng for the past
year was l ost. Corporate management had handed down a
decree from on hi gh. No i fs, ands, or buts about i t.
She wandered through the empty rooms. The smal l gas
pi pel i ne subsi di ary that she supervi sed occupi ed most of one
fl oor i n a handsomel y decorated Shel l Oi l property. And she
l oved i t. The comfortabl e jumbl e of rooms, the wi nki ng com-
puter termi nal s, the saggi ng, over-burdened bookcases on tatty
Ori ental carpets — i t was home away from home. Work was her
l i fe. Li fe was her work.
That memo put a ki nk i n al l that, though.
Fi ve years ago, Dana had had an aborti on. At Pl anned Parent-
hood. A botched aborti on. For hal f a decade, she’d struggl ed
wi th the physi ol ogi cal effects of a torn cervi x. But worse, she’d
struggl ed wi th the psychol ogi cal effects of a seared consci ence.
Her therapy had been her work. I t was al l she’d had l eft.
Pro-aborti on rhetori c had dri ven her out of her church. Pro-
aborti on senti ment had cool ed most of her rel ati onshi ps. And
pro-aborti on pol i ti cs had dampened her enthusi asm for soci al
acti vi sm. So, she had i nvested everythi ng i n her work — her
hopes, her dreams, and her passi ons.
But, now, even her work was threatened – haunted by the
morbi d and spectral shade of aborti on. Company pol i cy di ctated
that every empl oyee be “strongl y encouraged” to parti ci pate i n
the annual donati on dri ve for Uni ted Way. And si nce i n many
states Uni ted Way donati ons di rectl y benefi t Pl anned Parenthood
afhl i ates as member agenci es, those empl oyees were bei ng subtl y
coerced i nto fi nanci ng i ts bi rth control and aborti on acti vi ti es.
That was somethi ng that Dana just coul dn’t tol erate.
At fi rst, she’d tri ed to si mpl y i gnore the pol i cy. She’d expl ai ned
her personal posi ti on to her superi ors. But si nce she was i n
seni or management, they fel t that she si mpl y had to set an exam-
pl e for the other empl oyees.
She had fought the pol i cy then. For a yeti . Al l the way to the
hi ghest corporate l evel . Al l the way to the Board of Di rectors.
The memo was thei r answer.
152 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
“And thi s i s zny answer: she sai d al oud, reachi ng across the
desk to scan once more, for the thousandth ti me that day, her
l etter of resi gnati on. As much as she l oved her job, as much as
she depended on i t, she woul d not sacri fi ce her i ntegri ty for i t.
She woul d not sacri fi ce the chi l dren for i t.
She wal ked out i nto the ni ght. The Houston streets gl i stened
l i ke bl ood on gol d.
Looki ng a Gi ft Horse i n the Mouth
I t i s bad enough that Ameri cans unwilling~ give mi l l i ons of
dol l ars every year to Pl anned Parenthood wi th our taxes. But
that we unknowing~ give mi l l i ons more wi th our chari tabl e gi v-
i ng i s tragi c.
We are a generous peopl e. Every year we gi ve al most fi fty
bi l l i on dol l ars to vari ous pri vate chari ti es.s And that doesn’t
even count the nearl y forty bi l l i on dol l ars i n support we l end to
our l ocal churches and synagogues,A and the addi ti onal fi ve bi l -
l i on dol l ars we ante up i n foundati on and corporate gi vi ng.s
We gi ve to school s, to hospi tal s, to rel i ef agenci es, to research
i nsti tutes, to soci al servi ce provi ders, and to communi ty proj-
ects. No peopl e has ever gi ven more freel y to the needy, the
sufferi ng, or the oppressed.G Of course, we gi ve out of great
weal th and comfort. 7 And, often, we gi ve fool i shl y, hasti l y, and
unthi nki ngl y.s Sti l l , we gi ve. And we gi ve freel y.
When thousands and even mi l l i ons l angui shed i n hunger
and desperati on i n Communi st Ethi opi a, we responded wi th
more than three hundred mi l l i on dol l ars i n emergency ai d.g
When the Sovi et-occupi ed Ukrai ne faced cal ami ty and di saster
fol l owi ng the Chernobyl nucl ear acci dent, we di spatched teams
of medi cal workers and nearl y twel ve mi l l i on dol l ars i n rel i ef. 10
When the oppressi ve regi mes of Ni caragua, Vi et Nam, Camb-
odi a, Zi mbabwe, Cuba, and Angol a sl aughtered thousands of
thei r ci ti zens and drove thousands of others i nto exi l e, we fed
them, cl othed them, housed them, nursed them, and trai ned
them, spendi ng mi l l i ons of dol l ars i n refugee camps and i mmi -
grati on centers al l around the gl obe. 11
We support everythi ng from the March of Di mes to the
PTA, from the Uni ted Way to the YMCA, from Hands Across
Ameri ca to UNI CEF, si mpl y because we want to hel p.
And that i s good. 12
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scandal 153
Unfortunatel y, we are so wi l l i ng to gi ve, that we fai l to ask
enough questi ons. Or we fai l to ask the ri ght questi ons.
And that i s bad. l a
The fact i s, huge sums of the money we fai thfi dl y donate
every year to those chari tabl e organi zati ons wi nd up i n the
hands of Pl anned Parenthood. 14 To the tune of seventy mi l l i on
dol l ars. 15 About one-thi rd of that comes from Uni ted Way and
other communi ty chest combi ned chari ti es. 16 Another one-thi rd
comes from corporate grants and foundati on bequests. 17 And the
fi nal one-thi rd comes from mi scel l aneous endowments, match-
i ng gi fts, i ndi vi dual donati ons, and di rect-mai l sol i ci tati on. 18
Most peopl e si mpl y don’t real i ze that when they gi ve they
are actual l y ai di ng and abetti ng Pl anned Parenthood’s Eugeni c
agenda. Onl y occasi onal l y does someone – l i ke Dana Mei er – ask
questi ons, rai se objecti ons, and voi ce concerns. Onl y occasi onal l y
i s the conventi onal wi sdom — that donati ons wi l l be appl i ed where
most need-d— actual l y chal l enged. And, thus, onl y occasi onal l y
do chari tabl e contri buti ons end up goi ng where they were ori gi -
nal l y i ntended. 19
Program Sweepstakes
From i ts earl i est days, Pl anned Parenthood wooed corpora-
ti ons, foundati ons, cel ebri ti es, and chari ti es i n the hopes of
securi ng operati ng capi tal .
Margaret Sanger rubbed shoul ders and shared beds wi th the
radi cal chi c i n the roari ng twenti es — the arti sts, actors, wri ters,
musi ci ans, and acti vi sts i n New York’s Vi l l age and London’s
Fabi an Encl ave.ZO She shrewdl y used her proxi mi ty to them to
promote her revol uti onary i deas.zl And she careful l y networked
wi th them to gai n contacts i n the pol i ti cal and fi nanci al worl d. 22
Si ngl e-mi nded i n her commi tment to the cause, her per-
si stence and unfl aggi ng enthusi asm began to open doors. She
was ti rel ess and dri ven. Some even sai d she was “possessednZs —
whi ch, no doubt, she was.zq At any rate, her crusade qui ckl y be-
came a cause c~l}bre. By the thi rti es, corporati on grants and foun--
dati on bequests began to pour the money i nto her coffers.zs By
the forti es, she had won the endorsements of such notabl es as
El eanor Roosevel tzb and Katheri ne Hepburn.z7 By the fi fti es,
she had attai ned i nternati onal renown and counted among her
supporters Jul i an Huxl ey,28 Al bert Ei nstei n,zg Nehru,sO John D.
154 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Rockefel l er,tl Emperor Hi rohi to,tz and Henry Ford. 33 The si x-
ti es brought her tremendous fame and acceptance. Before her
death, she recei ved the enthusi asti c endorsements of former
Presi dents Harry Truman and Dwi ght Ei senhower.tA She won
over arch-conservati ves l i ke Mrs. Barry Gol dwater,s5 and arch-
l i beral s l i ke Margaret MeadtG – i deol ogy di dn’t seem to matter.
I n addi ti on, Margaret Sanger was a tenaci ous organi zer. Her
days wi th the Soci al i st Partyt7 and the Communi st Labor move-
ment 38 not onl y trai ned her i n effecti ve propaganda techni ques,
they taught her how to sol i ci t, trai n, and acti vate vol unteers.sg
Usi ng these ski l l s, Margaret l i teral l y combed the country, and
ul ti matel y the worl d, searchi ng for donors.qo She l eft no stone
unturned. She appl i ed for every grant, appeal ed to every foun-
dati on, made presentati ons to every corporati on, and appeal ed
to every chari t y.ql She wanted a pi ece of every phi l anthropi c pi e,
and she woul d go to great pai ns to make her case to any who
woul d l i sten. *Z She was a dogged promoter. And, l i ke the per-
si stent wi dow i n Chri st’s parabl e, she was so unrel enti ng, she
prevai l ed more ti mes than not (Luke 18:1-8).
Perhaps Margaret’s greatest coup came when she was abl e to
gai n for her organi zati on an I RS chari tabl e tax-exempt status.At
That move put Pl anned Parenthood i n the same l egal category
as a l ocal church or a phi l anthropi c soci ety.*q Al l donati ons be-
came tax-deducti bl e, and that made sol i ci tati on and donor
devel opment al l too easy.4s
The fund-rai si ng apparatus that she set i n pl ace has onl y
grown i n si ze and sophi sti cati on i n the years si nce she di ed. I t has
garnered hundreds of cel ebri ty endorsements.4G I t has affi l i ated
wi th every major nati onal and i nternati onal professi onal and
educati onal associ ati on even remotel y rel ated to Pl anned
Parenthood’s wor k.AT And i t has tapped i nto the fi scal l i febl ood
of vi rtual l y every major chari tabl e resource avai l abl e. *S
The Uni ted Way
Founded i n 1918, Uni ted Way of Ameri ca i s the worl d’s l arg-
est cooperati ve coal i ti on of chari ty organi zati ons i n the worl d. *9
I ts mul ti -mi l l i on dol l ar annual effort not onl y di stri butes much
needed cash to l ocal pri vate-sector servi ce provi ders, but i t pro-
vi des program support and consul tati on i n the areas of “fund-
rai si ng, budgeti ng, management, fund di stri buti on, pl anni ng,
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scandal 155
and communi cati ons .“sO I t conducts major nati onal medi a cam-
pai gns, produces fi l ms and audi o-vi sual presentati ons, admi ni s-
ters staff and vol unteer devel opment trai ni ng, and publ i shes
dozens of bookl ets, pamphl ets, and di rectori es every year.sl I t
assi sts l ocal servi ce groups by conducti ng company-wi de and
communi ty-wi de campai gns and cul ti vati ng i ncreased corporate
gi vi ng through donor devel opment programs.sz Uni ted Way
funds hel p organi zati ons l i ke the Sal vati on Army, Goodwi l l , the
Red Cross, and Bi g Brothers do what they do best: care for the
needy.ss Though recent charges of mi sappropri ati on of funds,
strong-arm tacti cs, and management ski mmi ng has sul l i ed i ts
i mage, the phi l anthropi c l egacy of Uni ted Way i s unquesti ombl e.sq
Mi l l i ons of dol l ars every year are used to strengthen the work of
drug rehabi l i tati on, medi cal research, emergency food rel i ef,
shel teri ng the homel ess, cri si s counsel i ng referral s, l egal servi ces
to the poor, and job restrai ni ng for the unempl oyed.ss
But they al so go to Pl anned Parenthood – mi l l i ons of dol l ars
worth every year.sG Even those few l ocal Uni ted Way groups that
have yi el ded to pro-l i fe pressure over the years, and removed
Pl anned Parenthood as a di rect reci pi ent of funds, conti nue to
support hot l i nes, fkni l y counsel i ng centers, heal th servi ce agen-
ci es, and communi ty associ ati ons that COWW1 for aborti on and
ref~ cl i ents to the organi zati on’s abortuari es. ST
Nati onal l y, Uni ted Way, over the years, has strongl y defended
i ts commi tment to Pl anned Parenthood and has consi stentl y upped
i ts share of the annual fund-rai si ng bounty.ss I t has even gone so
far as to entangl e i tsel f i n Pl anned Parenthood’s pol i ti cal spats,sg
even to the poi nt of ri ski ng i ts own tax-exempt status .GO
Ji m Si ngl eton i s an executi ve wi th an i nternati onal oi l tool
manufacturi ng company based i n Okl ahoma Ci ty. Al ways ac-
ti ve i n ci vi c affai rs and communi ty devel opment, he has l ong
been an enthusi asti c sponsor for Uni ted Way’s corporate pro-
gram. “1 woul d personal l y go to each of our empl oyees,” he sai d,
“and encourage them to gi ve. I woul d hel p executi ves i n other
compani es set up i ncenti ve programs. I even di d some vol unteer
work at the regi onal Uni ted Way offi ce.”
Ji m’s enthusi asm was dampened si gni fi cantl y when he di s-
covered that the funds he had worked so hard to rai se were bei ng
used for Pl anned Parenthood’s aborti on and bi rth control
crusade. “I went to several of the di rectors and board members
156 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
to see i f there was any possi bi l i ty of droppi ng that support ,“ he
sai d. “But they were al l thoroughl y commi tted to mai ntai ni ng
the status quo. The thi ng i s, they were vi ~ defensi ve. I t was l i ke
thi s subject had al ready been dri ven i nto the ground and they
weren’t even wi l l i ng to di scuss i t any more.~
Of course, they di dn’t want to l ose Ji m al together, so they
proposed an al ternati ve. “They tol d me that i f I di dn’t want my
donati on to go to Pl anned Parenthood,” he remembered, “al l I
had to do was to ask for a negati ve dai gnati on. They real l y wanted
me to stay wi th the program. The troubl e wi th negatiue &signa-
tions, though, i s that Pl anned Parenthood gets a set percentage
of the Uni ted Way total . That i s pre-arranged. So, no matter
‘ how I desi gnate or don’t desi gnate, the very fact that I ’ve made a
Uni ted Way contri buti on rai ses the total that Pl anned Parent-
hood gets. Negati ve desi gnati ons are, thus, a sham. My protest
woul d be i rrel evant .“
Frustrated, Ji m pul l ed hi s company out of the program. “The
whol e reason I worked so hard for years to rai se money was to
hel p peopl e. To l earn that my efforts were actual l y havi ng the oP-
@si te effect was terri bl y soberi ng. Now, every ti me I see one of
those Uni ted Way ads duri ng footbal l games, I have to wonder
how many other fol ks there are i n the same boat – wanti ng to hel p,
but doi ng i t i n a compl etel y mi sbegotten fashi on. I t i s tragi c.”
The March of Di mes
Founded i n 1938 by Presi dent Frankl i n D. Roosevel t, the
March of Di mes i s one of the worl d’s premi er pri vate-sector heal th
and medi cal associ ati ons.Gl Dedi cated to the preventi on of bi rth
defects, i t rai ses nearl y mi l l i ons of dol l ars each year for educati on,
research, and servi ce. I t works to i mprove maternal and newborn
heakh.GZ I t makes basi c cl i ni cal grants to hospi tal s and uni ver-
si ti es for peri natal and geneti c study prograrns.Gs I t sponsors med-
i cal conferences, coordi nates symposi a, and publ i shes l i terature.’4
Si nce i t successful l y l ed the fi ght to cure pol i o duri ng the earl y
fi fti es, the March of Di mes has become a symbol of hope for mi l -
l i ons of parents al l around the gl obe.Gs
But i t has al so pl aced i tsel f at the forefront of the Pl anned
Parenthood movement .66
Si nce the earl y si xti es, i t has i ncreasi ngl y turned i ts attenti ons
away fr om cur i ng geneti c di sor der s and bi r th defects to
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scandal 157
o%tecting and eliminating them.GT And, as a resul t, amni ocentesi s
and aborti on have become i ts chi ef concerns, consumi ng a vast
majori ty of i ts fundi ng.GS I nstead of tryi ng to so~ve the probl em of
bi rth defects, the March of Di mes now di sposes of those prob-
l ems by fundi ng “search and destrofl mi ssi ons.
Ei ghty-ei ght percent of al l March of Di mes geneti ci sts favor
aborti on-on-demand .Gg Seventy-one percent argue that i f am-
ni ocentesi s di agnosti c tests prove a chi l d to be defecti ve, he
shoul d be termi nated regardl ess of the stage of pregnancy.70 A
l arge number even reveal ed that they were i nvol ved i n l i ve fetal
experi mentati on and fetal harvesti ng.Tl Thi s despi te the per-
si stent cl ai ms of the organi zati on that i t i s “aborti on neutral .”T*
The connecti on between the March of Di mes and Pl anned
Parenthood i s not just phi l osophi cal . Many fai thful donors
woul d be shocked to di scover that the money they have gi ven
over the years to “hel p fi ght bi rth defects” has actual l y wound up
i n Pl anned Parenthood coffers.
I n 1980, for i nstance, the March of Di mes gave more than
one-hal f mi l l i on dol l ars to a Pl anned Parenthood aborti oni st for
a major research project.’s The resul ts of the study, publ i shed
i n Obstetrics and Gynecology, have been wi del y heral ded i n pro-
aborti on ci rcl es and sel ecti vel y ci rcul ated by Pl anned Parent-
hood affi l i ates al l around the country.T4
I n response to pro-l i fe cri ti ci sm of i ts cl ose rel ati onshi p wi th
Pl anned Parenthood, the nati onal offi ce of the March of Di mes
cal l ed i ts cri ti cs “i deol ogi cal zeal ots eager to i nvent new ene-
mi es.”
75
Today, the ki nshi p between the two groups i s fri endl i er than
ever. They di spl ay and di stri bute each other’s l i ter atur e.TG They
refer cl i ents back and forth to each other’s programs. 77 They
cooperate i n sponsori ng geneti c research and peri natal medi cal
conferences.TB And they support each other i n thei r pol i ti cal
l obbyi ng efforts.7g
Joseph Resni ck was for years a dedi cated March of Di mes
fi nd-rai ser. And for good reason. “I fel t that I owed a deep, per-
sonal debt to the March of Di mes,
n
he tol d me. “See, i n 1954,
when I was fourteen-years-ol d, an epi demi c of pol i o myel i ti s was
sweepi ng across Ameri ca. My mother and my younger si ster
both were stri cken. For weeks, both of them l i ngered near death.
158 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Then they were both confi ned to an i ron l ung for months on
end. Today, though, thanks to the March of Di mes, they are
both heal thy, producti ve ci ti zens. My mother uses a cane to
wal k, but my si ster shows no effects of the di sease at al l .”
Joseph’s mother and si ster were both a part of a March of
Di mes therapy program for al most a year and a hal f. “Wi thout
the March of Di mes, nei ther of them woul d have had a chance
of recovery,” he sai d.
Not surpri si ngl y, Joseph tri ed to show hi s grati tude to the or-
gani zati on by worki ng hard every year i n i ts fund-rai si ng dri ve.
“My wi fe and I ran our l ocal campai gn si x out of seven years i n
the seventi es,” he sai d. “But then, around 1978 or 1979, I began
to detect a major shi ft i n the organi zati on’s i nterest and concern.
Then, i n 1981, my pastor showed me a number of surveys and
studi es that i mpl i cated the March of Di mes i n major aborti on
and amni ocentesi s research, i n cooperati on wi th groups l i ke
Pl anned Parenthood. Wel l , I was outraged. Not at the March of
Di mes. But at my jxzstor ! I was angry that he woul d even enter-
tai n the thought that the organi zati on I ’d worked so hard to sup-
port was compromi sed moral l y.”
Joseph i mmedi atel y set out to vi ndi cate the organi zati on and
prove hi s pastor wrong. “The next coupl e of weeks were very
pai nful for me. I made a number of cal l s. I wrote l etters. I read
arti cl es. I made i nqui ri es. And, i n the end, I was forced to admi t
that my pastor was ri ght. I was devastated. Here was an organi -
zati on commi tted to l i fe, promoti ng death. I t broke my heart. I
fel t ashamed, embarrassed, and humi l i ated.’
For some ti me, Joseph tri ed to work wi thi n the organi zati on
to change the Pl anned Parenthood ori entati on. But al l to no
avai l . “I fi nal l y had to come to the concl usi on that the March of
Di mes was just not goi ng to change. That i t was unchangeabl e
and unredeemabl e.”
Fortunatel y, Joseph’s commi tment to fi ghti ng bi rth defects
di d not end wi th hi s break wi th the March of Di mes. Today, he
i s acti vel y i nvol ved wi th The Mi chael Fund, an i nternati onal l y
respected pro-l i fe geneti c research foundati on. so “Now, I feel
l i ke I ’m actual l y accompl i shi ng what I ’d been tryi ng to do al l
those years,” he sai d. “Now, I ’m actual l y hel pi ng ki ds l i ve and
l i ve better.”
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scandal 159
Corporate Phi l anthropy
For some ti me, Ameri ca’s bi ggest compani es have been i n-
vol ved i n an al most sui ci dal mi ssi on to underwri te radi cal and
l efti st causes.sl Overseas, thei r trade support i s vi rtual l y the onl y
thi ng that has kept the Communi st di ctators i n the Sovi et bl oc
afl oat economi cal l y.8z Thei r di pl omati c meddl i ng has toppl ed
Western Al l i ance regi mes on four conti nents.ss And, at home,
thei r chari tabl e gi vi ng has bankrol l ed the febri l e mi l i tants i n i n-
numerabl e anti -busi ness, anti -fami l y, and anti -l i fe groups .8A
I n a remarkabl e study of the Forbes 100 compani es, a Uni ver-
si ty of Texas professor, Marvi n Ol asky, found that seven of every
ten corporate dol l ars contri buted for publ i c pol i cy purposes go to
such l i beral groups .
85
For i nstance, he reported that grants from
Aetna, Al l i ed Stores, AT&T, Atl anti c Ri cMel d, Dayton Hudson,
Exxon, General Motors, RCA, and Westi nghouse hel p support
“soci al and recreati onal events” for l esbi ans, and programs de-
si gned to “eradi cate homophobi a.”sG
Chevron, Travel ers, Standard Oi l , Ci gna, U.S. West, Bel l
Atl anti c, Ford, and the Sun Company al l have made major
grants to groups “teachi ng aggressi ve use of federal regul atory
agenci es to extort concessi ons from busi ness.”sT Defense con-
tractors l i ke Honeywel l support l efti st peace organi zati ons that
di ssemi nate fal se propaganda agai nst i tsel f and i ts i ndustry.ss
Al though vi rtual l y al l of the organi zati ons of the l eft – from
the Urban League to Peace Chi l d, and from the NAACP to
Ki nheart – benefi t from free enterpri se’s generosi ty, pro-aborti on
femi ni st groups seem to be the bi g wi nners. Ni neteen of the top
twenty-fi ve compani es support radi cal femi ni st organi zati ons.sg
The revol uti onary Nati onal Organi zati on for Women, wi th
fewer than 250,000 members nati onwi de, recei ved l arge bequests
from Ameri can Express, Ameri tech, Bel l South, Burl i ngton
Northern, Chrysl er, Coca-Col a, Dart & Kraft, Eastman Kodak,
Goodyear, Johnson & Johnson, Manufacturers Hanover, Merri l l
Lynch, J. C. Penney, Phi l i p Morri s, R. J. Reynol ds, and Xerox.gO
Of course, ami dst thi s morass of confusi on and corrupti on,
Pl anned Parenthood has found a way to profi t, and profi t hand-
somel y. Compani es such as AT&T, Ci ti corp, Dayton Hudson,
Morgan Guaranty Trust, Standard Oi l , and Uni on Paci fi c gave
more than one hundred thousand dol l ars to the organi zati on’s
160 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
aborti on and bi rth control crusade.gl Corporate gi vi ng has proven
to be so l ucrati ve over the l ast several years that several Pl anned
Parenthood affi l i ates have ful l -ti me corporate devel opment staffs
that do nothi ng but wi ne and di ne executi ves i n the hopes of
wooi ng more dol l ars i nto i ts Mi dasi zed vaul ts. 92 Efforts by or-
gani zati ons l i ke Li fe Deci si ons I nternati onal have done much to
educate the publ i c and corporate boards al i ke — the resul t has
been that several major compani es have dropped thei r support
of Pl anned Parenthood — but mi l l i ons of dol l ars every year sti l l
travel from board rooms to aborti on cl i ni cs.gs
Ruth Demmi k i s a systems engi neer for a l arge Si l i con
Val ey manufacturi ng company. She i s al so very acti ve i n the
pro-l i fe movement, donati ng ten hours a week to counsel bat-
tered women and abused chi l dren at her church’s cri si s outreach
center. Last year, she was i nstrumental i n hel pi ng her pastor or-
gani ze a communi ty-wi de protest of Pl anned Parenthood.
To her di smay, she di scovered just two weeks before the
march that her company was acti vel y cooperati ng wi th a Na-
ti onal Organi zati on for Women and Pl anned Parenthood effort
to di ffuse the effects of the pi cket. “The pro-aborti on peopl e went
around to busi ness and ci vi c l eaders sol i ci ti ng donati ons,~ she
sai d. “But they di dn’t just ask for donati ons strai ght out; i nstead
they asked contri butors to pl edge a certai n amount for every
pro-l i fer that turned out for the pi cket. I n other words, the bi g-
ger our turnout, the greater th% gai n. When they came to our
company, they asked for a corporate matchi ng grant: however
much they coul d rai se out i n the communi ty, matched dol l ar for
dol l ar by the company. Doubl e or nothi ng. Wel l , our board sai d
yes. I was fl abbergasted.”
Ruth went from boss to boss al l the way up the corporate l ad-
der, tryi ng to get the board to reverse thei r deci si on. “They had
thei r mi nds made up, though: she sai d. “They di dn’t want me to
confuse them wi th the facts. I don’t thi nk I ’ve ever been more
fi -ustrated i n al l my l i fe. Here I was, worki ng~or a company that
was worki ng agai nst everythi ng that I bel i eve i n. That’s a tensi on
that wi l l have to be resol ved soon. One way or another.”
Fami l y Foundati ons
Duri ng the fi rst three decades of thi s century, a number of
fami l y-control l ed phi l anthropi c foundati ons were establ i shed.gq
The era of the i ndustri al tycoon and the manufacturi ng monopol y
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scandal 161
was al so the era of graduated taxes and heavy governmental reg-
Ul ati on.gs Fami l y foundati ons were, thus, not merel y al trui sti c,
they were very pragmati c hedges agai nst hi gh tax rates and
magi steri al i nterference.gG I n other words, they provi ded the
ri ch wi th exempti ons and l oophol es .97
That i s not to say, of course, that the foundati ons di d not ac-
compl i sh great thi ngs that contri buted to the publ i c good. They
di d, and often sti l l do.
The Carnegi e Foundati on, establ i shed i n 1911 by Andrew
Carnegi e, al most si ngl e-handedl y endowed the publ i c l i brary
movement i n the Uni ted States.gB Wi th assets of nearl y hal f a
bi l l i on dol l ars at work every year fundi ng uni versi ti es, hospi tal s,
and communi ty devel opment projects, i t has been a remarkabl e
i nsti tuti on of hel p and hope .99
The Rockefel l er Foundati on, establ i shed i n 1913 by John D.
Rockefel l er, l i kewi se has endowed, over the years, i nnumerabl e
worthy phi l anthropi c projects. 100 I t has endowed hunger rel i ef
projects worl dwi de. 101 I t has establ i shed hospi tal s and heal th care
faci l i ti es on every conti nent. 10Z And i ts support of educati onal
progress has l ed to the devel opment of research centers, the pub-
l i cati on of academi c advances, and the subsi di zi ng of pri vate i n-
sti tutes and uni versi ti es. 10S Wi th assets of al most a bi l l i on dol l ars
at work every year, i t has been a powerful force for good. 104
The Ford Foundati on, establ i shed i n 1936 by Henry Ford,
has greatl y advanced the publ i c wel fare by tryi ng to i denti fy and
contri bute to the sol uti on of si gni fi cant nati onal and i nternati onal
probl ems.l os I nterested pri mari l y i n i mprovement of educati onal
qual i ty and opportuni ty i n school s, col l eges, and uni versi ti es, i t
has endowed al ternati ve l earni ng projects, schol arshi p pro-
grams, and research management semi nars. 10G Wi th assets of
nearl y three bi l l i on dol l ars at work every year, i t, too, has wrought
tremendous grace around the worl d. l I JT Dozens of other fami l y
foundati ons – establ i shed by the Mel l ons, the Asters, the Morgans,
the Johnsons, the Roosevel t, the Kennedys, the Vanderbi l t,
and many l esser-known cl ans, l i ke the Kel l oggs, the Dukes, the
Watumul l s, the Motts, and the Kaufmans – have si mi l arl y exer-
ci sed consi derabl e chari tabl e effect.
Sadl y, though, much of the good work that these foundati ons
have done has been at best mi ni mi zed, at worst nul l i fi ed, by thei r
counterproducti ve contri buti ons to organi zati ons l i ke Pl anned
162 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Parenthood. I nstead of supporti ng organi zati ons, i nsti tuti ons,
servi ces, chari ti es, and mi ni stri es that strengthen the fami l y,
l ower taxes, produce i ndi vi dud i ni ti ati ve, and promote heal th
and justi ce, they tend to endow the narrow, sectari an, and
destructi ve programs and pogroms of the Left. 10s
The Rockefel l er began fundi ng Pl anned Parenthood i n 1952
when Margaret Sanger charmed John D. Rockefel l er at a l avi sh
ti te-&t?te i n her Tucson mansi on. 109 I n 1959, the Fords began
gi vi ng and, before l ong, vi rtual l y al l the others had fol l owed
sui t. 11° Si nce then, mi l l i ons of dol l ars have been pumped i nto
the organi zati on by thei r foundati ons. As ni mbl e as a dry l eaf
i n the whi rl wi nd, Pl anned Parenthood has been abl e to si destep
i ts i deol ogi cal commi tment to Revol uti onary Soci al i sm l ong
enough to stretch a suppl i cati ng hand toward Ameri ca’s greatest
capi tal i sts. And, often enough, to make i t as ri ch as they.
Geral d Wi l son i s an hei r to a mul ti -mi l l i on dol l ar pri vatel y
hel d busi ness. For years, he fought the patronage of the Left,
general l y, and Pl anned Parenthood speci fi cal l y, i n hi s fami l y’s
phi l anthropi c foundati on. But the task turned out to be both
thankl ess and fmi tl ess. I n the end, he was forced to endow hi s
own foundati on, one that he coul d control . “I t i s terri bl y
fi -ustrati ng,n he tol d me, “to see so much opportuni ty for good
transl ated i nto so much opportuni ty for evi l .”
He especi al l y bemoaned the vani ty, graft, and mani pul ati on
that i s al most i nherent i n the endowment process. “I n many
ways,” he sai d, “the system i s just a seri es of unhol y al l i ances,
meant for ri ght, desti ned for wrong.”
Unhol y Al l i ances
Throughout the Bi bl e, warni ngs agai nst enteri ng i nto un-
hol y al l i ances are abundant and cl ear.
Whe to the rebel l i ous chi l dren,” decl ares the Lord, “who exe-
cute a pl an, but not Mi ne. And make an aI 1i ance, but not of
My Spi ri t, i n order to add si n to si n” (I sai ah 30:1).
Do not enter the path of the wi cked, and do not proceed i n the
way of evi l men. Avoi d i t, do not pass by i t; turn away from i t
and pass on. For they cannot sl eep unl ess they do evi l ; and they
are robbed of sl eep unl ess they make someone stumbl e. For
Strange Bedfellows: The I nstitutional Scanckl 163
they eat the bread of wi ckedness, and dri nk the wi ne of vi o-
l ence. But the path of the ri ghteous i s l i ke the l i ght of dawn,
that shi nes bri ghter and bri ghter unti l the ful l day. The way of
the wi cked i s l i ke darkness; they do not know over what they
stumbl e (Proverbs 4:14-19).
How bl essed i s the man who does not wal k i n the counsel of the
wi cked, nor stand i n the path of si nners, nor si t i n the seat of
scoffers! But hi s del i ght i s i n the Law of the Lord, and i n Hi s
Law he medi tates day and ni ght (Psal m 1:1-2).
Whenever men have vi ol ated thi s basi c pri nci pl e, catastrophe
has resul ted. What was ori gi nal l y i ntended for good, for secur-
i ty, and for justi ce, ended i n evi l , destructi on, and oppressi on.
Lot entered i nto an unhol y al l i ance wi th Bera, ki ng of
Sodom and, as a resul t, l ost al l hi s weal th, hi s posi ti on, hi s
home, and, fi nal l y, hi s fami l y (Genesi s 19:1-26).
Asa entered i nto an unhol y al l i ance wi th Ben-Hadad, ki ng of
Aram and, as a resul t, empti ed both the royal and the templ e
treasuri es, vi rtual l y bankrupti ng the ki ngdom (1 Ki ngs 15:16-19).
Jehoshaphat entered i nto an unhol y al l i ance wi th Ahab the
apostate ki ng of I srael and, as a resul t, nearl y l ost hi s l i fe to
decepti on and i ntri gue (1 Ki ngs 22:24-33).
Havi ng fai l ed to l earn hi s l esson, Jehoshaphat entered i nto
sti l l another unhol y al l i ance, thi s ti me wi th Ahab’s son, Ahazi ah,
and, as a resul t, the enti re royal fl eet was l ost i n Ezi on-geber
(2 Chroni cl es 20:35-37).
Ahaz entered i nto an unhol y al l i ance wi th the ki ngs of
Assyri a despi te the di re warni ngs of the prophet I sai ah and, as a
resul t, the nati on became i mpoveri shed and subject to pagan
pi l feri ng and perfi dy (2 Chroni cl es 28:1-19).
The fi rst century Church at Thyati ra entered i nto an unhol y
al l i ance wi th the wanton prophetess Jezebel and, as a resul t,
si ckness, tri bul ati on, and pesti l ence befel l the peopl e i n great
waves of judgment and retri buti on (Revel ati on 2:18-29).
Agai n and agai n, thi s truth i s dri ven home. When men al l y I
themsel ves wi th the wi cked and thei r causes and thei r i nsti tu-
ti ons, heartache and cal ami ty are the onl y possi bl e outcomes.
Al l the good that the Uni ted Way or the March of Di mes or
corporate benevol ence or fami l y foundati ons attempt i s corn-
164 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
pl etel y subsumed i n i mpotence and fai l ure due to thei r unhol y
al l i ance wi th Pl anned Parenthood. One bad appl e spoi l s the
whol e batch. One bad reci pi ent spoi l s the whol e fund.
Do not be bound together wi th unbel i evers; for what partner-
shi p have ri ghteousness and l awl essness, or what fel l owshi p has
l i ght wi th darkness? Or what harmony has Chri st wi th Bel i al ,
or what has a bel i ever i n common wi th an unbel i ever? Or what
agreement has the templ e of God wi th i dol s? For we are the
templ e of the l i vi ng God; just as God sai d, ‘I wi l l dwel l i n them
and wal k among them; and I wi l l be thei r God, and they shal l
be My peopl e. Therefore, come out from thei r mi dst and be
separate,” says the Lord. ‘And do not touch what i s uncl ean;
and I wi l l wel come you. And I wi l l be a father to you, and you
shal l be sons and daughters to Me ,“ says the Lord Al mi ghty.
Therefore, havi ng these promi ses, bel oved, l et us cl eanse our-
sel ves from al l defi l ement of fl esh and spi ri t, perfecti ng hol i ness
i n the fear of God (2 Cori nthi ans 6:14-7,:1).
Concl usi on
Kathari ne Hepburn usual l y does not attend gal a fundrai s-
ers, but when Pl anned Parenthood recentl y deci ded to honor the
actress and her l ate mother for thei r outspoken support of the or-
gani zati on, she was more than wi l l i ng. Proceeds from the star-
studded di nner, pri ced at fi ve hundred to one thousand dol l ars a
ti cket, benefi ted Pl anned Parenthood’s aborti on and bi rth con-
trol programs. l ‘1
Wi th al l the ri ch and famous, the chi c and sophi sti cated, the
hi gh and the mi ghty, and the best and bri ghtest i n tow, Pl anned
Parenthood once agai n demLonstrated i ts abi l i ty to attract the
support of the very peopl e who shoul d know better. The very
peopl e who shoul d be usi ng thei r power, pri vi l ege, and presti ge
to i mpact’ the worl d for good, si de i nstead wi th the mi ni ons of
darkness.l l z
But Pl anned Parenthood l i kes them al l the better for i t.
N I N E
THE CAMERA BLINKED:
THE MEDIA LEGACY
ad captandum vul@.sl
Note that penaknts lose all propotiion. They never can kzep sane in a discussion.
l%ey will go wild on matters they are wholly unable to judge. Never do they use
one of those three phrases which keep a man stedy and balarue his mind; I mea
the words (1) A@er all it is not my busitwss. (2) T&! Tti! You don~ say so! And
(3) Credo in Unum Dewn Patrem Omn@otentem, Factorem omniurn visibilium
atqu invtiibilium; in which last, the is a powfl of gmthesis that can jam all
tha”r ana~tical dust-heap into such ajne, tight, and compact body a.s would mah=
them stare to see.
2
Hilaire Belloc
Al ways i n wanton pursui t of the new, the costl y, and the con-
spi cuous, New York Ci ty i s a paragon of haute. I roni cal l y,
though, a strol l through i ts streets al ways yi el ds a ki ng’s ransom
of Prousti an memori es as wel l .
Li ke Veni ce and Genoa, i t i s a sea ci ty. And l i ke the Veneti ans
and Genoans of ol d, i ts l eaders have al ways been eager to di spl ay
thei r weal th, pui ssance, and apl omb by bui l di ng the avante –
grand pol azzi and carnpani l i – as monuments to themsel ves.
But, they – agai n, l i ke the Veneti ans and Genoans – al so have a
fme eye for preservi ng the ephemera that defi ne bygone eras. I t
i s al most as i f, seeki ng connecti ons i n an “i nsecure country,” they
cl utch at the rel i cs of a stabl e and secure nostal gi a. I t i s al most as
i f, sti l l gropi ng for the ever-el usi ve “radi ant way,” they bel ay
agai nst the rock-sol i d certai nty of the past.
And so the vi ew of Central Park i s shared equal l y by the Ci ti -
corp Center, the Seagram Bui l di ng, and the Wal dorf-Astori a.
The crooked l i ttl e streets of Greenwi ch Vi l l age are shared
165
.
166 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
equal l y by the Bobst Li brary, the Provi ncetown Pl ayhouse, and
the Washi ngton Mews. The grand promenade down Fi fth
Avenue i s shared equal l y by the Empi re State Bui l di ng, the
Ti -ump Tower, and St. Patri ck’s Cathedral .
The ci ty’s gestal t of raw tensi on and hungry ambi ti on cal ves
i ts persona l i ke an Arcti c berg — spl i nters dri fti ng away. The ecl ec-
ti ci sm i s everywhere evi dent. I t i s a bri ght matri x of contradi c-
ti on unfol di ng across a tantrum of l ogi c and i l l ogi c, of anti qui ty
and moderni ty, of substance and i l l usi on, of objecti vi ty and bi as,
of bondage and freedom, and of honesty and decepti on.
That odd juxtaposi ti on, that al most schi zophreni c New York
yi n-yang, i s nowhere more evi dent than i n i ts mi d-town i nfor-
mati on agri busi ness. Wi th a proud l egacy dangl i ng l i ke a
medal l i on upon i ts chest, the New York medi a — whi ch i s the na-
ti onal medi a – si mul taneousl y bel i es that l egacy wi th a brash
bravado of contemporanei ty.
I n other words, i t ai n’t what i t seems to be.
Why Don’t We Know?
“Thi s ki nd of country can’t work,” says tel evi si on journal i st
Charl es Kural t, “unl ess peopl e have a rel i abl e way of fi ndi ng out
what’s goi ng on.”s
The news medi a i s supposed to be that rel i abl e source of
i nfor mati on.
But i t’s not.
And, perhaps, that i s part of the reason why thi s country
ahesn’t work very wel l ri ght now.4
Much of the i nformati on i n thi s book i s probabl y surpri si ng,
even shocki ng, to you. “Coul d thi s possi bl y be true?” you maybe
aski ng yoursel f. “I f i t i s, then why haven’t I heard i t before? Why
don’t I al ready know about i t?”
‘ The answer i s that the medi a has acted as a fi l ter, screeni ng
out most of the i nformati on that coul d “damage” groups l i ke
Pl anned Parenthood “i n the publ i c vi ew.”s I nstead of hel pi ng
peopl e fznd out what i s goi ng on, i t i s i nsuri ng that they don’t.
And won’t. And can’t.
The medi a has an agenda. I t i mposes i ts val ues on i ts au-
di ence. As Herbert Gans, renowned medi a anal yst, has argued,
“Journal i sm i s, l i ke soci ol ogy, an empi ri cal di sci pl i ne. As a
resul t, the news consi sts not onl y of the fi ndi ngs of empi ri cal
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legacy 167
i nqui ry, but al so of the concepts and methods whi ch go i nto that
i nqui ry, the assumpti ons that underl i e those concepts and
methods, and even a further set of assumpti ons, whi ch coul d
then be tested empi ri cal l y i f journal i sts had the ti me.”G
I n other words, the medi a operates accordi ng to i ts own per-
specti ves and presupposi ti ons. I t retel l s the news accordi ng to i ts
bi as, accordi ng to i ts worl dvi ew.
That, i n and of i tsel f, i s not necessari l y bad. That, i n and of
i tsel f, does not make the medi a “unrel i abl e.” Al l of us have i nes-
capabl e presupposi ti ons that make genui ne objecti vi ty y i mpossi -
bl e. We al l have worl dvi ews.
Our worl dvi ew i s si mpl y the way we l ook at thi ngs. I t i s our
perspecti ve of real i ty. I t i s the means by whi ch we i nterpret the
si tuati ons and ci rcumstances around us. Whether we know i t or
not, we have a worl dvi ew. Everyone does. Al vi n Toffl er, i n hi s
l andmark book Futur e Shock, sai d, “Every person carri es i n hi s
head a mental model of the worl d, a subjecti ve representati on of
external real i ty.”T Thi s mental model i s, he says, l i ke a gi ant fi l -
i ng cabi net. I t contai ns a sl ot for every i tem of i nformati on com-
i ng to us. I t organi zes our knowl edge and gi ves us a gri d from
whi ch to thi nk. Our mi nd i s not open and our vi ewpoi nt i s not
i mparti al . “When we thi nk, we can onl y do so because our mi nd
i s al ready fi l l ed wi th al l sorts of i deas with which to thi nk,” says
economi c phi l osopher E. F. Schumacher.g These more or l ess
fi xed i deas we thi nk wi th make up our mental model of the
worl d, our frame of reference, our presupposi ti ons — i n other
words, our worl dvi ew.
“A worl dvi ew i s a map of real i ty; author James Si re tel l s us.
“And, l i ke any map, i t may fi t what i s real l y there or i t may be
grossl y mi sl eadi ng. The map i s not the worl d i tsel f, of course,
onl y an i mage of i t, more or l ess accurate i n some pl aces, di s-
torted i n others. Sti l l , al l of us carry around such a map i n our
mental make-up, and we act on i t. Al l of our thi nki ng pre-
supposes i t. Most of our experi ence fi ts i nto i t .“9
When wri ters wri te, when journal i sts report, and when broad-
casters go on the ai r, they communi cate from the pecul i ar perspec-
ti ve of thei r own worl dvi ew. From the stori es they sel ect, to the
way they present them, from the evi dence they show, to the ti me
they afford them, newsmen not onl y sl ant the news, they make
the news. They deci de what we know. And what we don’t know.
168 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
I nvesti gati ve reporter Geral do Ri vera has sai d that objecti vi ty
%as i nvented by journal i sm school s. I t has very l i ttl e to do wi th
real l i fe.” 10
Robert Bazel l , of NBC, procl ai ms that “objecti vi ty i s a
fhl l acy. Journal i sm ahnost al ways i s about a poi nt of vi ew.”11
Ace reporter Li nda El l erbee agrees: ‘We report news, not
truth. There i s no such thi ng as objecti vi ty. Any reporter who
tel l s you he’s objecti ve i s l yi ng to you.”l z
And NBC’s seni or anal yst, I rvi ng R. Levi ne, asserts that i t i s
“the reporter who has to determi ne ul ti matel y what i s val i d and
what i s not, whose arguments are the most persuasi ve and
whose are not.”l q
There i s no such thi ng as news free of edi tori al comment. 1A
To accuse the medi a of bi as has become an al most i ndi s-
putabl e trui sm. Chri sti an medi a pi oneer Marl i n Maddoux
stated the obvi ous when he sai d that after a comprehensi ve
anal ysi s of Ameri can network news coverage, he was forced to
concl ude that:
There wasn’t a ni ckel ’s worth of di fference among the Big
Three– ABC, CBS, and NBC. The stori es were basi cal l y the
same; the bi as i n thei r coverage was the same. I t became
fri ghteni ngl y cl ear that the tel evi si on screen was domi nated by
the radi cal l eft. And opposi ng vi ews were vi rtual l y cl osed out .“1s
The reason for thi s i s actual l y qui te si mpl e: the medi a–l i ke
any other di sci pl i ne or professi on — operates accordi ng to i ts own
perspecti ves and presupposi ti ons. I t has i ts own uni que agenda.
Herbert Gans, a renowned medi a anal yst has sai d that:
Journal i sm i s, l i ke soci ol ogy, an empi ri cal di sci pl i ne. As a
resul t, the news consi sts not onl y of the fi ndi ngs of empi ri cal
i nqui ry, but al so of the concepts and methods whi ch go i nto
that i nqui ry, the assumpti ons that underl i e those concepts and ‘
methods, and even a further set of assumpti ons, whi ch coul d
then be tested empi ri cal l y i f journal i sts had the ti me.”l G
Agai n, that, i n and of i tsel f, i s not necessari l y bad. What i s
bad i s the way that the medi a sl ants the news. What i .r bad i s /zow
the medi a deci des what news becomes the news. What i s bad i s
Th Camera Blinked: The Media Leguy 169
the “unrel i abl e” perspecti ve that the medi a has. What i s bad i s
i ts worl dvi ew.
God’s condemnati on of anci ent I srael came because “thei r
ways were not Hi s ways, and thei r thoughts were not Hi s
thoughts” (I sai ah 55:8). They di d not have a worl dvi ew shaped
and i nformed by God’s Truth. I nstead, they “di d what was ri ght
i n thei r own eyes” (Judges 21:25).
Si mi l arl y, the news medi a today i s dri ven by a worl dvi ew
that i s enti rel y al i en to the Bi bl i cal standards of truth, justi ce,
mercy, and i ntegri ty. I ts ways are not Hi s ways, and i ts thoughts
are not Hi s thoughts. I nstead, i t does what i s ri ght i n i ts own eyes.
And, havi ng eaten from the forbi dden tree, i t has become l i ke a
god i n i ts own si ght, knowi ng good and evi l (Genesi s 3:5, 22).
Accordi ng to the now famous study of the medi a conducted
by three pol i ti cal sci enti sts, Li nda Li chter, Robert Li chter, and
Stanl ey Rothman, the overwhel mi ng majori ty of newsmen i n
major medi a outl ets are hosti l e to Bi bl i cal val ues. 17 Onl y ei ght
percent are regul ar church-goers. 18 Ei ghty percent bel i eve that
homosexual i ty i s a perfectl y acceptabl e al ternati ve l i festyl e. 19
Ei ghty-four percent sai d that they di d not have strong aversi ons ~
to adul tery.zo Ni nety-two percent oppose tradi ti onal fami l y
structures. 21 And a ful l ni nety-seven percent take a cl ear pro-
aborti on stand. **
Meanwhi l e, nearl y seventy percent endorse the i dea that the
medi a shoul d acti vel y promote i ts i deas, val ues, and perspecti ves. 23
As Frank Schaeffer has argued:
Wi th such wi despread agreement about basi c i ssues, whi ch can
onl y stem from the same phi l osophi c outl ook, i t hardl y takes a
conspi racy for the medi a machi ne to speak wi th one smother-
i ng voi ce .24
Even i f we had not been tol d that the medi a was overwhel m-
i ngl y pro-aborti on,*s we mi ght have guessed i t — after al l , i f i t
l ooks l i ke a duck, wal ks l i ke a duck, and quacks l i ke a duck, i t
probabl y i s a duck.
Thus, as the Los Angeks Ti mes r epor ted:
I t’s not surpri si ng that some aborti on-ri ghts acti vi sts woul d see
journal i sts as thei r natural al l i es. Most major newspapem support
170 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
aborti on ri ghts on thei r edi tori al pages, and two major medi a
studi es have shown that ei ghty to ni nety percent of U. S. journal -
i sts personal l y favor aborti on ri ghts. Moreover some reporters
parti ci pated i n a bi g aborti on ri ghts march i n Washi ngton l ast
year, and the Ameri can Newspaper Gui l d, the uni on that repre-
sents news and edi tori al empl oyees at many major papers, has
offi ci al l y endorsed freedom of choi ce i n aborti on deci si ons. 26
The arti cl e went on to assert:
Responsi bl e journal i sts do try to be fai r, and many charges of
bi as i n aborti on coverage are not val i d. But carefi d exami nati on
of stori es publ i shed and broadcast reveal s scores of exampl es,
l arge and smal l , that can onl y be characteri zed as unfai r to the
opponents of aborti on, ei ther i n content, tone, choi ce of l an-
guage, or promi nence of pl ay.27
The fact i s, the medi a’s Mi ni Vani l l i l i p-synchi ng of the
Pl anned Parenthood party l i ne provi des stark evi dence that i t
has tossed any sembl ance of i mparti al i ty or objecti vi ty to the
four wi nds.
But that i s not the most di sturbi ng aspect of the medi a’s cov-
erage of Pl anned Parenthood. Bi as i s a fai rl y strai ghtforward
vi ce. What i s even more i nsi di ous than an absence of factual
objecti vi ty y i s an absence of professi onal i ntegri ty — journal i sts
have been ventri l oqui sts i nstead of orators.
The essence of sci ence i s preci si on. The essence of senti ment
i s presumpti on. Because the medi a has di ffi cul ty di sti ngui shi ng
one from the other, i t i s both preci se and presumptuous — but
about exactl y the wrong thi ngs. When i t comes to thei r coverage
of Margaret Sanger’s Eugeni c dystopi ani am, the medi a has been
very sci enti fi c and soci ol ogi cal about senti mental thi ngs, but
very senti mental about sci entfi c and soci ol ogi cal thi ngs.
They have, i n short, not checked the facts, not veri fi ed the
data, and not understood the i ssue. They have i nvari abl y taken
the easy way out-by retrofi tti ng news rel eases from pro-aborti on
l obbyi sts and publ i ci sts and si mpl y addi ng thei r byl i ne.
I nstead of worki ng harder, they shouted l ouder. I nstead of
stri vi ng for professi onal excel l ence, they have settl ed for profes-
si onal expedi ency. I nstead of attempti ng to grasp thei r subject
matter, they have grasped at straws — and straw men.
That ki nd of dul l di shonesty i s ei ther a si gn of faul ty di sci -
pl i ne or faul ty ethi cs – or maybe both.
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legacy 171
The Seven Deadl y Si nners
Al ong wi th the “corporati zati on” of Ameri can cul ture i n gen-
eral has come the “corporati zati on” of the medi a i n parti cul ar.z*
Amazi ngl y, al most hal f of the nati onal news and i nformati on
outl ets are concentrated i n the hands of just seven corporate
monol i ths: CBS, RCA, CapCi ti es, the i ’Vew York Ti mes, the
Wi i .dzi ngton Post, Gannett, and Ti me-Li fe.z9 And thi s despi te the
expl osi ve growth i n recent years of al ternati ve network:, cabl e
systems, and satel l i te technol ogy.s”
Al l seven of these communi cati ons monopol i es have mai n-
tai ned a consi stent pro-aborti on edi tori al pol i cy over the years.sl
Thei r stri ct advocacy of Pl anned Parenthood’s agenda has be-
come as much a hal l mark of thei r profi l e as thei r sl i ck promo-
ti ons and hi gh-tech i magery.
CBS. Founded i n 1928 by Wi l l i am Pal ey, the Col umbi a
Broadcasti ng System operates one of the country’s three major
commerci al tel evi si on and radi o networks. 32 Wi th two hundred-
si xteen affi l i ated tel evi si on stati ons and four hundred twenty-
ei ght affi l i ated radi o stati ons, i t i s abl e to spread i ts message to
al l fi fty states, reachi ng as much as ni nety-si x percent of the
Uni ted states popul ati on.ss
I n addi ti on to that, CBS, i n partnershi p wi th Sony, i s the
worl d’s l argest producer, manufacturer, and marketer of re-
corded musi c. 3A I t makes and di stri butes computer software and
on-l i ne databases.ss I t publ i shes magazi nes and books for edu-
cati onal , consumer, and professi onal markets. 36 I t publ i shes
musi c, produces musi c vi deos, devel ops and produces moti on
pi ctures, makes and di stri butes vi deocassettes, programs cabl e
tel evi si on, and devel ops vi deotext servi ces. 37 I f i t has to do wi th
communi cati ons, CBS i s i n i t. And i t i s i n i t wi th a vengeance.
Sadl y, thi s vast power and i nfl uence has been marshal ed to
Pl anned Parenthood’s cause.ss Besi des the consi stentl y sl anted
newscasts by the l i kes of Wal ter Cronki te and Dani el Rather,
and documentari es by Mi ke Wal l ace and Ed Bradl ey, CBS has
even used pri me-ti me entertai nment programmi ng to bol ster i ts
propaganda predi l ecti on.sg Forget “fami l y val ues.” CBS i s si mpl y
not i nterested.
RCA. One of the great el ectroni cs pi oneers, RCA i s, today,
a formi dabl e gl obal communi cati ons gi ant. Besi des engagi ng i n
172 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
the research, manufacture, di stri buti on, sal e, l ease, and servi c-
i ng of everythi ng from tel evi si on recei vers to el ectro-opti c
devi ces, from vi deo-cassette equi pment to audi o records, tapes,
and CDs, and from commerci al communi cati ons satel l i tes to
mi l i tary el ectroni c hardware, the company operates the NBC
network, wi th two hundred affi l i ated tel evi si on stati ons and more
than fi ve hundred radi o stati ons.Ac’ I n addi ti on to that, the com-
pany operates a system of satel l i te and submari ne cabl e ci rcui ts
l i nki ng the conti nental Uni ted States di rectl y wi th numerous
forei gn countri es and overseas poi nts.41 I t offers tel ex servi ces,
data transmi ssi on programs, tel egram transmi ssal s, tel epri nter
ci rcui ts, and hi gh speed mul ti -poi nt l i ne data communi cati ons
servi ces for termi nal communi cati on and poi nt-to-poi nt l i nes to
host computers.AZ
For years, the NBC network has domi nated radi o and tel evi -
si on broadcasti ng.4s I t has more often than not control l ed the
ai rwaves and di ctated programmi ng fashi ons.AA And, not sur-
pri si ngl y, i t has i mposed i ts l efti st perspecti ve on vi rtual l y every-
thi ng that i t broadcasts.As News reporti ng under the aegesi s of
Tom Brokaw has constantl y rei nforced the Pl anned Parenthood
party l i ne.qG I ts entertai nment programmi ng has fal l en i n l i ne as
wel l wi th rabi d pro-aborti on pi eces profi l ed on numerous pri me-
ti me si tcoms and dramati c seri es.AT Duri ng the 1992 el ecti ons,
when hi s network’s cheerl eadi ng for the pro-aborti on Demo-
crati c ti cket became obvi ous to even the most epi stemol ogi cal l y
unconsci ous observer, Brokaw qui pped, “Bi as, l i ke beauty, i s i n
the eye of the behol der.”As But i t has gotten so bad that now, we
al l behol d i t.
Ca@’i ti e.s. For many years, ABC was the stepchi l d of nati onal
radi o and tel evi si on broadcasti ng. 49 A di stant thi rd i n rati ngs,
earni ngs, and affi l i ates throughout the si xti es and seventi es, the
network perpetual l y l agged behi nd CBS and NBC, exerti ng l i ttl e
i nfl uence i n ei ther news or entertai nment. But, then, a seri es of
dramati c events i n the ei ghti es, i ncl udi ng a merger wi th the vast
Capi tal Ci ti es Communi cati ons Group and a bol d and i nnovati ve
programmi ng twi st, catapul ted the network i nto the number one
posi ti on.s” I t grew to more than two hundred affi l i ated tel evi si on
stati ons and nearl y two thousand ai l i l i ated radi o stati ons. 51
Wi th i ts new-found strength, the company began to bui l d i ts
own communi cati ons empi re. I t i nvested i n cabl e and subscri pti on
The Camera Blinked: Tb Media Legmy 173
tel evi si on programmi ng, buyi ng ESPN, the Arts and Entertai n-
ment Network, and Li feti me.sz I t began publ i shi ng ni ne bi g-ci ty
dai l y newspapers and forty smal l er communi ty papers.ss I t
branched out i nto home vi deo markets, magazi ne publ i shi ng,
i nsti tuti onal i nvesti ng, and musi c recordi ng, di stri buti on, and
sal es.sA For a ti me, i t even owned one of the worl d’s l argest
Chri sti an publ i shi ng compani es, i n an attempt to cash i n on that
market as wel l . 55
Li ke the other networks, though, ABC has used i ts posi ti on
to catechi ze i ts audi ences wi th the Pl anned Parenthood message. 56
I n news reports by Sam Donal dson and Peter Jenni ngs, and
documentari es by Hugh Downs and Barbara Wal ters, the pro-
aborti on message has been dri ven home agai n and agai n.5T And
al though i ts entertai nment programmi ng has tended to be un-
consci ous of soci al obl i gati ons, pol i ti cal i deol ogi es, or moral con-
sequences —focusi ng al most excl usi vel y on the Ni el sen rati ngs –
several shows have regul arl y portrayed a pro-aborti on spi ri t .5*
T/ze New York Ti mes. Al though not even the best selling paper
i n New York Ci ty, the Ti mes i s far and away the most i nzuenti al
newspaper i n the country, perhaps i n the worl d.sg Founded i n
1851, the venerabl e ol d publ i shi ng concern now reaches more than
a mi l l i on homes a day, wi th a worl dwi de di stri buti on system .GO
I n addi ti on, i t owns and operates ei ghteen other dai l y and
weekl y papers throughout the Uni ted States .61 I t publ i shes fi ve
major magazi nes, i ncl udi ng l?am.i~ Circle, the l argest-sel l i ng
women’s magazi ne i n the country.Gz I t runs three tel evi si on sta-
ti ons and i s a major force i n radi o broadcasti ng.Gs I t operates i ts
own news servi ce whi ch has grown to be the l eadi ng suppl emental
news wi re i n the country, di stri buti ng materi al from the Ti mes
to more than fi ve hundred dependent publ i cati ons around the
gl obe.Gq I t owns two publ i shi ng compani es, an i nforrhati on bank,
an edi tori al syndi cate, two compani es that manufacture audi o-
vi sual materi al s for school s, col l eges, and uni versi ti es, a mi cro-
fi l m processor and di stri butor, and four of the worl d’s l argest
paper mi l l s.Gs As Bernard Nathanson has sai d: “Thi s i s not exactl y
your average Mom ‘n Pop country weekl y that James Stewart
takes over when he resi ~s i n a sancti moni ous huff from the cor-
rupt Bi g Ci~ Dai@ and turns the weekl y i nto the rural equi val ent
of the Manchester Guardian after three weeks of Hercul ean effort
and the devoted and adori ng efforts of June Al l yson.”GG
174 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Over the years, the i Vew fi nk Ti mes, and i ts vari ous anci l l ary
organs, has been the pri mary forum used by Pl anned Parent-
hood to spread i ts merci l ess message.@ Vi rtual l y every new
campai gn, every new strategy, every new rhetori cal pl oy, and
every new emphasi s has been l aunched i n i ts pages.GB Ful l -page
adverti sements, op-ed arti cl es, feature stori es, edi tori al car-
toons, l i terature revi ews, publ i c servi ce announcements, and
opi ni on page commentary have been scrupul ousl y expl oi ted for
the cause.Gg
The Wmhi ngtm Pmt. Li ke the New fi rk Times, the pri vatel y-
hel d Wmhi ngtm Post i s a communi cati ons gi ant, wi th annual
sal es of al most $600 mi l l i on and more than fi ve thousand em-
pl oyees. TO Besi des i ts Capi tol Hi l l fl agshi p, i t owns three news-
papers, i ncl udi ng the I nternational Herald Tn”bune.71 I t operates
tel evi si on stati ons i n several major markets.’z I t owns i ts own
paper mi l l and a newspri nt manufacturi ng company.7s Most i m-
portantl y, though, i t publ i shes one of the two most i nfl uenti al
news magazi nes i n the worl d: Newsweek.
Both the Post and Newsweek steered fai rl y cl ear of the aborti on
i ssue throughout the si xti es. 7A Wi th onl y a few obl i gatory reports
on vari ous court cases and medi cal devel opments, the i ssue was
otherwi se i gnored. 75 But, then, wi th the dawni ng of the seventi es,
they al l i ed themsel ves unreservedl y wi th Pl anned Parenthood.TG
They began to l aud the heroi cs of pro-aborti on advocates as
‘humane and compassi onate” and to deni grate pro-l i fers as rabi d
“mi ssi onari es” and “crusaders .“TT By the ni neti es, both publ i ca-
ti ons had become overtl y pro-aborti on and anti -Chri sti an.Ts
Gannett. The nati on’s l argest newspaper chai n, wi th some
ei ghty-ei ght dai l y newspapers, was founded i n 1906 by an up-
state New York entrepreneur, Frank Gannett .79 By the ti me he
di ed i n 1957, he had acqui red twenty-three very profi tabl e smal l -
town papers i n fi ve states .80 Hi s successors bui l t the company
from that smal l base i nto an i nternati onal phenomenon. Today,
the company’s l ocal newspapers have a combi ned ci rcul ati on of
more than si x mi l l i on copi es a day.sl I ts sharehol ders have en-
joyed ei ghty-two consecuti ve quarterl y earni ngs gai ns – more
than twenty years of uni nterrupted growth i n profi ts.sz I t owns
thi rty-two pri nt si tes besi des i ts ei ghty-ei ght l ocal news faci l i ti es,
i ncl udi ng one i n Swi tzerl and and another i n Si ngapore.ss I t has
seven tel evi si on stati ons and twel ve radi o stati ons. 84 And i t runs
The Canun-a Blinked: The Media Legmy 175
the l argest outdoor adverti si ng and bi l l board company i n North
Ar ner i ca.85 But i ts greatest asset i s USA Today, the phenomenal l y
popul ar nati onal newspaper known for i ts bri ght col ors, short ar-
ti cl es, breezy, upbeat styl e, and TV-shaped di spensers. Si nce i t
was l aunched on September 15, 1982, USA Today has expl oded
onto the Ameri can scene, attracti ng nearl y fi ve mi l l i on readers a
day, more than any other newspaper i n hi story.sG
Even though Gannett has become a new and powerful pres- ‘
ence i n worl dwi de communi cati ons, i t has not carved for i tsel f a
uni que edi tori al ni che. Thus, despi te i ts attempt to produce
news wi th “an unrel enti ng cheerful ness” and a “journal i sm of
hope: USA Today, and the other Gannett outl ets, have toed the
Pl anned Parenthood l i ne.s7 The mi l i tant pro-aborti on tack of
Gannett’s papers have, at ti mes, even surpri sed Pl anned Parent-
hood wi th thei r vehemence and i ntol erance.ss
Time-Lije. Wi th annual sal es of nearl y three bi l l i on dol l ars,
and more than 25,000 empl oyees, Ti me-Li fe i s the bi ggest, ri ch-
est, and most powerful of al l the communi cati ons monol i ths .89
I t owns and operates si x magazi nes, i ncl udi ng Lije, Fortune,
Money, People, Sports I llustrated, and i ts fl agshi p, Time.go I t runs
the Book-of-the-Month Cl ub and the Qual i ty Paperback Book
Cl ub.gl I ts other publ i shi ng ventures i ncl ude the Li ttl e, Brown,
and Company, the New York Graphi cs Soci ety, the St. Paul
Pi oneer Press, and the Angel i na Free Press.gz I t operates the
Home Box Offi ce cabl e network, as wal l as forty-one l ocal cabl e
TV compani es.gs I t has a control l i ng i nterest i n several trans-
portati on busi nesses, mortgage compani es, i nsurance concerns,
steel mi l l s, musi c publ i shers, real estate agenci es, hotel chai ns,
and computer software manufacturers. 9*
Time fi rst covered the aborti on i ssue i n 1965 wi th an openl y
sympatheti c arti cl e i n the medi ci ne secti on.gs But that was onl y a
hi nt of thi ngs to come. By 1967, i t had burst out of the cl oset and
decl ared i tsel f “unequi vocal l y i n favor of the repeal of restri cti ve
aborti on l aws .“9G From that day forward, Time has remai ned
resol utel y i n the Pl anned Parenthood vanguard wi th the rest of
the mega-press.
97
Frank Schaeffer has sai d: “Gi ven the concentrati on of the
medi a’s power i n rel ati vel y few hands, and thei r shared val ues,
176 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i t’s nearl y i mpossi bl e to avoi d the concl usi on that the medi a rep-
resents a monol i thi c, unel ected force i n publ i c l i fe: a sel f-
-assured, sel f-perpetuati ng el i te that rel i shes i ts power and woul d
have more.”98
On the Offensi ve
The cooperati on between the seven major medi a monopol i es
and Pl anned Parenthood was vi vi dl y i l l ustrated i n a seri es of co-
ordi nated stori es duri ng the ei ghteen months between October
1985 and March 1987 and agai n duri ng the summer of 1992.99
Concerned that the grassroots pro-l i fe movement was at l ast
gai ni ng an upper hand i n the aborti on battl e, Pl anned Parent-
hood put together a wel l -orchestrated, heavi l y-fi nanced, no-hol ds-
barred, negati ve publ i c rel ati ons campai gn. 10° The campai gn
was ai med at the more than three thousand counsel i ng centers
establ i shed by pro-l i fers i n order to offer women, i n the mi dst of
cri si s pregnanci es, aborti on al ternati ves and genui ne hel p. 101
The centers, whi ch were typi cal l y smal l , poorl y fi nanced, and
run by vol unteers, apparentl y had begun to substanti al l y cut
i nto the aborti on trade. I “z But, perhaps more i mportantl y, they
had al so begun to steal Pl anned Parenthood’s thunder. The cen-
ters were recei vi ng favorabl e publ i ci ty from many quarters for
thei r “hel pful contri buti ons to the process of devel opi ng i nformed
choi ce on aborti on.’’l os
Pl anned Parenthood argued that many women were maki ng
.
appoi ntments at the al ternati ve centers thi nki ng that they were
actual l y aborti on cl i ni cs. From ti me to ti me the vol unteers at a
few of the centers woul d al l ow that i l l usi on to persi st i n the hopes
of gai ni ng a fai r heari ng on the facts of fetal devel opment and
the ri sks of aborti on procedures. Al though such tacti cs were ex-
tremel y few and far between, Pl anned Parenthood saw i n them a
gol den opportuni ty. 10A
Amy Sutni ck, a publ i c i nformati on associ ate for Pl anned
Parenthood of New York Ci ty, wrote several news rel eases and
put together a press packet l abel i ng the al ternati ve centers as
“bogus” and “decepti ve; l uri ng cl i ents i n by “masqueradi ng< as
aborti on cl i ni cs and then “terrori zi ng” them wi th “horror stori es,”
“gory photographs; and “brai nwashi ng techni ques.”l os
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legacy 177
Sutni ck approached a sympatheti c reporter at the New York
tabl oi d, the Dai~ News, wi th her packet and a proposal for a
story. The reporter took the assi gnment and publ i shed a pi ece
wri tten al ong the l i nes of Sutni ck’s news rel eases, often even
usi ng the same wordi ng. I OG
Wi th the Dai~ News arti cl e now i n hand, Sutni ck began to
cal l on other pro-aborti on journal i sts i n the ci ty. Before l ong, she
was abl e to pl ace si mi l ar stori es on vi rtual l y every New York
tel evi si on stati on, i ncl udi ng the network affi l i ates, and i n the
other New York newspapers. 107
Soon the strategy began to snowbal l . Sutni ck sent her grow-
i ng pi l e of cl i ppi ngs al ong wi th her press packet to Pl anned
Parenthood af%.l i ates, cl i ni cs, and chapters around the country
so that they coul d contact thei r l ocal medi a outl ets. Meanwhi l e,
she al so contacted al l the vari ous women’s magazi nes.
Hundreds of arti cl es, stori es, edi tori al s, profi l es, and news
features resul ted.1°8 From Vogue, Glamour, and Cosmopolitan to the
Detroit Free Press, the Houston Chronicle, and the New York Times,
Pl anned Parenthood’s smear campai gn confronted consumer
audi ences everywhere. l I Jg
But the bi g break came when both Newsweek and USA Today
transl ated Sutni ck’s now-stuffed portfol i o i nto major stori es. 110
The author of the two USA Today pi eces, enti tl ed “Bogus
Aborti on Cl i ni cs Draw Legal Fi re” and “Anti -Aborti oni sts Mas-
querade as Cl i ni cs,” l ater admi tted that she had not even vi si ted
any of the al ternati ve centers. 111 The onl y women she tal ked
to were provi ded by Pl anned Parenthood. 112 And a ful l quar-
ter of the materi al was di rect quotati on and paraphrase from
Sutni ck. 113
The Newsweek story was bui l t around dozens of i ndepend-
entl y veri fi ed news reports from al l across the country — actual l y,
the i ncestual progeny of Sutni ck’s di l i gent l abors. 114 I t descri bed
the pro-l i fe vol unteers worki ng i n the al ternati ve centers as
“radi cal ” and “mi l i tant ,“ but “cl ever” “fundamental i sts” who used
“scare tacti cs” i n order to “jol t” women out of the aborti on deci -
si on. 115 Enti tl ed “Cl i ni cs of Decepti on: Pro-Li fers Set Up Shop,”
the arti cl e’s synergi sm wi th Pl anned Parenthood’s campai gn was
perfectl y choreographed.
178 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Sutni ck’s sl ei ght-of-hand tri ck tri ggered an aval anche of con-
cern, sti mul ated a bevy of l awsui ts, and manufactured a major
news event.
RU-Ki ddi ng?
Joseph Schumpter once asserted, ‘the fi rst thi ng a man wi l l
do for hi s i deal s i s l i e.”l l G The medi a’s Homeri c trumpeti ng of
the vi rtues of the French aborti on drug RU-486 i s cl ear evi dence
that Schumpter was ri ght.
Speaki ng at an i mportant contracepti ve technol ogi es con-
ference recentl y, Pl anned Parenthood’s RU-486 strategi st,
Mari e Bass, crowed that “press coverage real l y i s good, i f you
thi nk about i t – someti mes I worry that i t’s al most too good.’
The major medi a outl ets, she confi ded, had, for the most part,
enti rel y mi sunderstood the safety, compl exi ty, and mechani sm
of the drug. And i roni cal l y, that was good news. Bass sai d she
‘al most fel t l i ke cel ebr ati ng.n117
She had every ri ght to. That happy mi sunderstandi ng, after
al l , was due i n great part to her own expert effort to shape and
coordi nate press coverage of the drug.
I n l ate 1988, her company, Bass & Howes, a hi gh-powered
Washi ngton, D. C., l obbyi ng fi rm – spun off from Pl anned Parent-
hood i n the same way that the Al an Guttmacher I nsti tute was –
formed the Reproducti ve Heal th Technol ogi es Project. A l oose
coal i ti on of i nternati onal pro-aborti on organi zati ons, i t acts as
a cl eari nghouse for i nformati on on RU-486 and as the command
center for the’ di ssemi nati on of that i nformati on to the medi a.
Mari e Bass was at one ti me the pol i ti cal di rector of the Nati onal
Aborti on Ri ghts Acti on League – and thus cl osel y al l i ed wi th
Pl anned Parenthood. Her partner, Joanne Howes, was actual l y
a Pl anned Parenthood staffer — servi ng as the organi zati on’s
chi ef l obbyi st i n Washi ngton. Together they brought excel l ent
credenti al s to the task of sani ti zi ng the publ i c percepti on of
pharmaceuti cal chi l d-ki l l i ng.
Earl y on, they devel oped a fi ve-fol d strategy to hasten medi a
acceptance of RU-486:
. Emphasi ze the possi bi l i ty that the drug coul d very wel l end the
whol e publ i c aborti on struggl e by maki ng cl i ni c protests obsol ete;
The Camera Blinked: The Media L.egmy 179
. Emphasi ze the dearth of other contracepti ve opti ons avai l -
abl e — parti cul arl y i n compari son wi th what i s avai l abl e i n
other parts of the worl d;
. Emphasi ze the i ssues of pri vacy, ease, safety, choi ce, and
freedom, rather than of aborti on and pol i ti cs;
. Emphasi ze the possi bi l i ty of other medi cal benefi ts of the drug,
such as treatment of breast cancer and Cushi ng’s Syndrome;
. Emphasi ze the threat to the freedom of ongoi ng medi cal
research that a rejecti on of the drug mi ght bri ng. 1 i s
Apparentl y, someti me thereafter, Bass and Howes began to
suppl y key medi a contacts wi th a seri es of careful l y devel oped
press ki ts hi ghl i ghti ng each emphasi s. The ki ts i ncl uded sampl e
stori es, charts, graphs, photos, and i ntervi ews.
Charl es Durran, a reporter for a major dai l y newspaper i n
the Mi dwest tol d me: “Those press ki ts were i mpressi ve. I n fact,
they were a l azy reporter’s gol d mi ne. Everythi ng you needed for
a real l y fantasti c story — or seri es of stori es — was ri ght there at
your fi ngerti ps. I don’t thi nk I ’ve ever seen anythi ng l i ke i t .“
Before l ong, stori es began appeari ng i n newspapers and
magazi nes al l over the U.S. and Bri tai n — many of them were
rumored to bear a stri ki ng resembl ance to the materi al s i n the
press ki ts, whi l e some were copi ed verbati m. 119
Ti ne, Newsweek, The Economist, and vi rtual l y every major
dai l y newspaper began to trumpet the fi ve emphases that Bass
and Howes had outl i ned. As i f on cue, they quoted the vari ous
tenets of the credo wi thout a hi nt of i ncredul i ty.
They cl ai med the drug was safe. I z” They cl ai med i t was easy
to use. 121 They cl ai med i t coul d short ci rcui t al l the pol i ti cal
ani mosi ty. 122 They cl ai med i t coul d cure al l manner of other
i l l s. 123 They cl ai med i t was a l i tmus test for sci enti fi c freedom. 12A
And they cl ai med i t was merel y an advanced contracepti ve –
and everybody knows that onl y rel i gi ous cranks and i mpotent
curmudgeons coul d possi bl y be agai nst that. 125
Of course, such fi cti ons rank ri ght up there wi th El vi s si ghti ngs,
Marti an l andi ngs, Beatl es reuni ons, and Gi nsu kni fe commerci -
al s. 126 But the tragedy i s not just that the stori es were untrue
but that they were cri bbed from someone el se’s scri pt. The medi a
180 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i s so l ame and hel pl ess i n thi s matter that i t cannot even makeup
i ts own l i es — i t i s forced to borrow them from others. The onl y
thi ng worse than getti ng a fai l i ng grade on an exam i s cheati ng
to do i t.
Such poor deportment i s even beneath hypocri sy. After al l ,
‘ hypocri sy i s the homage whi ch error pays to truth. But uni n-
formed sl oth pays homage to no one and no thi ng.
Such power shoul d not be taken l i ghtl y. I t col ors everythi ng
i t touches. And when that power i s caval i erl y couched i n sl ug-
gardl y bamboozl ery i t i s al l the more fri ghteni ng:
When pri de comes, then comes shame; but wi th the humbl e
i s wi sdom. The i ntegri ty of the upri ght wi l l gui de them, but
the perversi ty of the unfai thful wi l l ul ti matel y destroy them
(Proverbs 11:2-3).
News and Truth
The damage i nfl i cted by the machi nati ons of Mari e Bass and
Amy Sutni ck has been tremendous. 127 The momentum that pro-
l i fe forces have gai ned over several years of di l i gent work and
compassi onate care has al most i mmedi atel y been undermi ned. 128
And Pl anned Parenthood and i ts chi l d-ki l l i ng cohorts have thus
been abl e to embezzl e the cul tural moral hi gh ground.
The reason for thi s i s that the medi a, by the sheer force of i ts
smotheri ng domi nance, has successful ~y erased the di sti ncti on
between news and truth.
More than hal f a century ago, Wal ter Li ppman, the god-
father of modern journal i sm, argued that “the functi on of news i s
to si gnal i ze an event; the functi on of truth i s to bri ng to l i ght hi d-
den facts, to set them i nto rel ati on wi th each other and make a
pi cture of real i ty on whi ch men can act .=129 He concl uded that i f
the publ i c requi red “a more truthful i nterpretati on of the worl d
they l i ved i n, they woul d have to depend on i nsti tuti ons other
than the press.”1~
But we have not depended on other i nsti tuti ons. We have ac-
cepted the medi a’s news as truth. Thus, i t has ceased to functi on
as a news reporter and has become, i nstead, a news maker, or ,
more to the poi nt, a truth maker. I n a very real sense, the medi a
actual l y defi nes our real i ty.
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legaqv 181
James H[tchcock, professor of hi story at St. Loui s Uni versi ty,
has sai d:
What i s presented i n the medi a, and the way i n whi ch i t i s
presented, are for many peopl e the equi val ent of what i s real .
By determi ni ng what i deas wi l l be di scussed i n publ i c, the
medi a determi nes whi ch i deas are to be consi dered respectabl e,
rati onal , and true. Those excl uded from di scussi on, or treated
onl y i n a negati ve way, are conversel y defi ned as di sreputabl e,
i rrati onal , and fal se. The medi a has the power al most to confer
exi stence i tsel f. Unl ess a bel i ef or an i nsti tuti on recei ves some
recogni ti on, i t does not exi st. Even those who know that the medi a
i s fundamental l y hosti l e to thei r val ues nonethel ess court medi a
recogni ti on as a way of achi evi ng status i n the publ i c eye. 131
From the medi a we di scover what i s i mportant and what i s
not. We l earn what i s tragi c and what i s heroi c, what i s com-
mendabl e and what i s di shonorabl e, what i s sober and what i s
humorous. 132 We l earn how to dress, what to eat and dri nk, and
what ki nd of car to dri ve. And, of course, we l earn how we
shoul d thi nk about publ i c i ssues, how we shoul d react to per-
sonal cri ses, and how we shoul d l i ve our l i ves. 133
I n hi s scathi ng cri ti que of ethi cs i n journal i sm, Tb News at
Any Cost, Tom Gol dstei n suggests that not onl y are reporters the
‘ki ngmakers” and %ngbre+ers” of our day, they are the “unac-
knowl edged l egi sl ators” of our none-too-pl ural i sti c soci ety.l s4
They shape cul tural mores, he says, ti ect pol i ti cal contests,
create the parameters of publ i c i ssues, unvei l hi dden truths —
whether true or not — and di ctate the soci al agenda, al l on a two-
hour deadl i ne! They functi on not onl y as the judge, jury, and
executi oner i n the courtroom drama of l i fe, but al so as both pub-
l i c defender and cri mi nal prosecutor. 135
Such power shoul d not be taken l i ghtl y. I t col ors everythi ng
i t touches.
When Karen Denney fi rst began to see the news reports and
the arti cl es deni grati ng the pro-l i fe cause, she si mpl y shrugged
them off as just one more seri es of pro-aborti on attacks on the
truth. As a vol unteer counsel or at an al ternati ve center, she ,had
seen any number of medi a di storti ons and moral ti rades ai med
at her work. “At the start, i t seemed l i ke i t was just the same ol d
propaganda,’ she sai d.
182 G RAND I L L USI ONS
But when the reports persi sted and even i ntensi fi ed, Karen
began to have seri ous doubts. When she saw the arti cl e i n News-
week, those doubts became a ful l -fl edged cri si s of confi dence. “1
just began to wonder i f I ’d gotten mysel f i nvol ved i n some sort of
fri nge group,” she sai d. “I began to thi nk that we were al l just a
bunch of kooks or somethi ng. I began to questi on al l my pre-
supposi ti ons. I was depressed for days. I t was l i ke there was an
emoti onal and theol ogi cal and i ntel l ectual tug-of-war goi ng on
i nsi de me. I di dn’t want l ast ni ght’s newscast or l ast week’s news
magazi ne to determi ne truth and error for me, but i t was hard to
overcome the feel i ng that we pro-l i fers were fl yi ng i n the face of
everythi ng reasonabl e, sensi bl e, sane, and normal .”
Fortunatel y, Karen had the emoti onal stami na and the i ntel -
l ectual honesty to weather the storm of confusi on and exami ne
the facts rati onal l y. “I fi nal l y settl ed down and reconci l ed the
whol e thi ng,” she sai d. “I n the end, I was thankful that I ’d gone
through i t al l . I came away wi th a new understandi ng of the power
and i nfl uence of the medi a. And I came away wi th a whol e new
commi tment to stand for the truth that sets us al l free .“
Sadl y, very few peopl e have the i ncl i nati on or the determi na-
ti on to wrestl e wi th the i ssues as Karen Denney di d. And so they
take the medi a’s versi on of real i ty at face val ue.
Very few peopl e have the ti me, the resources, or the abi l i ty
to ferret out the facts that chal l enge the medi a’s versi on of real i ty.
Dozens of i ssues coul d be ci ted to i l l ustrate thi s:
The Bi rth Dearth. The medi a has i ncessantl y harped on the
dangers of the “popul ati on expl osi on” for more than a quarter-
century.l sG Somehow, though, i t has fai l ed to report that al l of i ts
earl i er esti mates have proven to be utterl y erroneous. 137 Some-
how i t has fai l ed to report that, i nstead of faci ng a “popul ati on
expl osi on ,“ we are now faci ng a “bi rth dearth .“ 138 There i s, i n-
deed, a “popul ati on cri si s,” but, i nstead of havi ng “too many peo-
pl e,” the cri si s i s that we don’t have enough. l ag
I f the medi a refuses to report the facts, i f i t conti nues to
bol ster i ts al ternate ‘real i ty: how can peopl e ewr know the truth?
The Chi nese Holocaust. Wowed and enamored wi th the “new”
Chi na, the medi a has somehow overl ooked one of the most i n-
si di ous massacres i n man’s l ong and turbul ent hi story. 140 I n i ts
few obl i gatory passi ng menti ons of the Communi st government’s
coerci ve aborti on and i nfanti ci de programs, the medi a has, at
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legay 183
best, mumbl ed i ncoherentl y about the “harsh necessi ti es” of
reduci ng the country’s burgeoni ng bi rth rate. 141 Hardl y the ki nd
of reporti ng you’d expect of a genoci de that cl ai ms as many as
fi fty mi l l i on l i ves every year, i s i t? 142
I f the medi a refuses to report the facts, i f i t conti nues to
bol ster i ts al ternate “real i ty~ how can peopl e ever know the truth?
Post-Abortion Syndrome. The medi a has posed i tsel f as a
champi on of women’s ri ghts, as an advocate of women’s
i ssues. 143 Somehow, though, i t has fai l ed to report the fact that a
mujority of women who undergo aborti ons suffer si gni fi cant psy-
chol ogi cal di stress. 144 One study showed that si xty-two percent
had become “sui ci dal ” fol l owi ng the procedure, twenty percent
had actual l y made attempts, thi rty percent began dri nki ng
heavi l y, forty percent experi enced ni ghtmares, and twenty per-
cent had undergone a “nervous breakdown .“ 145 And yet, the
most we hear from the medi a i s that women are “ambi val ent”
towards aborti on. 146
I f the medi a refuses to report the facts, i f i t conti nues to
bol ster i ts al ternate “real i ty; how can peopl e ever know the truth?
Fetal Harvesting. The horrors of Nazi Germany are consi st-
entl y vi l i fi ed by the medi a, even today. 147 Somehow, though, i t
has fai l ed to report that the very ki nds of atroci ti es we roundl y
condemn Hi tl er’s doctors for are today practi ced routi nel y by
upstandi ng physi ci ans and researchers i n Ameri ca’s hospi tal s
and uni versi ti es. 148 Babi es that survi ve aborti ons are subjected
to bi zarre and barbari c l i ve experi ments. 149 Human ti ssue i s
bought and sol d on the open market for everythi ng from cosmeti cs
to pharmacol ogy. l SO Fetal organs are often arti fi ci al l y sustai ned
and then l ater “harvested” for commerci al consumpti on. 151
Somehow we are l ed to bel i eve that aborti on onl y i nvol ves the
woman’s body, that the “product of concepti on” i s l i ttl e more
than a “bl ob of ti ssue.”l sz
I f the medi a refuses to report the facts, i f i t conti nues to
bol ster i ts al ternate “real i ty; how can peopl e ever know the truth?
For al l i ntents and purposes, they can’t.
The Press as a Moral Force
The medi a scene has not al ways been a scythe of unri ght-
eousness. Once upon a ti me, l ong ago and far away, the press
actual l y took a vi tal rol e i n quashi ng the fi rst aborti on movement
184 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i n Ameri ca. 153 I t took a stri dent stand agai nst the raci st and
Eugeni c programs of Margaret Sanger. 15A
Duri ng most of the ni neteenth century, aborti on was an open
commerci al enterpri se. 155 I n fact, between 1830 and 1880, abor-
ti oni sts adverti sed thei r servi ces qui te freel y. 156 And they di d a
boomi ng trade. 1ST
One woman, Ann Lehman, bui l t her aborti on busi ness i nto
an i ncredi bl y profi tabl e enterpri se wi th cl i ni cs i n Newark, Provi -
dence, Boston, Phi l adel phi a, and fi ve more i n New York. ’58 She
operated a mai l -order busi ness that ranged across the conti nent,
wi th dozens of sal esmen up and down the East Coast peddl i ng
her aborti faci ent pi l l s. 159 Known professi onal l y as Madame
Restel l , Lehman spent as much as si xty thousand dol l ars a year
on adverti si ng —an i ncredi bl e amount i n that day — to support
her empi re. I GO By the 1870s, she was l i vi ng i n the l ap of l uxury,
wi th an opul ent mansi on on Fi fth Avenue, a magni fi cent horse-
drawn coach, and a soci al standi ng of the hi ghest order. 161
Lehman was not al one i n her prosperi ty. Aborti on was bi g
busi ness. 162 Any number of opportuni sts cashed i n. The dogma
of Mammon l eaked i nto the whol e l and, touchi ng the ai r wi th
benedi cti on. 163
At the ti me, there was not even a sembl ance of a uni fi ed
Chri sti an opposi ti on to the trade whi ch cl ai med as many as a
mi l l i on young l i ves a year .l G4 A number of doctors compl ai ned
that the publ i c was apatheti c and unaware, and that even the
“cl ergy, wi th very few excepti ons, have thus far hesi tated to enter
an open crusade agai nst cri mi nal aborti ons.” 165 One pro-l i fe
l eader of the day contended that mi ni sters “have been very
derel i ct i n handl i ng thi s subject too del i catel y and speaki ng of i t
too sel dom.”l GG He wondered i f anyone woul d ever take l eader-
shi p i n al erti ng and arousi ng the publ i c. 167
The New hrk Times– then owned and edi ted by commi tted
Chri sti ans – stood i n the gap, grasped the ri ng, and took the
l eadershi p. I n 1870, i t publ i shed an edi tori d enti tl ed “The Least
of These Li ttl e Ones.” Fi l l ed wi th Bi bl i cal references, edi tor
Loui s Jenni ngs compl ai ned that the “perpetrati on of i nfhnt mur-
der . . . i s rank and smel l s to heaven. Why i s there no l i mi t of
puni shment?’’l Gs Agai n, i n 1871, he wrote that aborti oni sts “have
openl y carri ed on thei r i nfamous practi ce . . . to a fri ghtful ex-
tent, and have l aughed at the defeat of respectabl e ci ti zens who
have vai nl y attempted to prosecute them .”l Gg
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legacy 18.5
Late that year, he gave one of hi s top-fl i ght reporters an
undercover assi gnment i n order to expose the most prosperous
abortuari es and thei r medi cal mal practi ce. The expl osi ve story
that resul ted, “The Evi l of the Age; by Augustus St. Cl ai r,
l aunched the Ti mes i nto a moral crusade that woul d not end
unti l pro-l i fe l egi sl ati on, outl awi ng aborti on and protecti ng
women, was passed i n every state i n the Uni on. l TO Not ordy
that, i t tri ggqred a wave of support that engul fed much of the
rest of the medi a, and saw to the prosecuti on of the most offen-
si ve aborti oni sts, i ncl udi ng Lehman. 171
Cl earl y, the medi a has come a l ong, l ong way on the down-
grade i n the l ast one hundred years.
The Cl oak of Conspi racy
Absal om was the passi onate thi rd son of Davi d, Ki ng of
I srael . Hi s personal comel i ness and chari sma was matched i n
greatness onl y by hi s undi sci pl i ned ego and ambi ti on. Thus, he
was forever getti ng hi msel f i nto troubl e and embroi l i ng the pal -
ace i n controversy and scandal (2 Samuel 13:38-39; 14:28).
When fi nal l y hi s father recei ved hi m back i nto favor, the ol d ki ng
was repai d by a pl ot agai nst hi s throne.
And Absal om used to ri se earl y and stand besi de the way to the
gate; and i t happened that when any man had a sui t to come to
the ki ng for judgment, Absal om woul d cal l to hi m and say,
‘From what ci ty are you?” And he woul d say, “Your servant i s
fi -om one of the tri bes of I sr ael ? Then Absal om woul d say to
hi m, ‘See, your cl ai ms are good and ri ght, but no man l i stens
to you on the part of the ki ng.” Moreover, Absal om woul d say,
“Oh, that one woul d appoi nt me judge i n the l and, then every
man who has any sui t or cause coul d come to me, and I woul d
gi ve hi m justi ce.” And i t happened that when a man came near
to prostrate hi msel f before hi m, he woul d put out hi s hand and
take hol d of hi m and ki ss hi m. And i n thi s manner Absal om deal t
wi th al l I srael who came to the ki ng for judgment; so Absal om
stol e away the hearts of the men of I srael (2 Samuel 15:2-6).
Pl ayi ng the part of the peopl e’s advocate, Absal om stol e
away thei r hearts. Wi th del i ci ous whi speri ngs and twi sted mur-
muri ngs .he pl i ed ci rcumstances i n hi s favor. Wi th great ski l l and
>
186 GRAND ILLUSIONS
evi dent adroi tness he sl anted the facts, edi ted the truth, and fi l -
tered the news, al ways wi th an eye toward the rati ngs.
Then, at the peak of the game, he upped the ante.
J
Now i t came about at the end of forty years that Absal om sai d
to the ki ng, “Pl ease l et me go and pay my vow whi ch I have
vowed to the Lord, i n Hebron. For your servant vowed a vow
whi l e I was l i vi ng at Geshur i n Aram, sayi ng, ‘I f the Lord shal l
i ndeed bri ng me back to Jerusal em, then I wi l l serve the
Lord.’” And the ki ng sai d to hi m, “Go i n peace.” So he arose
and went to Hebron. But Absal om sent spi es throughout al l the
tri bes of I srael , sayi ng, “As soon as you hear the sound of the
trumpet, then you shal l say, ‘Absal om. i s ki ng i n Hebron.’”
Then a messenger came to Davi d, sayi ng, “The hearts of the
men of I srael are wi th Absal om” (2 Samuel 15:7-10, 13).
Absal om covered hi s conspi racy wi th a cl oak of ri ghteous-
ness. Hi s conni vi ng, mal i gnant i ntenti ons were obscured by a
thoroughl y benevol ent, pi ous exteri or.
And the ki ng, taken as he was by that exteri or, di dn’t know
what was happeni ng unti l i t was too l ate. By then he was too
compromi sed to arrest the cri si s. He was forced to fl ee (2 Samuel
15:14). He had to l earn the hard way – as Eve had before hi m–
that just because someone or somethi ng l ooks “good; “desi rabl e,”
or even “del i ghtful ,” i s assurance of preci ous l i ttl e (Genesi s 3:6).
He had to l earn the hard way, as Paul woul d after hi m, that just
because someone or somethi ng comes di sgui sed as an “angel of
l i ght” or a “servant of ri ghteousness,” i s no guarantee of anythi ng
(2 Cori nthi ans 11:14-15).
What Absal om di d was to take very real concerns and i ssues
and bl ow them out of proporti on, twi sti ng the si tuati on to serve
hi s own ends: the overthrow of the rei gni ng admi ni strati on. He
took facts, fi gures, and anecdotes and mol ded them and shaped
them to fi t hi s own predi sposi ti on. He cal l ed on al l hi s ski l l , al l
hi s chari sma, dl hi s personal attracti veness, and al l hi s i nsi de
contacts. He pl ayed on the emoti ons of the peopl e. He showed
an i mpeccabl e sense of ti mi ng. I n short, he mani pul ated the si t-
uati on masterful l y. He expl oi ted an aged ki ng, a compl acent ad-
mi ni strati on, and l atent di scontent, maki ng news and maki ng
truth by the sheer force of hi s profi ci ent wi l l ful ness — not at zdl
unl i ke the modern news medi a and i ts masterful mani pul ati on of
the facts to gi ve credence to i ts parti cul ar soci o-pol i ti cal causes.
The Camera Blinked: The Media Legacy 187
Absal om wreaked a l ot of havoc. So has the medi a. But there
i s one thi ng that nei ther of them counted on: The good guys
al ways wi n i n the end. There may be defeats al ong the way.
There may be major setbacks from ti me to ti me. Tranqui l i ty
may be dashed. The fai thful maybe sent i nto fl i ght. But onl y for
a ti me. I n the end, the cause of the ri ghteous wi l l be uphel d (Job
27:16-17). The true truth wi l l come out (Ezeki el 36:33-36). God’s
peopl e wi l l prevai l (Matthew 6:10). I f – and that i s a bi g “i f” –
i f they wi l l onl y do ri ght, cl i ng to the bl essed hope, and stand
steadfast on the very great and preci ous promi ses of God
(Joshua 1:7-9).
Absal om abandoned the good l egacy of hi s past, shi el di ng hi s
wi ckedness wi th a cover of sophi sti cati on and moral i ndi gnati on.
Si mi l arl y, the medi a has abandoned the good l egacy of i ts past,
shi el di ng i ts tai nted advocacy of Pl anned Parenthood wi th a smoth-
eri ng cover of professi onal objecti vi sm and market mani pul ati on.
I n the end, though, i t wi l l have i ts due.
A fool ’s l i ps bri ng stri fe, and hi s mouth cal l s for bl ows. A fool ’s
mouth i s hi s rui n, and hi s l i ps are the snare of hi s soul . The
words of a whi sperer are l i ke dai nty morsel s, and they go down
i nto the i nnermost parts of the body (Proverbs 18:6-8).
Concl usi on
Nat Hentoff was at one ti me a card-carryi ng establ i shment
medi a spokesman. He was a board member of the ACLU. He
was a renowned advocate of ci vi l l i berti es and radi cal l i beral
causes. And he was a tenured journal i st wi th the l eft-of-gauche
newspaper, the Village Eiice.
But then he began to cover several wi del y publ i ci zed i nfan-
ti ci de and aborti on cases. And he di d the unthi nkabl e: he be-
gan to devi ate from “the orthodox l i beral posi ti on that women
cannot achi eve thei r basi c ri ghts wi thout the ri ght to ki l l i ncon-
veni ent fetuses .“172
Hentoffs col l eagues were shocked. 173 He was qui ckl y
dropped from the board of the ACLU. 174 And pressure from the
l eft beckoned for hi m to return to the fol d. To conform.
I t seems that freedom of the press i n thi s country i s l i ttl e
more than theoreti cal these days.
And about that, Pl anned Parenthood coul dn’t be happi er.
T E N
TO THE UTTERMOST:
THE INTERNATIONAL
LEGACY
Pmtwn Sews t
The great cleavage throughout the world lies between wh~ is with, and what is
against, the faith.
2
Hibire Belloc
When Karl Marx and Frederi ck Engel s began thei r COzwnUrzi st
A4an~esto wi th the el oquent sentence, “A specter i s haunti ng
Europe,” they were at l east partl y ri ghts A specter was i ndeed
haunti ng Europe — though i t was not qui te the one that those
pampered armchai r revol uti onari es thought.
I n fact, a specter was not just haunti ng Europe– i t was vexi ng
the whol e earth. And i t sti l l i s.
Even apart from the contemporary brutal i ti es of aborti on,
i nfanti ci de, and euthanasi a, the twenti eth century has been the
bl oodi est, cruel est, most destructi ve i n al l of human hi story.A
Genoci dal atroci ti es have hi deousl y pockmarked the best efforts
of modern humani sti c soci eti es wi th an uni magi nabl e barbari sm:
Auschwi tz, Campuchea, Gul ag Oranov, Entebbe, Ti ananmen,
Addi s Ababa, Tehran, Bei rut, Hanoi , and Baghdad.
But the most devastati ng ni ghtmare of al l may yet sti l l be un-
fol di ng i n the Bal kans– i n the mountai nous terri tori es once forci bl y
federated together as the Soci al i st Federati on of Yugosl avi a.
Long a hot-bed of terrori sm, torture, and tri age, those stun-
ni ngl y beauti ful l ands al ong the Adri ati c —just east of I tal y,
south of Austri a, and north of Greece — are even now convul si ng
under the strai n of a bi tter ethni c war that has tragi cal l y gri pped
189
190 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
the worl d’s ful l attenti ons. Every week new i mages of harsh con-
centrati on camps, cal l ous raci al purgi ng, and ruthl ess bombi ng
and strafi ng haunt the morni ng papers and eveni ng newscasts.
Once descri bed as “a si ngl e nati on wi th two al phabets, three
rel i gi ons, four l anguages, fi ve nati onal i ti es, si x republ i cs, and
seven borders,”s the erstwhi l e pl ural i sti c mul ti -cul tural i sm of
Yugosl avi a i s now l i ttl e more than “a canker of hatred, war, and
devastati on.”G As the predomi nantl y Chri sti an nati ons of
Sl oveni a and Croati a take i n a fl ood of refugees from Bosni a,
Herzegovi na, Montenegro, and Dal mati a fl eei ng from Serbi an
death squads, the rest of the worl d watches uneasi l y and wonders
how somethi ng thi s terri bl e coul d actual l y be happeni ng– agai n.
% some ways, i t was i nevi tabl e that such horrors shoul d
erupt here,” Nada Kovaci c tol d me.
“Anyone who i s surpri sed by the feroci ty of thi s confl i ct si mpl y
has not been payi ng attenti on to the many warni ng si gns – al l too
evi dent to us for several decades now,” agreed Ruza Vejzovi c.
A thi ck morni ng fog settl ed i nto the val l ey that hal ved the ol d
ci ty center of Zagreb — the capi tal of Croati a. From the broad
vantage of the Trg J e/ aAc —a vast open square that had been a
hub of commerci al acti vi ty si nce the twel fth century – the hi gh
medi eval Gomzz’ Grad was barel y vi si bl e. Actual l y, the great
cathedral spi res of Sueti Ste#Aen3 that pi erced the dense shroud
were the onl y i ndi cati ons that beyond the busy Republiqw busi ness
di stri ct the ci ty conti nued to ri se sharpl y toward the anci ent twi n
settl ements of Gradi c and Kapto/ .
Nada and Ruza, both students at the Uni versi ty of Zagreb,
were maki ng thei r way through the narrow streets of Croati a’s
capi tal toward those venerabl e spi res for the morni ng A4atzks
l i turgi cal servi ce. They turned asi de momentari l y to purchase a
few cri sp pastri es at a quai nt shop just off the square. Standi ng
there, across from. the oddl y modernesque gl ass crenel ati ons of
the Dubrovnik hotel – favored by many of the forei gn journal i sts
coveri ng the war – they were once agai n confronted wi th the
pai nfbl pl i ght of thei r homel and. A fi l m crew was l oadi ng equi p-
ment i nto a battered mi ni -van.
The two women tol d me that the current obsessi on of the
Western medi a wi th “ethni c cl eansi ng,” “nati onal i sti c ri val ry:
‘gueri l l a terrori sm,” and “entrenched aggressi on” i s i n a very real
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Legacy 191
sense hypocri ti cal . “I n the past when the Serbi an bureaucrats
who control l ed the Communi st regi me targeted certai n undesi rabl e
and W@ ethni c el ements for extermi nati on, the West actual l y
appl auded thei r cutti ng-edge pol i ti cal -correctness,” sai d Ruza.
“But that was when the operati on was carri ed out by Pl anned
Parenthood. Now that renegade vi gi l ante and para-mi l i tary
groups have taken i t over, the West suddenl y l ooks askance.”
“The same ethni c communi ti es that are vi cti mi zed by
genoci dal tyranny i n Bosni a, Herzegovi na, Montenegro, and
Dal mati a today were l ong ago targeted by the sani tary total i -
tari ani sm of Eugeni c aborti on and Mal thusi an soci al -pl anni ng,”
sai d Nada. “I n the end, both forms of prejudi ci al cruel ty achi eve
the same resul t .“
“When Ti to i nvi ted Pl anned Parenthood to joi n the govern-
ment i n order to form a speci al di vi si on of the Yugosl av Heal th
Servi ce i n 1967, i mmedi ate pl ans were made to target certai n
sectors of our soci ety. Besi des troubl esome concentrati ons of
Croats and Sl ovenes, the scattered Mosl em, Cathol i c, Lutheran,
and Bohemi an Reformed communi ti es i n Bosni a, Kosovo, and
Dal mati a were especi al l y hard hi t ~ she expl ai ned.
I ndeed they were. Wi th a popul ati on of onl y 22 mi l l i on,
Pl anned Parenthood-run government cl i ni cs averaged between
four hundred and ei ght hundred thousand aborti ons every year
duri ng the l ast decade of central i zed r ul e.T The rati o of aborti ons
to bi rths was nearl y four to one.
8
And some seventy percent of
those were performed on the targeted Yugosl av mi nori ti es out-
si de Greater Serbi a.g
‘What peopl e don’t real i ze i s that thi s awful hol ocaust has
been goi ng on for qui te some ti me,” sai d Nada. “Now i t i s exe-
cuted wi th bombs and bul l ets; before i t was executed wi th pi l l s
and procedures. But ei ther way, the undesirables are el i mi nated.
They suffer, regardl ess.”
They had reached the great stone gate of the Kamentia Vrata
where a busy shri ne was i l l umi nated by a bl aze of voti ve candl es.
Dozens of peasants, col l ege students, pri ests, and shopkeepers
had gathered – as they di d each dawn – for prayer and con-
templ ati on. After a bri ef but tense si l ence that seemed to bear
the wei ght of untol d sorrows, Nada spoke i n fl at, si l ent tones. “I
remember how my mother was ostraci zed, how my father was
192 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
deni ed advancement i n the factory, how my brother was ri di cul ed
at the gymnasi um where he attended cl asses, al l because our fam-
i l y was rel i gi ous – Bohemi an Reformed, or Husi te– and thus
refused to submi t to Pl anned Parenthood’s schemes. We were
not a pol i ti cal fami l y, but when i t came to the i ntegri ty of our
fami l y, my father drew the l i ne. I remember onl y too wel l the
ni ght I saw my mother dragged away by the pol i ce to the cl i ni c
for coerci ve aborti on and steri l i zati on– because she had al ready
borne the offi ci al l y sancti oned l i mi t of two chi l dren. I remember
her agony, her tears afterward. I remember the pal l or of death
that hung over our home. I remember and shudder?
“I t i s no worse for army thugs to shoot a chi l d than for medi cal
thugs to poi son a chi l d; Ruza l amented. “But the sel ecti ve moral
outrage of the West has somehow been di verted from the l atter
and fi xed on the former. That ki nd of ethi cal rel ati vi sm wi l l surel y
be the undoi ng of countri es l i ke Ameri ca. God i s not mocked.”
Evangel i sti c Zeal
Pl anned Parenthood has spread i ts del eteri ous effects on vi r-
tual l y every conti nent and i n nearl y every nati on al l across the
gl obe. Besi des the organi zati on’s Ameri can federati on – whi ch
fi mded 156 projects l o i n some 36 countri esl l around the worl d–
there are an addi ti onal 134 i ndi genous “fami l y pl anni ng associ a-
ti ons.”l z Each of these nati onal enti ti es are i n turn members of
the I nternati onal Pl anned Parenthood Federati on, headquartered
i n London. 13
The behemoth budget requi rements for these sundry i nter-
rel ated organi zati ons — runni ng i nto the tens of bi l l i ons of dol l ars
every year —are suppl i ed for the most part by twel ve major i n-
dustri al nati ons i ncl udi ng the Uni ted States, Canada, Bri tai n,
Sweden, Germany, and Japan. 14 When government pol i ci es
prohi bi t di rect fundi ng for Pl anned Parenthood’s Eugeni c abor-
ti on, steri l i zati on, and contracepti on programs — as was the case
wi th the Uni ted States duri ng the bygone Reagan-Bush years —
funds are merel y l aundered through one of any number of Uni ted
Nati ons agenci es: WHO, UNI CEF, UNESCO, or UNFPA. 15
Thi s remarkabl e and l ucrati ve gl obal outreach was spawned
i n 1925 when Margaret Sanger hosted an “i nternati onal neo-
Mal thusi an and bi rth control conference” at the ti ny Hotel
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Legmy 193
McAl pi n i n New York. 16 She had grown i ncreasi ngl y concerned
that soci etal , ci vi c, and rel i gi ous pressure mi ght snuff out her
nascent Eugeni c i deal s. As she asserted:
The government of the Uni ted States del i beratel y encourages
and even makes necessary by i ts l aws the breedi ng— wi th a
breakneck rapi di ty – of i di ots, defecti ve, di seased, feebl emi nded,
and cri mi nal cl asses. Bi l l i ons of dol l ars are expended by our
state and federal governments and by pri vate chari ti es and
phdanthropi es for the care, the mai ntenance, and the perpetuati on
of these cl asses. Year by year thei r numbers are mounti ng.
Year by year more money i s expended . . , to mai ntai n an i n-
creasi ng race of morons whi ch threatens the very foundati ons
of our ci vi l i zati on.’7
She was especi al l y di stressed by the di m prospects that
democrati c suffrage ti orded her dystopi c pl ans to i mpl ement a
uni versal system of i nhuman humani sm:
We can al l vote, even the mental l y arrested. And so i t i s no sur-
pri se to fi nd that the moron’s vote i s as good as the vote of the
geni us. The outl ook i s not a cheerful one. 1s
I f there was l i ttl e for her to cheer about i n Ameri ca, there ‘
was even l ess on the i nternati onal scene. Europe, deci mated by
the Great War, was desperate to reverse i ts dramati c decl i ne i n
popul ati on, whi l e the devel opi ng worl d was no l ess desperate to
stoke the hopeful fi res of progress wi th aggressi ve popul ati on
growth.l g Sanger’s message was fal l i ng on i ncreasi ngl y deaf ears.zo
By conveni ng dozens of l i ke-mi nded “neo-Mal thusi an pi o-
neers” from around the worl d, she was hopeful that together they
woul d be abl e to ci rcl e the wagons, to “devel op a new “evangel i sti c
strategy,” and ul ti matel y to reverse the ti de of publ i c opi ni on and
publ i c pol i cy — and thus “to keep al i ve and carry on the torch of
neo-Mal thusi an truth.”zl
For si x days representati ves from France, Engl and, Norway, ~
Hol l and, Austri a, Hungary, Germany, Bel gi um, Spai n, Sweden,
Swi tzerl and, I tal y, Portugal , I ndi a, South Afri ca, Russi a, Mexi co,
Canada, Japan, and Chi na l i stened as “experts” del i vered papers,
made speeches, hel d workshops, and offered di re prophesi es. 22
194 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
They suggested new pol i ti cal tacti cs.zs They crafted coy publ i c
rel ati ons schemes. 24 And they hammered out a bevy of pri ori ti es,
agendas, and schedul es. 25
I n addi ti on to al l that, they harked to pl enary portents,
admoni ti ons, and jeremi ads that:
Th e du l l a r d, th e ga wk , th e numbskul l , t h e s i mp l e t on , t h e
weakl i ng, and the scatter br ai n ar e amongst us i n ov er shadowi ng
number s — i nter mar r y i ng, br eedi ng, i nor di natel y pr ol i fi c, l i ter -
al l y threateni ng to overwhel m the worl d wi th thei r usel ess and
terri fyi ng get. 26
By the end of the conference i t was apparent to al l of them
that unl ess they took “a course of drasti c acti on the worl d woul d
face certai n emi nent di saster.”zp Many had been i nvol ved i n
some sort of subversi ve sex-acti vi sm for qui te some ti me — each
of the parti ci pants cl ai med membershi p i n the I nternati onal
Federati on of Neo-Mal thusi an Leagueszs and most were l eaders
i n the I nternati onal Eugeni cs Soci et y.zg Even so, the ti me for
uni ted purpose and concerted effort was cl earl y at hand. A l oose
federati on of “race hygi ene soci eti es,” “bi rth control l eagues,”
“fami l y pl anni ng associ ati ons,” and “soci al Eugeni cs commi ttees”
was formal i zed. so Drawi ng on the heri tage of Anni e Bessant,
Charl es Bradl augh, Charl es Drysdal e, and Al i ce Vi ckery– al l
radi cal soci al reformers from an earl i er generati onal — the new
federati on took a sel f-consci ousl y presupposi ti onal anti -Chri sti an~z
anti -fami l y,
33 and anti -choi cesq bent from the start.
The federati on woul d not be i ncorporated as I nternati onal
Pl anned Parenthood unti l a reorgani zati onal meeti ng i n Bombay
shortl y after the Second Worl d War,ss but i t remai ned acti ve
duri ng the i nterveni ng years nonethel ess. Shari ng both offi ces
and resources wi th thei r ki th and ki n i n the I nternati onal Eugeni cs
Soci ety,sG the members di d not want to hurry the careful con-
cepti on of thei r strategi c pl an unnecessari l y.s7 Thus, i t was duri ng
that devel opmental peri od that Sanger and the other l eaders l ai d
the phi l osophi cal foundati ons that characteri ze the organi zati on
and i ts mul ti fari ous programs to thi s day. 38
They made certai n, for i nstance, that al l nati onal affi l i ates
woul d adhere to a stri dentl y pro-aborti on stance. 39 I n fact, they
determi ned that al l Pl anned Parenthood associ ati ons – regardl ess
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Legacy 195
of soci al , cul tural , or pol i ti cal contexts — make “l egal access”
to “unrestri cted aborti on” a “hi gh pri ori ty.”40 As Mal col m Potts,
the medi cd di rector for the i nternati onal federati on, admi tted
years l ater:
The fact i s, that no nati on on earth has control l ed i ts ferti l i ty
wi thout aborti on. The Uni ted States has 1.5 mi l l i on aborti ons a
year. Why shoul d we expect I ndonesi a, say, to do better? No
matter how good the method i s, you can’t get adequate ferti l i ty
control wi th contracepti on al one. You have got to grappl e wi th
steri l i zati on and aborti on .41
They al so made certai n that the nati onal affi l i ates pressed for
coerci ve government acti on to enforce bi rth l i mi tati ons and
Eugeni c steri l i zati ons.Az They encouraged nati onal organi zati ons
to wei gh the necessi ty of “l i mi ti ng freedom of choi ce” through
the i mposi ti on of l egal and economi c i ncenti ves and di si ncen-
ti ves.Aq Such sancti ons mi ght i ncl ude the “i ntroducti on of a chi l d
tax,”AA “reducti on or el i mi nati on of pai d materni ty l eave and
benefi ts~qs “l i mi tati on or el i mi nati on of publ i c-fi nanced medi cal
care, schol arshi ps, housi ng l oans, and subsi di es to fami l i es wi th
more than the al l owed number of chi l dren,%AG or even, “compul sory
steri l i zati ons and aborti ons.”A7 I n l ater years, that preferenti al
bent toward total i tari ani sm l ed Pl anned Parenthood to l aud the
brutal one-chi l d-per-fami l y program of the Communi st Chi nese
as a “stunni ng success”As that was “worth our attenti on and awe.”49
They made certai n that each nati onal affi l i ate woul d devel op
and i mpl ement “val ue-free” sex-educati on curri cul a and pro-
grams. Advocati ng the ki nds of programs that the Ameri can
ai l i l i ate pi oneered —usi ng perverse off-the-shel f commerci al por-
nography i n el ementary cl assrooms,so undermi ni ng tradi ti onal
va.l ues,sl usurpi ng the authori ty of parents, 52 and encouragi ng
promi scuous acti vi ty. 53 Accordi ngl y, the i nternati onal l i terature
pol i cy asserts:
The broad abstract pri nci pl es i nspi red by an anti que, repressi ve
moral i ty serve onl y to confuse us. . . . As hard as i t i s to admi t,
sexual precoci ty i s a fact that i s present, progressi ve, and i rre-
versi bl e. . . . Onl y those who admi t, accept, and val i date the
possi bi l i ty of an earl y exerci se of sexual i ty wi l l have pl aced them-
sel ves i n a condi ti on to be abl e to channel i t through educati on. 54
196 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
They even mandated that each nati onal afI i l i ate be wi l l i ng to
/ si destep any l egal obstacl es that mi ght i mpede the overarchi ng
Pl anned Parenthood agenda of Eugeni c cl eansi ng. At ti mes that
mi ght mean merel y si desteppi ng the l aw: i n the Phi l i ppi nes where
aborti ons are i l l egal , Pl anned Parenthood offers “menstrual ex-
tracti ons” i nstead — despi te the fact that the procedures are, for
al l i ntents and purposes, techni cal l y the same.ss At other ti mes
cl ear vi ol ati on of the l aw i s perpetrated: i n Brazi l where steri l i zati on
i s i l l egal , Pl anned Parenthood performs as many as 20 mi l l i on of
the procedures every year i n i ts fi el d cl i ni cs.sG Accordi ng to one
i nternal di recti ve i ssued from the London offi ce:
Fami l y Pl anni ng Associ ati ons and other non-government
organi zati ons shoul d not use the absence of the l aw or the exi st-
ence of an unfavorabl e l aw as an excuse for i nacti on; acti on
outsi de the l aw, and even i n vi ol ati on of i t, i s part of the process
of sti mul ati ng change. s7
Though these i deas were more than a l i ttl e radi cal , thei r care-
M presentati on and prudent i nsti tuti onal i zati on – under the ever
watchful management of Sanger and the other neo-Mal thusi ans —
eventual l y pai d off. And i t pai d off i n huge di vi dends.
A New Worl d Order
Ul ti matel y, most of Pl anned Parenthood’s neo-Mal thusi an
i deas found thei r way i nto some of the most si gni fi cant pol i ti cal ,
cul tural , and soci al programs of the twenti eth century as modern
presupposi ti on~ tenets of,an aggressi ve and uni versal pol i ti cal l y-
correct orthodoxy. Unl i kel y -support for the i deas sprang up
everywhere.s* Opposi ti on practi cal l y evaporated. 59 Wi thi n just a
few years, the revol uti on that Sanger had hoped for and dreamed
of had become a veri tabl e real i ty.GO
Adol f Hi tl er, for i nstance, adopted the neo-Mal thusi an i deas
of Sanger i n a whol esal e fashi on i n hi s admi ni strati on of the
Thi rd Rei ch —hi s extermi nati ve “fi nal sol uti on,” hi s coerci ve
aborti on program i n Pol and, Yugosl avi a, and Czechosl ovaki a,
i md hi s el i ti st nati onal soci al i sm. He echoed the Mahhusi an cal l
to “ri d the earth of dysgeni c peopl es by whatever means avai l -
abl e so that we may enjoy the prosperi ty of the Fatherl and.”Gl
And he rei terated the Pl anned Parenthood i deal of el i mi nati ng
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Legacy 197
al l Chri sti an mercy mi ni stri es or soci al servi ce programs. “Let us
spend our efforts and our resources,” he cri ed i n a freneti c speech
i n 1939, “on the producti ve, not on the wastrel .”Gz
Josef Stal i n al so wove Pl anned Parenthood’s neo-Mal thusi an
i deal i nto hi s brutal i nterpretati on of Marxi sm — hi s Ukrai ni an
tri age, hi s col l ecti vi zati on of the Kukdcs, and hi s Si beri an genoci de.
He argued that, “The greatest obstacl e to the successfi d compl eti on
of the peopl e’s revol uti on i s the swarmi ng of i nferi or races from
the south and east .“GS And the onl y thi ng that kept hi m from
el i mi nati ng that obstacl e was “the fool hardy i nterference of
church char i ty?Gq
The concessi ons to Sanger’s mal i gnant phi l osophy di d not
end there. Before l ong, the Pl anned Parenthood pl anners and
prognosti cators were ri di ng a veri tabl e ti dal wave of success as
one pol i ti cal system after another capi tul ated to the i ntol erant
demands of Eugeni ci sm:
G I n 1938, Sweden became the first free nati on i n Chri sten-
dom to revert to pre-Chri sti an aborti on l egi sl ati on and to
i nsti tuti onal i ze Pl anned Parenthood sex-educati on and fami l y-
l i mi tati on programs.G5
. Between 1949 and 1956, aborti on was l egal i zed i n el even other
European nati ons – each at the behest of Pl anned Parenthood.GG
. I n 1954, pl anned pmenthmd hel d an i ntemati on~ co~erence
on aborti on and cal l ed for “reform” of restri cti ve l egi sl ati on.G7
G I n 1958, vari ous Uni ted Nati ons agenci es began to subsi di ze
Pl anned Parenthood projects and programs throughout the
devel opi ng worl d.GB
G I n 1962, the Ameri can Law I nsti tute proposed that aborti on
l aws be decri mi nal i zed.Gg
G I n 1967, the Ameri can Me&c~ Associ ati on r ever 5ed its
century-ol d commi tment to protect the l i ves of the unborn and
al so began cal l i ng for decri mi nal i zati on of aborti on .70
. Duri ng that same year, three states — Col orado, Cal i forni a,
and North Carol i na — l oosened restri cti ons on certai n chi l d-
ki l l i ng procedures.71
G I n 1968, the Uni ted Ki ngdom l egal i zed aborti on. 72
198 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
. Later that year, Pope Paul VI i ssued hi s Humanae Vita en-
cycl i cal whi ch, among other thi ngs, reaffi rmed the church’s
commi tment to the sancti ty of l i fe. Si nce thi s seemed to be the
l one Chri sti an voi ce of di ssent duri ng a massi ve juggernaut of
neo-pagan revi val i sm, the aborti on i ssue qui ckl y came to be
vi ewed i n the publ i c arena as ‘a Cathol i c i ssue.”7s
. I n 1970, four more Ameri can states — Hawai i , Al aska, Washi ng-
ton, and New York — enacted aborti on-on-demand l egi sl ati on.Tq
G By the end of 1971, nearl y hal f a mi l l i on l egal aborti ons were
bei ng performed i n the U. S. each year and another two mi l l i on
were performed worl d-wi de .75
G Then i n 1973, the Supreme Court i ssued i ts momentous Roe
U. Wi & decree that changed the aborti on l aws i n al l fi fty states
by sheer judi ci al fi at, and thus si gnal ed a keen message of
moral rel ati vi sm to the rest of the worl d. 76
And from there, thi ngs have onl y gone from bad to worse.
Despi te the fact that conservati ve – and ostensi bl y pro-l i fe – ad-
mi ni strati ons l ead Canada, the Uni ted States, and Great Bri tai n
for the great majori ty of the l ast two decades, Pl anned Parent-
hood i ncursi ons were onl y sl owed and not stopped al together.
77
Now that the conservati ve era seems to have passed i nto exti nc-
ti on — al ong wi th the Col d War — the prospects for the future are
omi nous i ndeed.
Taki ng ful l advantage of i ts new-found gl obal consensus,
Pl anned Parenthood has l aunched a massi ve campai gn to con-
struct a New Worl d Order i n accord wi th i ts own desi gn. A
pl ethora of damni ng and damnabl e programs has resul ted – as
Nada Kovaci c, Ruza Vejzovi c, and mi l l i ons of other women
around the worl d coul d readi l y testi fy.
Col oni zi ng the Gl obe
The l ast mandate of Chri st to Hi s di sci pl es – commonl y
known as the Great Commi ssi on– was to comprehensi vel y
evangel i ze al l the worl d. He sai d:
Al l authori ty i n heaven and on earth has been gi ven to me.
Therefore go and make di sci pl es of i l l nati ons, bapti zi ng them
i n the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Hol y
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Lega~ 199
Spi ri t, and teachi ng them to obey everythi ng I have com-
manded you. And surel y I wi l l be wi th you al ways, to the very
end of the age (Matthew 28:18-20).
The i mpl i cati ons of thi s mandate are revol uti onary and have
l i teral l y al tered the course of worl d hi story.
Jesus asserts that al l authori ty i n heaven i s Hi s (Psal m 103:19).
The hei ghts, the depths, the angel s, and the pri nci pal i ti es are al l
under Hi s soverei gn rul e (Psal m 135: 5-7). But al l authori ty on
earth i s Hi s as wel l (Psal m 147:15-18). Man and creature, as wel l
as every i nventi on and i nsti tuti on, are under Hi s provi denti al
superi ntendence (Psal m 24:1). There are no neutral areas i n al l the
cosmos that can escape the authori tati ve regency (Col ossi ans 1:17).
On that basi s, Chri st says, bel i evers al l across the wi de gul f
of ti me are to conti nual l y mani fest Hi s Lordshi p — maki ng di s-
ci pl es i n al l nati ons by goi ng, bapti zi ng, and teachi ng. Thi s
mandate i s the essence of the New Covenant, whi ch i n turn i s
just an extensi on of the Ol d Covenant: Go and cl ai m everythi ng
i n heaven and on earth for the everl asti ng domi ni on of Jesus
Chri st (Genesi s 1:26-28).
I t was thi s mandate that ori gi nal l y embol dened those di sci pl es
to preach the Gospel — fi rst i n Jerusal em and Judea, then i n
Sarnari a, and fi nal l y i n the uttermost parts of the earth (Acts
1:8). I t was thi s mandate that sustai ned the fai thful church
through generati ons of hardshi p, persecuti on, cal ami ty, and
pri vati on – provoki ng i t to offer l i ght and l i fe to those ensnared
i n the mi ry cl ay of darkness and death.
I t was thi s mandate that sent Col umbus, Vespucci , Bal boa,
da Garna, Magel l an, and Cabot out across the peri l ous uncharted
seas. I t was al so thi s mandate that catal yzed a remarkabl e re-
surgence of mi ssi onary efforts –both i n word and i n deed– that
fol l owed on the heel s of the great European expansi on and
col oni zati on duri ng the ni neteenth century.
The accessi on of the Chri sti an cul ture of Europe as the worl d’s
domi nati ng soci o-pol i ti cal force was actual l y not assured unti l
wel l i nto the ni neteenth century. I n fact, for the bul k of i ts fi rst
two mi l l enni a Chri sti an cul ture had been stri ki ngl y unsuccessfi d
i n spreadi ng i ts sumptuous effects beyond European shores. The
Great Commi ssi on remai ned profoundl y unful fi l l ed. I n the Far
200 GIWND ILLUSIONS
East, for i nstance, mi ssi onary endeavors were practi cal l y non-
exi stent i n Chi na and paral yzed by persecuti on i n Japan. I n
I ndi a, the hi gher castes were vi rtual l y untouched by the Gospel ,
and even the l ower castes showed onl y transi tory i nterest. The
I sl ami c l ands were as resi stant as al ways to the i nroads of the
church. South Ameri ca’s conversi on to the conqui stador’s Ca~-
ol i ci sm was tenuous at best. And tropi cal Afri ca had proven to
be so formi dabl e and i nhospi tabl e that Western settl ements were
confi ned to a few smal l outposts al ong the coast. Cl earl y, Chri sti -
ani ty was sti l l very much a whi te man’s rel i gi on.
There had been, of course, a few bursts of expansi on. I n
1453, a seri es of catastrophi c events – both good and bad — freed
European monarchs to cast thei r vi si on outward for the fi rst ti me
si nce the earl y crusades. That year saw the defeat of Constanti ne
XI by Sul tan Mohammed I I – thus, at l ong l ast, bri ngi ng to an
end the stori ed Byzanti ne Empi re. I n addi ti on, the Hundred
Years War between Engl and and France ended, as di d the wars
between Veni ce and Mi l an, Russi a and Li thuani a, and Prussi a
and Pol and. The Habsburgs and the Medi ci s were both bol stered
i n thei r respecti ve real ms. And Guttenberg’s press i n Mai nz
al tered the transmi ssi on of knowl edge and cul ture forever wi th
the publ i cati on of the fi rst printed book– a Bi bl e.
Expl orers began to venture out i nto uncharted real ms.
Sci enti sts began to probe l ong hi dden mysteri es. Traders and
merchants carved out new routes, new markets, and new tech-
nol ogi es. Energi es that had previ ousl y been devoted excl usi vel y
to survi val were redi rected by l ocal magi strates i nto projects and
programs desi gned to i mprove heal th, hygi ene, and the com-
mon good. Afri ca, I ndi a, Chi na, I ndonesi a, and the Ameri cas
were opened to expl orati on and expl oi tati on. From col oni al out-
posts there, a tremendous weal th of exoti c raw resources poured
i nto European ci ti es.
But despi te al l these advantages, European advances were
l i mi ted and short l i ved – and the Gospel made onl y hal ti ng and
sporadi c progress. I nterneci ne warfare and petty terri tori al i sm
di srupted – and very nearl y nul l i fi ed – even that much Chri sti an
i nfl uence. From 1688 — when Wi l l i am and Mary concl uded the
Gl ori ous Revol uti on i n Engl and by ascendi ng to the throne,
Loui s XI V canoni zed the i ron-fi sted noti on of “Di vi ne Ri ght:
To the Uttermost: The I n&national Legacy 201
and young Peter Romanov became Czar of al l the Russi as —
unti l 1848 — when the cal ami tous Marxi st rebel l i ons i n Pari s,
Rome, Veni ce, Berl i n, Parrrd, Vi enna, and Mi l an were fi nal l y
squel ched – Europe was racked by one convul si ve struggl e after
another. Duri ng those two centuri es, the cause of Chri sti an uni ty,
veraci ty, and temeri ty wore a Khazar face — buffeted by the
Austro-Pmssi an Wars, the Napol eoni c Wars, the Ameri can War
of I ndependence, the Persi an-Ottoman Wars, the Si ne-Russi an
Wars, the French Revol uti on, the Greek and the South Ameri can
Wars of I ndependence, and the Mogul I nvasi ons. The enti re
cul ture seemed to be dri ven by an Ari mathean i mpul se to bury
di sparaged truth.
At l ast though, a hush of peace fel l upon the conti nent duri ng
the Vi ctori an Age: Pax Bri tanni a. And wi thi n the span of a gen-
erati on, the message of Chri st and the benefi ts of a Chri sti an
cul ture and l aw code were i mpressed upon the whol e earth.
Three great revol uti ons –begi nni ng fi rst i n Engl and and
then spreadi ng throughout al l the European domi ni ons –l ai d
the foundati ons for thi s remarkabl e turn of events. The fi rst was
the Agri cul tural Revol uti on. The repl acement of fal l owi ng wi th
l egumi nous rotati on, the use of chemi cal ferti l i zers, and the
i ntroducti on of farm machi nery enabl ed Europeans to vi rtual l y
break the cycl e of fami ne and tri age across the conti nent for the
fi rst ti me i n manki nd’s hi story. The second was the I ndustri al
Revol uti on. Manufactured goods and the di vi si on of l abor created
a broad-based mi ddl e cl ass and freed the unl anded masses —
agai n, for the fi rst ti me i n human hi story. The thi rd was the
Transportati on Revol uti on. At the begi nni ng of the ni neteenth
century, Napol eon coul d not cross hi s domai n any more effi ci entl y
than Nebuchadnezzar coul d have si x centuri es before Chri st. By
the end of the Vi ctori an age, men were raci ng across the rai l s
and roads i n motori zed vehi cl es of stupendous power, they were
crashi ng over and under the waves of the sea i n i ron vessel s of
enormous si ze, and they were cutti ng through the cl ouds i n i n-
geni ous zeppel i ns, bal l oons, and pl anes.
Suddenl y, the earth became a European pl anet. Whol e con-
ti nents were carved up between the ri val monarchs. Wi th a
thrashi ng overheated qual i ty – i n whi ch chari ty and good sense
are someti mes sacri fi ced for the practi cal end of beati ng the
202 GIMND ILLUSIONS
Hun –Afri ca, Asi a, Austral i a, the Far East, Lati n Ameri ca, and
the Mi ddl e East became the backyard pl aygrounds of specul ati ve
col oni sts and i mperi al opportuni sts.
But just as no corner of the gl obe was l eft untouched by the
expl orers, sol di ers, merchants, and col oni sts beari ng up under
noti ons of the ‘Whi te Man’s Burden” and “Mani fest Desti ny,”
the sel fl ess and sacri fi ci al efforts of mi ssi onari es bent on ful fi l l i ng
at l ast the mandates of the Great Commi ssi on l eft vi rtual l y no
stone unturned ei ther. Peopl es everywhere tasted thei r abundant
benefi ts.7g And, chi ef among those benefi ts of course, was a new
respect for i nnocent human l i fe — a respect that was enti rel y
unknown anywhere i n the worl d unti l the advent of the Gospel .
As mi ssi onari es moved out from Chri stendom to the “utter-
most parts of the earth” they were shocked to di scover al l the
horrors of untamed heatheni sm. They found aborti on al l too
preval ent, i nfanti ci de al l too commonpl ace, abandonment al l
too fami l i ar, and euthanasi a al l too customary. They were con-
fronted by the specters of endemi c poverty, recurri ng fami ne,
unfettered di sease, and wi despread chattel sl avery — whi ch the
Chri sti an West had onl y recentl y abol i shed. Canni bal i sm, ri tual
abuse, patri ci de, human sacri fi ce, sexuzd perversi ty, petty t yranny,
paternal i sti c expl oi tati on, l i ve buri al s, extermi nati ve cl an war -
fme, and genoci dal tri bal vendettas al l predomi nated.
Agai n and agai n, they had to affi rm i n the cl earest possi bl e
way — i n both word and deed — that Jesus Chri st i s the onl y per-
fect sacri fi ce for the si ns of the worl d and that through Hi m had
come the death of death (Remans 5:6-18).
Most of the mi ssi onari es knew that such a l i berati ng message
woul d l i kel y be met wi th stri dent opposi ti on. And i t was. Espe-
ci al l y toward the end of the great mi ssi onary era — duri ng the
sunset of Vi ctori ani sm —mi ssi onari es were often forced i nto con-
fl i cts wi th Europeans and North Ameri cans who subscri bed to
the Enl i ghtenment noti ons of Darwi ni sm, Mal thusi ani sm, and
Eugeni cs. As these i deas took a hi gher and hi gher profi l e at
home, l eaders i n government and academi a– and gradual l y
even i n the church — began to i ncreasi ngl y bel i eve that the vast
di fference between Chri sti an cul ture and pagan cul ture was
actual l y not rooted i n rel i gi on but i n soci ol ogy and race. So,
Chri sti an sol di ers stati oned i n Bri ti sh col oni es, for exampl e,
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Legmy 203
were often repri manded for attendi ng the bapti sms of nati ve
converts because as representati ves of the government, they
were obl i gated to be “rel i gi ousl y neutral .” Thus, mi ssi onari es
found i t i ncreasi ngl y di ffi cul t to persuade the Western gov-
ernments to abol i sh heathen customs and i mpose the rul e of
humani tari an l aw.
Thankful l y, the vast majori ty of the mi ssi onari es on the fi el d
hel d the l i ne agai nst such l ati tudi nari ani sm. They conti nued to
sacri fi ce. The y conti nued to care for the hurti ng. They con-
ti nued to succor the ai l i ng. They conti nued to val ue the weak.
And they conti nued to stand for the i nnocent.
I n 1893, a Parl i ament of Rel i gi ons was hel d i n Chi cago. At
hand were del egates from dozens of pagan cul ts and rel i gi ous
sects from around the worl d to meet and di al ogue wi th Western
church l eaders i n what organi zers cal l ed the “uni versal and trans-
rel i gi ous spi ri t of cooperati on, tol erati on, and empathy that
uni tes al l manki nd regardl ess of i ts sundry rel i gi ous i mpul ses.”Tg
A group of Presbyteri an mi ssi onari es – representati ve of thousands
of fai thful men and women who had seen fi rsthand the horrors of
heathen l ands and had sacri fi ced dearl y to bri ng them hel p and
hope – quenched that spi ri t wi th a report that stated succi nctl y
the di sti ncti ve appeal of the Gospel :
Just qs Buddha, Mohammed, Confi ci us, Kri shna, and Zoroaster
r emai n to thk day decayed by i rrevocabl e death, so the rel i gi ons
that bear thei r names carry wi th them the stench of the grave.
Poverty, barbari ty, death, and l asci vi ousness must be the l ot of
those men and nati ons that fol l ow after them. The horrors of
chi l dren l eft to di e, women sacri fi ced to dumb i dol s, and the
si ck gi ven over to thei r own devi ces are the fmi t of the fl esh that
no heathen ravi ngs can be ri d. Onl y the Gospel of our Savi or
Jesus Chri st, the Way, the Truth, and the Li fe, can l end the be-
quest of l i fe. Onl y Chri st has Hi msel f escaped the shackl es of
death, and onl y the fai th i n Hi m that comes through grace can
free men from the oppressi ons of the spi ri t of murder, whi ch we
must sadl y ai i i rm, i s the same as your preci ous spi ri t of cooper-
ati on, tol erati on, and empathy.s”
Another di ssenti ng voi ce came from a veteran mi ssi onary
from Chi na who asserted:
204 GILAND ILLUSIONS
When I reached Amoy thi rty-two years ago, there was a pond
i n the center of town known as the Babtis Pond. Thi s was the
pl ace where unwanted l i ttl e ones were thrown by thei r mothers.
There were al ways several bodi es of i nnocents fl oati ng on i ts
green and sl i my waters and passers-by l ooked on wi thout sur-
pri se. Thi s i s what a worl d wi thout a cl ear uncompromi sed
Chri sti an Gospel l eads i rrevocabl y toward.sl
Sti l l another del egate, a converted Mangai an i sl ander, testi fi ed
that he had been marked out for ri tual sacri fi ce before the comi ng
of mi ssi onari es. By some stroke of Provi dence, he was temporari l y
spared. He conti nued:
Sti l l I bel i eved that I must di e, and i n my turn, be offered. But,
bl essed be Jehovah, not l ong after the cul tus, the Gospel was
brought to Mangai a. I then l earned wi th wonder that the true
peace offeri ng i s Jesus, who di ed on Cal vary, i n order that al l
the wretched sl aves of Satan mi ght be freed. Thi s was i ndeed
Good News to me. God forbi d that we shoul d return to the
bondage of uni ver saJ l awl essness.s2
Agai n ,and agai n, the fai thi i d concurred, the age ol d commi t-
ment of the di sti ncti ve Gospel message must not, can not, and
wi l l not be compromi sed. When i t i s, not onl y does heresy sweep
through the church, but death sweeps through the l and.
As mi ssi onari es ci rcl ed the gl obe, penetrated the jungl es,
and crossed the seas, they preached a si ngul ar message: l i ght out
of darkness, l i berty out of tyranny, and l i fe out of death. To cul -
tures epi demi c wi th terri bl e poverty, brutal i ty, l awl essness, and
di sease, those fai thful Chri sti an wi tnesses i nterjected the novel
Chri sti an concepts of grace, chari ty, l aw, medi ci ne, and the
sancti ty of l i fe. They overturned despots, l i berated the capti ves,
and rescued the peri shi ng. They establ i shed hospi tal s. They
founded orphanages. They started rescue mi ssi ons. They bui l t
al mshouse. They opened soup ki tchens. They i ncorporated
chari tabl e soci eti es. They changed l aws. They demonstrated
l ove. They l i ved as i f peopl e real l y mattered.
These ki nds of dramati c acti vi ti es, rather than bei ng i sol ated
occurrences, were actual l y qui te normati ve. Wherever mi s-
si onari es went, they faced a dual chal l enge: confront si n i n men’s
To the Uttermost: The I nternational Legay 205
hearts and confront si n i n men’s cul tures.ss That was, i s, and
ever shal l be the very essence of the Great Commi ssi on.
The Commi ssi on Reversed
The amazi ngl y successful gl obal program of Pl anned Parent-
hood i s a ki nd of Great Commi ssi on in reueme. The magni fi cent
tapestry of ci vi l i zati on woven by Chri stendom i s even now bei ng
unravel ed strand by strand unto the uttermost parts of the earth.
Pl anned Parenthood enthusi asts woul d have us bel i eve that
neo-Mal thusi an pri nci pl es, pol i ci es, and programs are actual l y
just i ssues of personal choi ce. Others say they are si mpl y i ssues
of comprehensi ve medi cal care. Sti l l others woul d argue that
they are i ssues of reproducti ve freedom, i ssues of maternal ri ghts,
i ssues of pol i ti cal preference, or i ssues of i ndi vi dual pri vacy.
But the profl i gate taki ng of i nnocent l i ves, the perverti ng of
tradi ti onal val ues, and the defi l i ng of i ndi vi dual fami l i es are
actual l y not i ssues at al l .
An i ssue i s somethi ng that we can reasonabl y and rati onal l y
dkcuss around a negoti ati ng tabl e. An i ssue i s somethi ng that
we can compromi se on. I t i s somethi ng that i nvol ves gi ve and
take. I t i s somethi ng that we can ponder, argue, and debate. I n-
deed, i t i s somethi ng that good men and women can l egi ti matel y
di sagree on. We can juggl e i ts ni ggl i ng l i ttl e poi nts back and
forth. Or we can do nothi ng at al l . We can take i t or l eave i t.
Eugeni c cl eansi ng i s none of those thi ngs. I nstead, i t i s a
matter of l i fe and death. I t i s a test of fai th. I t i s perhaps the
ul ti mate test of fai th i n these di ffi cul t and compl ex ti mes. And
thus, i t demands uncompromi si ng, unwaveri ng, and unhesi tati ng
fai thful acti on.
Through the centuri es, Chri sti ans have at al l ti mes, i n al l
pl aces, and i n al l ci rcumstances mai ntai ned preci sel y thi s same
convi cti on. Wi th one voi ce, they cri ed out across the gul f of ti me
the Good News of l ove and l i fe. As one, they procl ai med the
Gospel – the vi ctory of Chri st Jesus over si n and death. And at
great ri sk, they authenti cated that cry i n the way they l i ved thei r
l i ves. They demonstrated that procl amati on i n thei r acti ons –
rescui ng the peri shi ng at every opportuni ty, by every means.
Ruza Vejzovi c tol d me that she bel i eved that the greatest
threat that Pl anned Parenthood posed was “not so much to the
206 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fami l y as to the church.” After al l , she sai d, “I t i s the church that
has been commi ssi oned to hol d the l i ne agai nst such thi ngs –
and so when such thi ngs conti nue unchecked, i t i s the church’s
authenti ci ty and veraci ty that must fi rst come under our scruti ny.’
Concl usi on
Pol i ti cal theori st, Ayn Rand, may wel l have had the chi l l i ng
i nternati onal l egacy of Pl anned Parenthood i n mi nd when she
sai d that:
Every major horror of hi story has been commi tted i n the name
of an al trui sti c moti ve. Has any act of sel fi shness ever equal l ed
the carnage perpetrated by the di sci pl es of al trui sm? Hardl y.s4
Wi th the demi se of i deol ogi cal total i tari ani sm toward the
end of the twenti eth century, most neo-Mal thusi ans turned to
the practi cal total i tari ani sm of soci al control through bi rth con-
trol as the l ast best hope of thei r al trui sm. Undoubtedl y, i t has
become – as Margaret Sanger predi cted that i t woul d – thei r
“Love Poti on” and thei r “Hol y Grai l .nss
I t i s a fai th – a ki nd of mi rror-i mage reversal of Chri sti ani ty.
I t cannot be opposed by mere l ogi c, reason, or pol i ti cal savvy.
G. K. Chesterton once qui pped:
I f you argue wi th a madman, i t i s extremel y probabl e that you
wi l l get the worst of i t; for i n many ways hi s mi nd moves al l the
qui cker for not bei ng del ayed by the thi ngs that go wi th good
judgment. He i s not hampered by a sense of humor, or by char-
i ty, or by the dumb certai nti es of experi ence .86
We cannot hope to subdue Pl anned Parenthood’s madness
wi th argument — even wi th bri l l i ant argument. I nstead, i ts
counterfei t evangel i sm must be overwhel med wi th authenti c
evangel i sm. And that requi res an authenti c – and uncom-
promi sed – church.
E L E V E N
A DIVINE TRAGEDY:
THE RELIGIOUS LEGACY
anguis in haba 1
l’?wre is a complex knot offorces under~ing any natwn once Christtin; a smoldering
of the oldjres. Z
Hilaire Belloc
Easter i s the greatest of al l the Chri sti an festi val s. I t i s the
day when every bel i ever rejoi ces i n the knowl edge of Hi s Re-
deemer’s resurrecti on. Even so, there was preci ous l i ttl e joy i n
the hearts of the peopl e of Constanti nopl e on Easter Sunday,
1453. I t fel l that year on Apri l the fi rst. After a l ong and stormy
wi nter, spri ng was comi ng at l ast to the Thraci an peni nsul a. I n
the l ush orchards throughout the venerabl e ci ty the frui t trees
were bursti ng i nto fl ower. The ni ghti ngal es had returned to si ng
i n the Lycus thi ckets and the storks were al ready rebui l di ng thei r
nests on the peaked rooftops al l al ong the Mese. The sky was
mottl ed wi th l ong thi ck l i nes of mi gratory bi rds fl yi ng to thei r
summer havens way away i n the north. But the Bosphorus was
rumbl i ng wi th the sounds of war: the men, armaments, and ac-
coutrements of a great and dreaded army.
Hagi a Sophi a was thronged w’i th the fai thful , as were the
hundreds of other Churches throughout the ci ty. They cul -
mi nated Hol y Week surrounded by a mi l l enni um of gl ory and
majesty. Wi thi n ei ght weeks al l of them woul d be exi l ed, capti ve,
or dead. The i nfi del Turks that began gatheri ng outsi de the
great Theodosi an Wal l s that day woul d soon be upon them. The
gl ory and majesty was doomed. And everyone knew i t.
The fal l of the greatest ci ty i n al l of Chri stendom woul d send
devastati ng quakes throughout the West, shaki ng the foundati ons
207
208 GMND ILLUSIONS
of l i fe and hope and truth. The ci vi l i zed worl d woul d never be
the same.
Back i n the days when hi stori ans were but si mpl e men, the
catastrophi c conquest of Constanti nopl e was bel i eved to mark
the end of the Mi ddl e Ages. I n these more compl ex and cosmo-
pol i tan ti mes we know onl y too wel l that “the stream of hi story
fl ows on rel entl essl y and there i s never a barri er across i t .“s As
di sconti nuous as the events i n 1453 were, we must say that there
i s no sudden or preci se poi nt at whi ch the medi eval worl d was
transformed i nto the modern worl d. Long before 1453, the Ren-
ai ssance had begun i n Fl orence, Veni ce, Genoa, and Pari s.
Long after 1453, the feudal l i fe persi sted i n Fl anders, Bavari a,
and Russi a. Long before 1453, the great navi gators and di scov-
erers had begun to expl ore the ocean routes that woul d ul ti matel y
al ter the economy of the whol e worl d. Long after 1453, vast, vast
uncharted real ms were sti l l l eft for the stout of heart to cl ai m.
As cal ami tous as the events i n 1453 were, they ~were l argel y
symbol i c. They were nei ther the begi nni ng nor the end.
Si nce Cal vary there have been no absol ute di vi si ons i n hi s-
tory, onl y benchmarks.
Thus i n 1973, when another ci tadel of majesty fel l , the stream
of hi story, though di sturbed, conti nued to fl ow ever onward. As
i n the sack of Constanti nopl e, thi s modern assaul t on l i fe and
hope and truth woul d reverberate throughout the ci vi l i zed
worl d, shaki ng the foundati ons of every i nsti tuti on: fami l y,
church, and state. And yet, l ong before the Supreme Court’s
l be U. Wi de deci si on l egal i zi ng aborti on that year, l i berty and
securi ty had al ready been seri ousl y jeopardi zed. Several states
had al ready l i beral i zed thei r aborti on l aws.A Tax fundi ng for
Pl anned Parenthood had al ready been appropri ated.s And
epi demi c promi scui ty had al ready begun to ravage the kmd.G
Long after 1973 strong and ri ghteous resi stance chal l enged the
seducti ve tyranny of death on demand.
7
The church arose from
i ts cul tural sl umber and began to reassert i ts di sci pl i ni ng rol e i n
soci ety.g Pro-l i fers devel oped creati ve al ternati ves for women
and chi l dren i n cri si s.g And seri ous l egal chal l enges conti nued
to threaten Pl anned Parenthood’s death gri p on the nati on’s
purse stri ngs. 10
As cal ami tous as the deci si on i n 1973 was, l i ke the fi l l of
Constanti nopl e, i t was l argel y symbol i c. I t was nei ther the be-
gi nni ng nor the end.
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious Legacy 209
Aborti on, promi scui ty, raci sm, greed, and decepti on are as
anci ent as manki nd. I i They di d not spri ng up ful l bl own i n 1973
wi th Justi ce Bl ackrnun and the Supreme Court or even i n 1917
wi th Margaret $anger and Pl anned Parenthood. 12 And sadl y,
they wi l l probabl y conti nue to pl ague us even after Rw o. Whal e i s
overturned and Pl anned Parenthood’s ai ms are vanqui shed. l a
I n the Begi nni ng
Exposure, aborti on, chi l d sacri fi ce, and other forms of i nfan-
ti ci de more often than not were both l egal and respectabl e i n
pagan soci eti es from the earl i est ti mes. 1A Unwanted chi l dren i n
anci ent Rome were abandoned outsi de the ci ty wal l s to di e from
exposure to the el ements or from the attacks of wi l d forgi ng
beasts.i 5 The Greeks often gave pregnant women heavy doses of
herbal or medi ci nal aborti faci ents. 16 The Persi ans devel oped
hi ghl y sophi sti cated surgi cal curette procedures. 17 Anci ent Hi n-
dus and Arabs concocted chemi cal pessari es – aborti faci ents
pushed or pumped di rectl y i nto the womb through the bi rth
canal . 1* The pri mi ti ve Canaani tes threw thei r chi l dren onto
great fl ami ng pyres as a sacri fi ce to thei r god Mol ech. I g The
Pol ynesi ans subjected thei r pregnant women to onerous tor-
tures, thei r abdomens beaten wi th l arge stones or hot coal s
heaped upon thei r bodi es.zo The Egypti ans di sposed of thei r un-
wanted chi l dren, especi al l y gi rl s, by di sembowel i ng and di s-
memberi ng them. Thei r col l agen was then ri tual l y harvested for
the manufacture of cosmeti c creams.zl The more thi ngs change,
the more they stay the same.
Pl ato and Ari stotl e both recommended i nfanti ci de and abor-
ti on for Eugeni c purposes.zz Juvenal and Chrysostom reveal ed
that many aborti ons were performed i n order to conceal i l l i ci t or
i l l egal sexual acti vi ty.z3 Soranos argued that some women ki l l ed
thei r chi l dren out of sheer conveni ence or sel f-i ndul gent vani ty.z4
Ambrose and Hi ppol ytus sai d that some fami l i es resorted to
these drasti c measures for economi c reasons.zs Others, accord-
i ng to Justi ni an, di d so for rel i gi ous, i deol ogi cal , or sectari an
reasons. 26 But most women, reported Cal aetus, si mpl y were
coerced by oppressi ve cul tural norms, val ues, and structures to
despi se and reject thei r progeny.zT
I ndeed, “there i s nothi ng new under the sun” (Eccl esi astes 1:9).
210 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
From ti me to ti me voi ces were rai sed agai nst the sl aughter of
the i nnocent and hel pl ess.zB But they were l i ke voi ces cryi ng i n
the desert: haunti ngl y propheti c but scornful l y spurned.
I t was not unti l the rapi d spread of Chri sti ani ty throughout
the Medi terranean worl d i n the second and thi rd centuri es that a
consi stent and convi nci ng pro-l i fe message began to sound. But
when i t di d, the whol e ci vi l i zed worl d stopped to l i sten.zg I t was
not l ong unti l l aws were passed and a cul tural consensus was
reached to protect both women and chi l dren. so The church’s
pro-l i fe message was arresti ng.
The reason Chri sti ani ty commanded such attenti on and com-
pel l ed such acti on was not just that the sancti ty of l i fe was a new
and novel noti on. The pro-l i fe emphasi s was provocati ve because
the church fi rmed i t uni versal l y and wi thout di ssent, because i t
was undeni abl y rooted i n Scri ptural Revel ati on, and because i t was
coupl ed wi th compl ementary acti on on the part of the fai thful .sl
A#imnation. The whol ehear ted consensus of the ear l y
church was that aborti on and i nfanti ci de were i n fact nwder. S*
No i fs, ands, or buts about i t. On that, al l of the patri sti cs abso-
l utel y agreed.
The Di dache was a compi l ati on of Apostol i c moral teach-
i ngs that appeared at the end of the fi rst century. Among i ts
many admoni ti ons, i t asserted an unwaveri ng reverence for the
sancti ty of l i fe: “Do not murder a chi l d by aborti on or ki l l a
newborn i nfant .“SS
The Epistle of Barnabas was an earl y second-century theol ogi -
cal tract that was hi ghl y regarded by the fi rst Chri sti an commu-
ni ti es. Li ke the Di dache, i t l ai d down absol ute stri ctures agai nst
aborti on and i nfanti ci de: “You shal l l ove your nei ghbor more
than your own l i fe. You shal l not sl ay a chi l d by aborti on. You
shal l not ki l l that whi ch has al ready been generated.”sq
The second-century apol ogi st Athenagoras i n a l etter to
Emperor Marcus Aurel i us wrote, “We say that women who i n-
duce aborti ons are murderers, and wi l l have to gi ve account of i t
to God. . . . The fetus i n the womb i s a l i vi ng bei ng and there-
fore the object of God’s care.”3s
I n the thi rd century, Cl ement of Al exandri a asserted that
“our whol e l i fe can proceed accordi ng to God’s perfect pl an onl y
i f we gai n domi ni on over our desi res, practi ci ng conti nence from
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious LegaV 211
the begi nni ng i nstead of destroyi ng through perverse and per-
ni ci ous arts human offspri ng, who are gi ven bi rth by Di vi ne
Provi dence. Those who use aborti faci ent medi ci nes to hi de thei r
forni cati on cause not onl y the outri ght murder of the fetus, but
of the whol e human race as wel l .”sG
At about the same ti me Tertul l i an wrote i n hi s Apol ogy that
“murder i s forbi dden once and for al l . We may not destroy even
the fetus i n the womb. . . . To hi nder a bi rth i s merel y a
speedi er man-ki l l i ng. Thus, i t does not matter whether you take
away a l i fe that i s born, or destroy one that i s comi ng to the
bi rth. I n both i nstances, destructi on i s murderTsT
I n the fourth century, Basi l the Great argued, “She who has
del i beratel y destroyed a fetus must bear the penal ty for murder.
. . . Moreover, those who gi ve aborti faci ents for the destructi on
of a chi l d concei ved i n the womb are murderers themsel ves,
al ong wi th those recei vi ng the poi sons.”sB
Ambrose, bi shop of Mi l an, condemned those who “deny i n
the very womb thei r own progeny. By use of pari ci dal mi xtures
they snuff out the frui t of thei r wombs. I n thi s way l i fe i s taken
before i t i s gi ven. . . . Who except man hi msel f has taught us
ways of repudi ati ng our own chi l dren?”sg
Li kewi se, Jerome wrote that those who “dri nk poti ons to en-
sure steri l i ty are gui l ty of rebuffi ng God’s own bl essi ngs. Some,
when they l earn that the poti ons have fai l ed and thus are wi th
chi l d through si n, practi ce aborti on by the use of sti l l other
poti ons. They are then gui l ty of three cri mes: sel f-muti l ati on,
adul tery, and ‘the murder of an unborn chi l d.”qo
Augusti ne condemned those whose “l ustful cruel t~ provoked
women “to such extravagant methods as to use poi sonous drugs
to secure barrenness; or el se, i f unsuccessful i n thi s, to murder
the unborn chi l d.”41
Ori gen,Az Hi ppol ytus,4s Cypri an,qA Methodi us of Ol ympus,As
Chrysostom,qG Mi nuci us Fel i x,47 and Gregory Nazi anzusqs al l
added thei r voi ces of affi rmati on as wel l . Agai n and agai n they
decri ed the wi ckedness of aborti on and i nfanti ci de. Together
they affi rmed the sancti ty of l i fe.
Revel ati on. The potency of the church’s pro-l i fe message was
not si mpl y due to a subjecti ve unani mi ty, as i mportant as ecu-
meni cal agreement was. The Patri sti cs di d not pul l thei r vi ew of
212 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
the sancti ty of l i fe out of thi n ai r. Thei r common affi rmati on was
butanobedi ent response to God’s Revel ati on, the Bi bl e.
I t was abundantl y cl ear to those fai thful earl y Chri sti ans that
the Scri ptures commanded a reverence for l i fe. Embedded i n
every book and i nterwoven i nto every doctri ne was the un-
waveri ng standard of justi ce and mercy for al l : the weak and the
strong, the great and the smal l , the ri ch and the poor, the l ame
and the whol e, the young and the ol d, the unborn and the born.
The Bi bl e decl ares the sancti ty of l i fe i n i ts ,account of God’s
creati on (Genesi s 1:26-28; 1 Ti mothy 6:13; Psal m 36:9, Psal m
104:24-30; John 1:34; Acts 17:25).
Wm to hi m who stri ves wi th hi s Maker! Let the potsherd stri ve
wi th the potsherds of the earth. Shal l the cl ay say to hi m who
forms i t, What are you maki ng?” Or shal l your handi work say,
‘He has no hands”? Woe to hi m who says to hi s father, ‘What
are you begetti ng?” or to the woman, What have you brought
forth?” Thus says the Lord, the Hol y One of I srael , and hi s
Maker: %sk Me of thi ngs to come concerni ng My sons; and
concerni ng the work of My hands, you command Me. I have
made the earth, and created man on i t. I t was My hands that
stretched out the heavens, and al l thei r host I have commanded
(I sai ah 45:9-12).
The Bi bl e decl ares the sancti ty of l i fe i n i ts descri pti on of
God’s soverei gnty (Deuteronomy 32:39; Psal m 22:9-10; Job
10:12; John 5:21; Romans 11:36; Col ossi ans 1:16-17).
For You have formed my i nward parts; You have covered me
i n my mother’s womb. I wi l l prai se You, for I am fearful l y and
wonderful l y made; marvel ous are Your works, and that my
soul knows very wel l . My frame was not hi dden from You>
when I was made i n secret, and ski l l ful l y wrought i n the
l owest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, bei ng
yet unformed. And i n Your book they al l were wri tten, the
days fashi oned for me, when as yet there were none of them
(Psal m 139:13-16).
The Bi bl e decl ares the sancti ty of l i fe i n i ts di scussi on of
Chri st’s i ncarnati on (John 3:16; John 11:25; John 14:6; Acts
2:22-28; Col ossi ans 3:4; Romans 5:21).
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious Legmy 213
The thi ef does not come except to steal , and to ki l l , and to de-
stroy. I have come that they may have l i fe, and that they may
have i t more abundantl y (John 10:10).
The Bi bl e decl ares the sancti ty of l i fe i n i ts expl anati on of
Chri st’s redempti on (Matthew 18:10-11; Mark 10:45; Remans
8:11; 1 Cori nthi ans 15:26, 54-56; 2 Cori nthi ans 2:16; 1 John
5:11-12).
But has now been reveal ed by the appeari ng of our Savi or
Jesus Chri st, who has abol i shed death and brought l i fe and i m-
mortal i ty to l i ght through the Gospel (2 Ti mothy 1:10).
The Bi bl e decl ares the sancti ty of l i fe i n i ts exposi ti on of judi -
ci al ethi cs (Genesi s 9:6; Exodus 20:13; Exodus 21:22-25; Levi ti -
cus 24:17; I sai ah 1:15; 1 Peter 3:7).
I cal l heaven and earth as wi tnesses today agai nst you, that I
have set before you l i fe and death, bl essi ng and cursi ng; there-
fore choose l i fe, that both you and your descendants may l i ve
(Deuteronomy 30:19).
The Bi bl e decl ares the sancti ty of l i fe i n i ts exhortati on to
covenantal mercy (Deuteronomy 10:18; I sai ah 1:17; I sai ah
58:6-7; Acts 5:20; James 1:27; Ti tus 2:11-14).
I f you fai nt i n the day of adversi ty, your strength i s smal l .
Del i ver those who are drawn toward death, and hol d back
those stumbl i ng to the sl aughter. I f you say, “Surel y we di d not
know thi s,” does not He who wei ghs the hearts consi der i t? He
who keeps your soul , does He not know i t? (Proverbs 24:10-12).
From Genesi s to Revel ati on (Genesi s 2: 7; Revel ati on 22 :17),
i n the Books of the Law (Exodus 4:12; Levi ti cus 19:16), i n the
Books of Hi story (Judges 13:2-24; 1 Samuel 16:7), i n the Books
of Wi sdom (Psal m 68:5-6; Proverbs 29:7), i n the Propheti c
Books (Amos 1:13; Jeremi ah 1:5), i n the Gospel s (Matthew 10:31;
Luke 1:15, 41-44), and i n the Epi stl es (Gal ati ans 1:15; 1 Cori nthi -
ans 15: 22), the pro-l i fe message of the Bi bl e i s absol utel y i nesca-.
pabl e. I t i s i ndeed “the Word of Li fe” (Phi l i ppi ans 2:16).
214 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Thus, when Chri sti ans spoke to thei r cul ture i n defense of
l i fe and l i berty, tl i ey spoke wi th great authori ty. Thei rs was a
message rooted i n precept, not mere prejudi ce or preference.
Application. The earl y Chri sti ans dramati cal l y redi rected the
ci vi l i zed worl d’s atti tude toward and treatment of the hel pl ess.
But i t was not just on the strength of thei r common affi rmati on
and Bi bl i cal Revel ati on that they were abl e to wi n the day.
Those fai thful pi oneers proclaimed a pro-l i fe message and believed
a pro-l i fe message, so they lived a pro-l i fe message.
I n Rome, Chri sti ans rescued babi es that had been aban-
doned on the exposure wal l s outsi de the ci ty.qg These “found-
l i ngs” woul d then be adopted and rai sed up i n the nurture and
admoni ti on of the Lord.sO
I n Cori nth, Chri sti ans offered chari ty, mercy, and refuge to
templ e prosti tutes who had become pregnant .51 These despi sed,
rejected, abused, and expl oi ted women were taken i nto homes
where they coul d safel y have thei r chi l dren and then get a fresh
start on l i fe .52
I n Caesarea, Chri sti ans cared for the poor, the si ck, the
sufferi ng, the l ame, and the aged i n cl i ni cs and hostel s~sq The
church protected and provi ded for these unwanted and di spos-
sessed soul s wi thout parti al i ty. 54
Whenever and wherever the Gospe~ went out, bel i evers
emphasi zed the pri ori ty of good works,ss especi al l y works of
compassi on toward the needy.sG For the fi rst ti me i n hi story,
hospi tal s were founded,sT orphanages were establ i shed,ss rescue
mi ssi ons were started,sg al mshouse were bui l t ,GO soup ki tchens
were begun,Gl shel ters were endowed,G* chari tabl e soci eti es were
i ncorporated,Gs and rel i ef agenci es were commi ssi oned.G4 The
hungry were fed, the naked cl othed, the homel ess shel tered, the
si ck nursed, the aged honored, the unborn protected, and the
handi capped cheri shed.Gs
The pro-l i fe message of the church was not mere rhetori c. I t
was a commi tment. I t was a l i festyl e. And as a resul t, i t made a
deep and l asti ng i mpressi on on the whol e ci vi l i zed worl d.GG Even
i n those regi ons where the Chri sti an fai th never predomi nated,
or where the Gospel took root onl y to be suppl anted l ater, the
sancti ty of l i fe was grafted i nto the cul tural consci ence .67
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious Legacy 215
The i dea that i nfanti ci de and aborti on are wrong, then, i s a
di sti nctl y Chri sti an i dea. And i t i s an i dea that the church has
always hel d to.Gs At no ti me i n i ts vaunted two-thousand-year hi s-
tory has i t ever wavered. I ts wi tness, rooted i n common affi rma-
ti on, Scri ptural Revel ati on, and sel fl ess appl i cati on has never
been repudi ated.
At l east, not unti l now.
The Betrayal
Al l of the church’s forefathers, fathers, patri archs, prophets,
apostl es, preachers, evangel i sts, martyrs, confessors, asceti cs,
theol ogi ans, and every ri ghteous spi ri t made perfect i n fai th
have tenaci ousl y defended the sancti ty of l i fe. I n ti mes of perse-
cuti on and ti mes of tri umph, i n ti mes of adversi ty and ti mes of
prosperi ty, i n ti mes of confl i ct and ti mes of peace, they have re-
mai ned stal wart and steadfast. None of them ever even consi d-
ered di ssenti ng from the common affi rmati on of the fai thful .
None of them ever even consi dered denyi ng the cl ear Revel ati on
of the Bi bl e. And none of them ever even consi dered departi ng
from the practi cal appl i cati on of compassi on. After al l , these are
the very thi ngs that make Chri sti ani ty what i t i s: ort/zodoxy,Gg
orthopraxy, 70 and orthotraditio. 71
Today though, there are men and women i n the church
who not onl y consi der abandoni ng these thi ngs, they do i t. And
wi th rel i sh. Tz
Sadl y, those men and women now actual l y control most of
the l arge mai nl i ne denomi nati ons i n the Ameri can church. I n
the fi rst three decades of the twenti eth century, i t seemed that al l
of the church’s spi ri tual and i nsti tuti onal resol ve col l apsed i n the
face of Pl anned Parenthood’s unrel enti ng assaul ts. The ‘l i ght of
the worl d” fel l i nto l ock-step wi th prevai l i ng death-ethi c consensus
of a dark and di smal worl d.
I n Ameri ca, after an al l -out l obbyi ng effort by Pl anned
Parenthood, the Commi ttee on Marri age and the Home of the
Federal Counci l of Churches – a precursor to the Nati onal
Counci l – became the fi rst major eccl esi asti cal i nsti tuti on i n the
hi story of Chri stendom to affi rm the l anguage, phi l osophy, and
ethi cal methodol ogy of “choi ce .=73 Soon after, the Quakers,
the Northern Presbyteri ans, the Congregati onal church, the
216 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Methodi st-Epi scopal church, and several Bapti st denomi nati ons
fol l owed sui t.
I n Germany, the cooperati ng church accepted Pl anned
Parenthood’s l ogi c i n gi vi ng taci t approval to the Nazi Rei ch’s
harsh Erbgedrumiheitsgetz l aws – whi ch prescri bed compul sory
aborti ons, steri l i zati ons, and eugeni c control s for “dysgeni c” peo-
pl es throughout occupi ed Eastern Europe, i ncl udi ng the “Fi nal
Sol uti on” that had been di vi sed for the Jews.
Even the Lambeth conference of Angl i can bi shops around
the worl d capi tul ated to Pl anned Parenthood presupposi ti ons i n
thei r statements on marri age, fami l y l i fe, and bi rth l i mi tati on.
When the Cathol i c church bemoaned thi s gross abdi cati on of
hi stori c orthodoxy, several l eadi ng European Protestants offered
a stri dent defense argui ng that God “i s reveal ed i n the endl ess
sweep of evol uti on and Hi s message i s bei ng sl owl y transl ated by
sci ence i nto the accents of the human tongue.” I nstead of rel yi ng
on the Bi bl e or Chri sti an tradi ti on, they sai d, the church shoul d
be gui ded by “the l i ght of the evi dence, the knowl edge, and the
experi ence of our ti me .“
74
I t was not l ong before an aval anche of compromi se occurred.
The Uni ted Church of Chri st – whi ch had l ed a pro-l i fe i ni ti -
ati ve i n Ameri ca just two generati ons earl i er — affi rmed “the
sacredness of al l l i fe, and the need to protect human l i fe i n par-
ti cul ar,” but then went on to uphol d “the ri ght of men and women
to have access to adequatel y funded fami l y pl anni ng servi ces,
and to safe and l egal aborti ons as one opti on among others .“7s
The Uni ted Methodi st Church decl ared:
Our bel i ef i n the sancti ty of unborn human l i fe makes us rel uctant
to approve aborti on. But we are equal l y bound to respect the
sacredness of l i fe and wel l -bei ng of the mother for who devas-
tati ng damage may resul t from an unacceptabl e pregnancy. I n
conti nui ty wi th past Chri sti an teachi ng, we recogni ze tragi c
confl i cts of l i fe wi th l i fe that may justi fy aborti on, and i n such
cases support the l egal opti on of aborti on under proper medi -
cal procedures. ‘G
The Fri ends church asserted:
On rel i gi ous, moral , and humani tari an grounds, we arri ved at
the vi ew that i t i s far better to end an unwanted pregnancy than
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious Legmy 217
to encourage the evi l s resul ti ng from forced pregnancy and
chi l dbi rth. We therefore urge the repeal of al l l aws l i mi ti ng
ei ther the ci rcumstances under whi ch a woman may have an
aborti on or the physi ci an’s freedom to use hi s or her best pro-
fessi onal judgment i n performi ng i t.Tr-
The Ameri can Bapti st churches bapti zed the Mal thusi an
rhetori c, sayi ng:
We gri eve wi th al l who struggl e wi th the di ffi cul t ci rcumstances
that l ead them to consi der aborti on. Recogni zi ng that each per-
son i s ul ti matel y responsi bl e to God, we encourage women and
men i n these ci rcumstances to seek spi ri tual counsel as they
prayerful l y and consci enti ousl y consi der aborti on.Ts
The l argest Lutheran communi ons worl dwi de, reaffi rmed
the pri nci pl es of thei r Nazi col l aborati on by stati ng:
I n th e con s i der ati on of i n du ced abor ti on , th e k ey i s s u e i s the
status of the unbor n fetus. Si nce the fetus i s the or gani c begi n-
ni ng of h u ma n l i f e, th e ter mi n a ti on of i ts dev el opmen t i s
al way s a ser i ous matter . Nev er thel ess, a qual i tati v e di sti ncti on
must be made between i ts cl ai ms and the r i ghts of a r esponsi bl e
per son made i n God’s i mage who i s l i vi ng i n r el ati onshi ps wi th
God and other human bei ngs. Thi s under standi ng of r esponsi bl e
per s on h ood i s con gr u en t wi th the hi stor i cal Luther an teachi ng
and pr acti ce wher eby onl y l i v i ng per s ons ar e bapti zed. On the
basi s of ti e ev angel i cal ethi c, a woman or coupl e may deci de
r es pon s i bl y to s eek an aborti on.’g
Even a l arge number of promi nent Evangel i cal l eaders from
around the worl d yi el ded to the temptati ons of Pl anned Parent-
hood’s l ogi c. Meeti ng under the auspi ces of Chrhti ani ty Today
magazi ne and the Chri sti an Medi cal Soci ety, and l ed by the
hi ghl y esteemed Carl F. H. Henry, the Evangel i cal engaged i n
debate and exchanged papers for several days before they drafted
a consensus report. Publ i shed l ater i n the magazi ne, the report
sai d i n part: -
Changes i n the state l aws on therapeuti c aborti on shoul d be
encour aged. 80
218 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Sui tabl e cases for aborti on woul d fal l wi thi n the scope of the
Ameri can Col l ege of Obstetri ci ans and Gynecol ogi sts State-
ment on Aborti on. 81
As to whether or not the performance of an i nduced aborti on i s
al ways si nful we are not agreed, but about the permi ssi bi l i ty for
i t under certai n ci rcumstances we are i n accord.BZ
The Chri sti an physi ci an wi l l advi se i nduced aborti on onl y to
sti eguard greater val ues sancti oned by Scri pture. These val ues
shoul d i ncl ude i ndi vi dual heal th, fami l y wel fare, and soci al
responsi bi l i t y.ss
Much human sufferi ng can be al l evi ated by preventi ng the
bi rth of chi l dren where there i s a predi ctabl e hi gh ri sk of geneti c
di sease or abnormal i ty. Thi s appears to be a reasonabl e Chri s-
ti an objecti ve.
84
Though many of the theol ogi ans and i nsti tuti ons that parti -
ci pated i n the symposi um l ater amended thei r pro-aborti on
stance, i t was, by then, too l ate.
Not onl y di d much of the church jetti son thei r hi stori c pro-
l i fe commi tments to offi ci al l y embrace the ol d pagan consensus
about aborti on and i nfanti ci de, they al so successful l y di verted
mi l l i ons of dol l ars – i ntended by pari shi oners for mi ssi ons – i nto
radi cal causes and mi l i tant organi zati ons l i ke Pl anned Parent-
hood.ss Addi ti onal l y, many of them have even devel oped organ-
i zati onal ti es,sG recrui ted stti vol unteers,sT pi oneered cooperati ve
pro~ams, ** sponsored semi nars and conferences,*g co-publ i shed
educati onal l i terature,go fi l ed ami cus bri efs,gl l ent the use of
church properti es ,92 and establ i shed publ i c testi monygs for
Pl anned Parenthood.
I n l ess than a generati on they were abl e to whi sk away the
two-thousand-year-ol d voi ce of ecumeni cal affi rmati on, the eter-
nal wi tness of Di vi ne Revel ati on, and the spi ri tual servi ce of
chari tabl e appl i cati on. I n l ess than a generati on they were abl e
to betray the most basi c pri nci pl es of the Chri sti an fai th.
The Bal ak Strategy
When Bal ak, Ki ng of Moab, was confronted wi th the advanc-
i ng armi es of I srael i mmedi atel y fol l owi ng the Exodus sojourn,
he began to cast about for a strategy to stop them (Numbers
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious Legacy 219
22:2-3). Mi l i tary confrontati on seemed hopel ess. Di pl omati c ap-
peasement seemed sui ci dal . And defensi ve al l i ances seemed
del i nquent (Numbers 22:4). So i n desperati on he sent for
Bal aam, a di vi ner, who was thought to have the power to bl ess
and bi nd through spel l s and i ncantati ons (Numbers 22: 5-6).
At fi rst the magi ci an was rel uctant to take part i n Bal ak’s
pl oy despi te hi s generous offer (Numbers 22:15-35). But eventu-
al l y he gave i n and del i vered four oracl es (Numbers 22:36-24:25).
Much to Bal ak’s chagri n, however, each of the oracl es predi cted
that I srael was i nvi nci bl e from wi thout. No army, no ki ng, no
nati on, and no empi re woul d be abl e to stand agai nst i t. The
onl y way God’s Chosen Peopl e coul d be defeated was i f they de-
feated themsel ves through moral defi l ement.
That was al l Bal ak needed to know. He di dn’t need an army.
He di dn’t need di pl omats. He di dn’t need al l i es. And he di dn’t
even need di vi ners. He woul d rel y on wol ves i n sheep’s cl othi ng
(2 Ti mothy 3:6).
The next ti me the curtai ns of hi story draw back, the women
of Moab have gone down i nto I srael ’s camp at Peer. Enti ci ng the
peopl e to pl ay the harl ot, those women were abl e to do what no
warri or or general possi bl y coul d: trap and defeat I srael . And
not a sword was drawn. Not an arrow was unsheathed. Not a
javel i n was hurl ed.
I t woul d be several hundred years before Moab woul d be
abl e to consummate thei r vi ctory and actual l y sack the capi tal of
I srael . But that future conquest i n Jerusal em was ensured by the
moral defeat wrought by Bal ak’s women at Peer.
Earl y on, Pl anned Parenthood adopted a si mi l ar strategy
agai nst the church. Margaret Sanger recogni zed that the
church was ‘the enemy” of her crusade.gq But she al so recog-
ni zed that an al l -out frontal assaul t on God’s Peopl e was
sui ci dal .gs And so she put together a “Bal ak strategy.” She rel i ed
on wol ves i n sheep’s cl othi ng (2 Ti mothy 3:6).
Margaret began by wooi ng young and ambi ti ous mi ni sters
wi th the tri nkets and baubl es of power, presti ge, pri vi l ege, and po-
si ti on. She doted on them, feedi ng thei r sense of sel f-i mportance .96
She enti ced them wi th honors.gT She i nvi ted them to si t on her
boards.ga She patroni zed thei r pet projects.gg She wi ned them
and di ned them. 100 She rewarded them wi th tri ps, junkets, and
220 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
tours. 101 She knew just how to tantal i ze them wi th attenti on and
appreci ati on. 10Z Her wi nsomeness was i rresi sti bl e and her thor-
oughness was i ncomparabl e. 10S
.:
But even wi thout al l that al l uri ng charm, Margaret’s camp-
ai gn to seduce Chri sti ans woul d probabl y have won support i n
three broad sectors of the church.
Racists. Especi al l y duri ng the Great Depressi on when tensi ons
were hi gh and jobs were scarce, raci sts saw Margaret’s Eugeni c
pl ans and programs as an open opportuni ty to el i mi nate whol e
“undesi red” races and “dysgeni c” cl asses. 11J4 Tragi cal l y many of
them carri ed out thei r vendetta i n the name of Chri st. 10S
Letti e Perki ns grew up i n a smal l sharecropper’s cabi n deep
i n the heart of rural South Carol i na. When she was just a
youngster she remembers a countywi de tent revi val meeti ng
cosponsored by several l arge al l -Whi te Bapti st churches and
several soci al servi ce agenci es, i ncl udi ng Pl anned Parenthood.
‘We were al l exci ted,
=
she sai d. “The revi val was al ways the so- ‘
ci al event of the year. And that year was to be the fi rst ti me
Bl acks were al l owed to attend. We coul d hardl y contai n our-
sel ves. Most of the women bought or made new dresses. We got
hats and gl oves. We real l y were goi ng to do thi ngs ri ght. I t was
l i ke a debutante’s comi ng-out for us.”
The pastor of one of the sponsori ng churches spent a good
deal of hi s ti me for nearl y a month before the revi val maki ng
sure that bl ack pastors i n the area turned thei r peopl e out. “I
don’t know why we were so nai ve at the ti me,” Letti e tol d me. “I t
was so obvi ous that he was setti ng us up for somethi ng.”
I ndeed, he was. On the day that the revi val was to begi n,
Pl anned Parenthood set up several tents. Bl acks were herded
i nto them and “counsel ed” on the “benefi ts” of steri l i zati on and
bi rth l i mi tati on. We weren’t even al l owed to go i nto the revi val
meeti ng i tsel f unti l we’d l i stened to thei r whol e spi el ,’ Letti e sai d.
‘And even then, they segregated us off to one si de. Li ke usual .”
Most of the Bl ack fami l i es were outraged. The bl atantl y
raci st col l usi on between Pl anned Parenthood and the al l -Whi te
churches was shocki ng to them, even i n that day of raw and fes-
teri ng prejudi ce. “I can sti l l remember my Mamma just shaki ng
wi th anger and humi l i ati on,” Letti e sai d. “Our fami l y newr went
to church agai n. Not any church, Bl ack or Whi te. Mamma
A Divine Tragedy: Tb Religious Legacy 222
di dn’t want to have anythi ng to do wi th a fai th that coul d sanc-
ti on thi ngs l i ke that.”
Liberals. But i t wasn’t just raci sts that were attracted to Mar-
garet Sanger’s cause. Duri ng the fi rst three decades of thi s cen-
tury, the great Moderni st-Fundamental i st controversy erupted
onto the Ameri can church scene. 1°G More di srupti ve than even
the el eventh-century Schi sm l OT or the si xteenth-century Refor-
mati on, 10B the controversy forever changed the face of Chri sti an-
i ty i n thi s country. 109 I n reacti on to the Moderni sts’ emphasi s on
the “Soci al Gospel : most Fundamental i sts wi thdrew from al l
cul tural i nvol vement to focus on ‘spi ri tual thi ngs .”l l o Meanwhi l e
the Moderni sts pursued cul tural i nvol vement wi th a vengeance,
uncri ti cal l y embraci ng every fri nge Li beral cause, i ssue, and or-
gani zati on i ncl udi ng Pl anned Parenthood. I l l Si nce the conserva-
ti ve Fundamental i sts no l onger acti vel y opposed them, the
Li beral s were abl e to capture the seats of power and i nfl uence. 112
Men who no l onger bel i eved the Bi bl e and who were com-
mi tted to a radi cal soci al agenda were easy prey for Margaret. 113
She expl oi ted the Li beral coup bri l l i antl y. 114
Ri chard L. Ford was the young i deal i sti c pastor of a l arge
Methodi st church on the West Coast duri ng Worl d War I I .
Al ready thoroughl y i nfected wi th Li beral i sm even then, hi s con-
gregati on sponsored several cooperati ve programs wi th Pl anned
Parenthood. “At the ti me we were gi ddy wi th exci tement ,“ he
tol d me recentl y. ‘We fel t that we’d been sequestered i n a rel i -
gi ous ghetto. That we’d been i rrel evant for years. Now at l ast we
were doi ng thi ngs that made a dz#&ence i n the worl d. Unshackl ed
of every encumbrance —tradi ti on, the Bi bl e, everythi ng— we
l oyal l y fol l owed every new fad and fashi on.”
A funny thi ng happened on the way to rel evance, however.
“I found that I di dn’t have answers any more,” Ri chard sai d.
‘When peopl e are faci ng a cri si s i n thei r l i ves they don’t need
thei r pastor to experi ment on thei r soul s and mi nds wi th what-
ever the l atest pop therapy i s. They need answers. When teens
are faci ng a barrage of temptati on you just can’t turn them over
to Pl anned Parenthood. That’s l i ke throwi ng gas on a fi re. They
need standards. Sol i d and sure .“
No l onger abl e to provi de hi s congregati on wi th deci si ve
gui dance, Ri chard was l eft hel pl ess i n the face of a rapi dl y
222 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
deteri orati ng moral cl i mate. “There wasn’t any such thi ng as si n
any more for us ,“ he sai d. “So, not surpri si ngl y, we began to i n-
dul ge oursel ves. I l l egi ti mate pregnanci es skyrocketed. Di vorce
rates soared. And the worse thi ngs got, the more we turned to
the very organi zati ons that prompted our demi se i n the fi rst
pl ace. I magi ne! Goi ng to Pl anned Parenthood to sol ve the teen
pregnancy epi demi c! That makes about as much sense as goi ng
to a pusher to stop drug abuse or to a pi mp to stop prosti tuti on.
But, that’s exactl y what we di d.”
Compromisers. Margaret Sanger was abl e to successful l y re-
crui t l arge numbers of Fundamental i st, Evangel i cal , Cathol i c,
and Orthodox Chri sti ans i nto her fol d as wel l . Unl i ke the raci sts
and l i beral s who were converts of consci ence, these men and
women were converts of conveni ence. 115 They were fi ne, up-
standi ng Chri sti ans who opposed Pl anned Parenthood’s pro-
mi scuous sex educati on programs. They stood fi rml y agai nst
aborti on. Unti l . . .
Charl es Boothe i s a respected and admi red Chri sti an l eader.
A former pastor and now the chai rman of hi s church’s deacon
board, he runs a communi ty-wi de youth mi ni stry. From the ex-
pressi on on hi s face I coul d tel l that he was deepl y di sturbed
when he wal ked i nto my offi ce. ‘Jeani e, my youngest daughter,
i s pregnant ~ he tol d me. “She’s just seventeen, a seni or i n hi gh
school . What am I goi ng to do? She has her whol e l i fe ahead of
her. Why thi s? Why now?”
We bri efl y tal ked through the Bi bl i cal opti ons: materni ty
homes, adopti on agenci es, al ternati ve centers, and marri age to
the father. We consol ed one another. We wept together. We
prayed together. And we tal ked l ong i nto the afternoon. We em-
braced warml y when he l eft.
He then promptl y took Jeani e to Pl anned Parenthood and
had hi s grandchi l d ki l l ed.
I was shocked.
Why? Why woul d he do such a thi ng? Why woul d he resort ‘
to that whi ch he knew was wrong?
“I ’ve al ways been agai nst aborti on,” he tol d me l ater. “Al ways.
And I sti l l bel i eve that i t’s wrong. I t’s murder. But . . . I tel l ya.
When i t’s your own daughter. . . . Wel l , I just coul dn’t see rui ni ng
her l i fe by maki ng her go through the humi l i ati on of an i l l e@ti -
A Divine Tragedy: The Religious Legacy 223
mate pregnancy. And besi des, our reputati on . . . my reputa-
ti on. . . . Wel l , I uh . . . I just. . . . Wel l , you know.”
Margaret Sanger’s “Bal ak Strategy” proved to be a phenomenal
success. Enti ci ng Chri sti ans to “pl ay the harl ot ,“ she was abl e to
do what no acti vi st or i deol ogue possi bl y coul d: trap and defeat
the church (Numbers 25:18).
I t woul d be several decades before Pl anned Parenthood
woul d be abl e to consummate i ts vi ctory and actual l y sack the
ci tadel of Chri sti an consensus. 116 But that future conquest i n the
Supreme Court was ensured by the moral defeat wrought by
Margaret’s mi ni ons i n the church. 117
Reapi ng the Whi rl wi nd
Margaret Sanger’s “Bal ak Strategy” and the church’s capi tu-
l ati on have had devastati ng resul ts. Even Bi bl e-bel i evi ng Evan-
gel i cal , tradi ti onal Cathol i cs, and fai thful Orthodox Chri sti ans
have been caught i n a mael strom of destructi on.
I n a recent survey conducted for Josh McDowel l ’s Why Wai t?
campai gn, i t was reveal ed that as many as forty-three percent of
“al l Chri sti an teens have experi enced i ntercourse, wi th another
twel ve percent reporti ng sexual acti vi ty just shy of that. 118
Ei ghty percent of those teens confessed Chri st as thei r “personal
Savi or.’’l l g And si xty-seven percent agreed that “the Bi bl e i s a
total l y rel i abl e gui de for al l si tuati ons.” l z”
What the survey seems to i ndi cate i s that the moral and be-
havi oral di sti ncti ons between bel i evers and unbel i evers have
al most compl etel y di sappeared.
Moab was abl e to prevai l over I srael onl y when that nati on l ost
i ts di sti ncti veness and became assi mi l ated i nto Moabi te cul ture.
Pl anned Parenthood has been abl e to prevai l over the
church si mpl y because Bel i evers have al l owed themsel ves to be-
come assi mi l ated i nto a corrupt and promi scuous cul ture.
An anal ysi s of Pl anned Parenthood’s cl i ni c vi si t records hi gh-
l i ghts that di smal ti uth. 121A random sampl e of nearl y thi rty-fi ve
thousand medi cal charts from fourteen affi l i ates coast-to-coast
reveal ed that si xty-two percent of the gi rl s recei vi ng aborti ons
i denti fi ed themsel ves as Evangel i cal Chri sti ans. 122 Another
twenty percent professed to be ei ther Cathol i c or Orthodox. 123
Of those ei ghty-two percent, a ful l seventy-si x percent not onl y
224 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
speci fi ed thei r rel i gi ous preference, they i denti fi ed thei r l ocal
church membershi p and pastor. 1*4
The noti on that i t i s pri mari l y “rank heathens” or ‘fl ami ng
l i beral s” who are aborti ng thei r future away si mpl y doesn’t hol d
up under the facts. The scandal of Pl anned Parenthood has be-
come the scandal of the church. Sowi ng the wi nd, i t has reaped
the whi rl wi nd (Hosea 8:7).
Achan i n the Camp
Fl ushed wi th confi dence fol l owi ng thei r spectacul ar vi ctory
at Jeri cho, the peopl e of I srael advanced to the much smal l er,
much weaker ci ty of Ai . So certai n were they of another vi ctory
that they sent up onl y a very smal l conti ngent to take the ci ty
(Joshua 7:2-3).
Much to thei r surpri se, however, the men of Ai routed thei r
vastl y superi or forces (Joshua 7:4-5).
Joshua and the l eaders of the nati on fel l on thei r faces i n fear
and trembl i ng before God. Tryi ng to make rhyme or reason out
of the l opsi ded battl e, they begged for an expl anati on (Joshua
7:6-9). And what was God’s repl y?
The Lord sai d to Joshua: “Get up! Why do you l i e thus on
your face? I srael has si nned, and they have al so transgressed
My covenant whi ch I commanded them. For they have even
taken some of the accursed thi ngs, and have both stol en and
decei ved; and they have al so put i t among thei r own stuff”
(Joshua 7:10-11).
I t seems that one man, Achan, had vi ol ated God’s speci fi c
commands, hi di ng hi s si n i n hi s tent, and thus had brought
judgment and condemnati on upon the enti re nati on.
Ai was l ost, and l i ves were l ost. Al l because Achan was i n the
camp. Al l because si n was i n the tent.
There are any number of Chri sti ans today who are dumb-
founded i n the face of our i mpotence agai nst Pl anned Parent-
hood. They cannot understand why we are so constantl y and
consi stentl y defeated when we contend wi th i ts forces i n our
school s, our courts, and our assembl i es. But the reason i s abun-
dantl y cl ear. We cannot effecti vel y assaul t the gates of Pl anned
Parenthood unti l we cast Achan out of the camp. We cannot
A Diuine Tragedy: The Religious Legacy 225
cessful l y vanqui sh Pl anned Parenthood unti l we repent of the si n
hi dden i n our own tent.
Judge not, that you be not judged. For wi th what judgment
you judge, you wi l l be judged; and wi th the same measure you
use, i t wi l l be measured back to you. And why do you l ook at
the speck i n your brother’s eye, but do not consi der the pl ank i n
your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, “Let me
remove the speck out of your eye,’ and l ook, a pl ank i s i n your
own eye? Hypocri te ! Fi rst remove the pl ank from your own
eye, and then you wi l l see cl earl y to remove the speck out of
your brother’s eye (Matthew 7:1-5).
Concl usi on
Ci ti ng the modern Ameri can church’s ambi val ence to l i fe,
mercy, justi ce, and truth, Federal Judge John F. Dool i ng, Jr.,
rul ed that the Supreme Court’s pro-aborti on stand was “i n the
mai nstream of the nati on’s rel i gi ous tradi ti on.” 125
By al l i ndi cati ons, he was ri ght.
Aborti on i s sti l l l egal i n Ameri ca because Ameri can Chri s-
ti ans sti l l want i t l egal .
Runni ng i n the face of Scri pture and tradi ti on, truth and ex-
peri ence, wi sdom and di screti on, and sancti ty and justi ce, the
church has bol stered the sordi d ki l l i ng busi ness of Pl anned
Parenthood by both i ts compl acency and compl i ci ty, for both i ts
conveni ence and i ts conti nuance.
We can poi nt our condemni ng fi ngers at Pl anned Parent-
hood, but unti l we turn our gaze toward home, we wi l l never be
abl e to gi ve a convi nci ng rendi ti on of i ndi gnati on.
And we wi l l never be abl e to remove the sti gma of death and
destructi on from our l and.
Judgment begi ns wi th the house of God.l zG
Wel l i t shoul d.
P A R T T H R E E
THE TRUTH
An imbecile habit has ari sen i n modern controversy of saying that such and
such a creed can be held in one age but cannot be held in anothen Some dopa,
we are told, was credible in the twel)h century, but is not credible in the
twentieth. You might as well say that a certain philosophy can be believed on
Mondays, but cannot be believed on Twm!q.ys. You might a well say of a
view of the cosmos that it was suitable to haZf-pa-st three, but not suitable for
half-past four. What a man can believe depends upon his philosophy, not
upon the clock or the century. 1
G. K. Chesterton
T W E L V E
SLAYING DRAGONS:
THE CHARACTER
TO CONFRONT
cum taent clamant
2
Whuteuer is buried right into our blood>om the immemorial habit of ho~ tradition,
we must be certain to dQ I f we are to befair~ happy, and what is more important,
&cent and secure of our souk.
3
Hilaire Etelloc
By the thi rteenth century, medi eval ci vi l i zati on had reached
i ts hei ght. I t had al so pl unged to i ts depth.
The Chri sti an fai th mi ngl ed wi th specul ati ve phi l osophy, hu-
mani st soci ol ogy, and recal ci trant theol ogy i n urbane ami ty. The
arts fl ouri shed. Trade was prosperous and abundant. The woes
and cares of the Dark Ages were past. Merri ment abounded.
At the same ti me, moral i ty deteri orated. Troubadours spread
l i beral and l asci vi ous noti ons from town to town. Women were
i mperi ousl y beauti ful and i mpi ousl y i mmodest. Greed, avari ce,
and materi al i sm domi nated the peopl e’s l i ves.
I nto thi s vol ati l e mi x of ol d and new, good and bad, vi rtue
and vi ce, came a profusi on of new cul ts and sects. Movi ng wi th
returni ng Crusaders, waves of Ori ental mysti ci sm and occul ti sm
assaul ted Chri sti an truth remorsel essl y. From the Persi ans, they
brought echoes of Mani chean dual i sm and Mazdaki an commu-
ni sm. From the Turks, they brought an asceti c i conocl asm and
resi gned fatal i sm. From the Hi ndus, they brought a l i berti ne
Gnosti ci sm and a l ust for the obscene.
A bevy of rel i gi ous communi ti es sprang up around these odd
heresi es and the men who procl ai med them. The Paul i ci ans and
229
230 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Bogomi l es gai ned wi de fol l owi ngs i n the Bal kans, al ong the
edge of Byzanti um. The BeWi nes and Beghards gai ned wi de-
rangi ng popul ari ty i n the Low Countri es of Fl anders and Lothi er.
The Wal densi ans and the Al bi gensi ans won devotees throughout
Toul ouse, Lyons, and al l of Southern France. Before l ong, the
thri vi ng towns al ong the Medi terranean were honeycombed
wi th apostates zeal ousl y prosel yti zi ng for thei r cause. “The
ci ti es,” one Bi shop excl ai med, “are jilled wi th these fal se proph-
ets.”q I ndeed, Mi l an al one had seventeen new rel i gi ons. Cul ts
outnumbered churches i n Vi terbo, Ferrara, and Ri mi ni . And
defecti ons i n Orl eans, Avi gnon, Sardi ca, and Ni comedi a had
become terri bl y al armi ng.
Most of the sects had an amazi ng uni formi ty of dogma.
They al l shared an Ari an concepti on of Chri st and a Mani chean
noti on of creati on. They were paci fi sti c and asceti c. They were
communi sti c and anarchi sti c. They exal ted i ndi vi dual auton-
omy, l i berty, and equal i ty. They were general l y sexual l y
i ndul gent, opposed to tradi ti onal fami l y l i fe, and rejected chi l d-
beari ng and reari ng as oppressi ve. They revi ved the popul ari ty
of aborti on, i nfanti ci de, and euthanasi a. Because they aban-
doned vocati ons and work, they often resorted to theft, confi sca-
ti on, l ooti ng, decepti on, conspi racy, and di vi si veness. They
i ndul ged i n drunkenness, carousi ng, and al l manner of sensual -
i t y. The y dabbl ed i n sorcery, wi tchcraft, al chemy, astrol ogy,
di vi ni ng, and i dol atry. Of course, these tendenci es and practi ces
vari ed somewhat from ti me to ti me, from pl ace to pl ace, and
from cul t to cul t, but thei r general conformi ty was such that
churchmen often referred to them al l by the name of the l argest
and best-organi zed group: the Cathari .
At fi rst, the church was tol erant and i ndul gent. But, as the
cul ts became more and more extreme, and as thei r excesses
wreaked more and more havoc, i t saw the necessi ty of confront-
i ng and exposi ng them.
The Apostl e Paul had warned bel i evers not to tol erate the
evi l and unfrui tful “deeds of darkness,” but, rather, to “expose
them.” The questi on was, were the cul ts actual l y evi l , or were
they si mpl y misguided ?
Bernard of Cl ai rveaux, the greatest Western preacher of the
day, answered by sayi ng that evi l was “not a matter of opi ni on.”s
The Scri ptures had afforded men, he sai d, wi th an objecti ve,
measurabl e, and tangi bl e defi ni ti on of evi l :
Slaying Dragons: The Charazter to Confront 231
Now the deeds of the fl esh are evi dent, whi ch are: i mmoral i ty,
i mpuri ty, sensual i ty, i dol atry, sorcery, enmi ti es, stri fe, jeal ousy,
outbursts of anger, di sputes, di ssensi ons, facti ons, envyi ng,
drunkenness, carousi ng, and thi ngs l i ke these, of whi ch I
forewarn you just as I have forewarned you that those who
practi ce such thi ngs shal l not i nheri t the ki ngdom of God
(Gal ati ans 5:19-21).
Gregory Pal amas, the greatest Eastern theol ogi an of the day,
l i kewi se answered, sayi ng, “The church has no opti on,” but to
‘appl y the unerri ng, unwaveri ng Standard” agai nst al l “concepts
and noti ons that chal l enge the Ti -uth.”G Evi l was not a matter of
degree, he argued, i t was knowabl e and defi nabl e: T
There are si x thi ngs whi ch the Lord hates, yes, seven whi ch are
an abomi nati on to Hi m: haughty eyes, a l yi ng tongue, and
hands that shed i nnocent bl ood, a heart that devi ses wi cked
pl ans, feet that run rapi dl y to evi l , a fal se wi tness who utters l i es,
and one who spreads stri fe among brothers (Proverbs 6:16-19).
Both Bernard and Gregory determi ned to expose these
Scri ptural l y-defi ned evi l s, and before l ong were met wi th great
success. The cul ts qui ckl y l ost momentum and popul ari ty.
Because they di d not hesi tate to objecti vel y i denti fy evi l , and
because they earnestl y contended for the fai th, Bernard and
Gregory not onl y were abl e to turn back the ri si ng ti de of error
i n thei r day, they were abl e to usher i n an era of spi ri tual revi val
and cul tural renai ssance as wel l . S
The cul ts di d not di sappear, however. They si mpl y went
underground, wai ti ng for a better day, a moment i n the sun.
That moment seemed to come i n the seventeenth and ei ghteenth
centuri es. The ol d Cathari cul ts resurfaced among Vi enna’s
l i terati , i n Pari s’ Pal ai s Royal e, and at London’s Fabi ata.
Vari ousl y cal l ed Rosi cruci ani sm, Free Masonry, Uni ty, and
Theosophy, the ol d sects found ready acceptance wi th soci al
revol uti onari es and acti vi sts.
By the ni neteenth and twenti eth centuri es, the cul ts hel d an
honored and tenured pl ace among Li beral s on the cutti ng edge
of anti -Chri sti an crusades. Hi tl er, Leni n, and Stal i n were al l
fasci nated and enamored by thei r ri tual s and phi l osophi es.g
232 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
H. G. Wel l s, Bertrand Russel l , and George Bernard Shaw
al l dabbl ed i n thei r ecl ecti c esoteri ca. 10 And, not surpri si ngl y,
Margaret Sanger accepted thei r tenets and practi ced thei r eth-
i cs as wel l . 11 She was an avi d Rosi cruci an and a dues-payi ng
member of Uni ty. 12
The Li ght of Day
I t i s no coi nci dence that the extremi sm, brutal i ty, excessi ve-
ness, and promi scui ty of Pl anned Parenthood and i ts vari ous
programs so di rectl y matches that of the Cathari . Pl anned
Parenthood i s l i ttl e more than an i nsti tuti onal i ncarnati on of
Margaret’s fai th.
I t i s al so no coi nci dence that the objecti ve standard that
Bernard and Gregory appl i ed to the cul ts i s just as rel evant
today as i t was then. Vi rtual l y every major dogma of those
hereti cal sects i s a pl ank i n the Pl anned Parenthood phi l osophi cal
pl atform: promi scui ty, greed, decepti on, revol uti on, soci al i sm,
aborti on, sorcery, 13 bi rth l i mi tati on, and materi al i sm.
Bernard and Gregory knew that such thi ngs were evil i n the
thi rteenth century. They are no l ess evi l i n the twenti eth.
To expose such evi l i s a Chri sti an duty (Luke 17:3). To
rebuke si n and admoni sh error i s never an opti on (2 Ti mothy
2:4). I nstead, i t i s an obl i gati on (Ti tus 2 :15). Model ed by Chri st
before Hi s di sci pl es (Luke 9:41), and before the worl d (John
6:26), i t i s l i ke beari ng testi mony, an essenti al aspect of true
di sci pl eshi p (Hebrews 12:5). I t was openl y practi ced by the
Apostl es Paul (Remans 15:14), James (James 5:1-6), Peter
(2 Peter 2:1-22), John (3 John 9-12), and Jude (Jude 4-23). And
i t has been responsi bl e for many of the church’s great revi val s
throughout hi story.14
Evi l must be exposed.
Pl anned Parenthood must be exposed.
But exposi ng evi l i s not a thi ng to be taken l i ghtl y. I t i s a seri -
ous matter.
When the Apostl e Paul was hounded day i n and day out by a
demoni c medi um, he refrai ned from acti ng hasti l y or rashl y
(Acts 16:16-17). Fi nal l y, after “many days” had passed, he con-
fronted the evi l , exorci si ng the woman (Acts 16:18).
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Confront 233
Why had he wai ted so l ong? Because he knew that evi l was
nothi ng to be tri fl ed wi th (Ephesi ans 6:10-18). To bri ng consum-
mate darkness to the l i ght of day i s no mean feat (Matthew 17:21).
Confronti ng evi l i s not the l east bi t tri vi al . I t i s not a matter
of persuasi on. I t i s not best l eft to educati on. I t i s not, after al l , a
di spassi onate di scussi on of concepts, i deas, and phi l osophi es. I t
i s war. I t i s real . I t i s seri ous. And i t i s deadl y.
I t i s a war i n whi ch opponents are di sarmed (Col ossi ans
2:15), capti ves are taken (2 Cori nthi ans 10:5), and casual ti es are
exacted (1 Peter 5:8). I t i s a war i n whi ch commi ssi ons are ex-
tended (Mark 6:15), ambassadors are engaged (2 Cori nthi ans
5:20), wehpons are di spensed (2 Cori nthi ans 10:4), strategi es are
formul ated (Revel ati on 5:1-8), espi onage i s exposed (Acts
20:29-30), battl e cri es are sounded (1 Cori nthi ans 14:8), and vi c-
tori es are won (1 John 5 :4). I t i s a war more devastati ng than any
other war, where stronghol ds are demol i shed and fortresses are
destroyed (2 Cori nthi ans 10:4-5). I t demands speci al precauti ons
(2 Cori nthi ans 10:7), speci al provi si ons (2 Cori nthi ans 10:3), and
speci al prescri pti ons (Ephesi ans 6:11).
Both Bernard and Gregory understood thi s onl y too wel l .
Bernard argued that men shoul d not even thi nk about confront-
i ng “the crafty, i mpure, vi l e, l oathsome, and al i en spi ri t of evi l ”
wi thout fi rst “cl othi ng themsel ves i n the hol y i l l umi nati on of
ri ghteous character.” 15
Gregory asserted that “to oppose wi ckedness whi l e yet
unconsecrated i s the fool ’s bane.” 16 Spi ri tual warfare demands
“spi ri tual armor,” he sai d, “an armor bestowed from above by
grace, appropri ated from bel ow by fai th, secured from wi thi n by
character.’ 17
Li ke the evi l they opposed, the character that Bernard and
Gregory esteemed was objecti ve, measurabl e, and tangi bl e. I t
was “knowabl e and defi nabl e.” 18
Agai n, i t was not coi nci dence that both Bernard and
Gregory chal l enged thei r fol l owers wi th the same exhortati on
from Scri pture,l g echoi ng the Apostl e Paul : “Be on the al ert,
stand fi rm i n the fai th, act l i ke men, be strong. Let al l that you
do be done i n l ove” (1 Cori nthi ans 16:13-14).
Al ertness, steadfastness, courage, strength, and l ove: these
are the character trai ts that Bernard and Gregory bel i eved were
234 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
essenti al to successful l y confront the Cathari i n the thi rteenth-
century. No doubt they are the same character trai ts essenti al to
successful l y confront the Cathari ’s progeny, Pl anned Parent-
hood, i n our own day.
Al ertness
I f we are to expose the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood, we must
be sober, watchful , al ert, and i nformed. Thi s i s a cornerstone of
Chri sti an character.
We are al l cal l ed to watch over oursel ves (Revel ati on 3:2-3).
We are to watch over our rel ati onshi ps (Exodus 34:12), watch
over our hearts (Proverbs 4:23), watch over our l i ps (Psal m
141:3), watch over the paths of our feet (Proverbs 4:26), and
watch over our moral conduct. We are to be al ert to the cal l of
Chri st (Ephesi ans 5:14), the judgment of Chri st (Mi cah 7:7),
and the comi ng of Chri st (Matthew 24:42-43).
We are to be sober i n spi ri tual warfare (Ephesi ans 6:18) and
sober i n prayer (Col ossi ans 4:2).
We are to be sober, watchful , and al ert i n al l thi ngs, at al l
ti mes, and i n al l pl aces so that we can be wi se to the snares of our
enemi es and so that we can avoi d the near occasi on of tempta-
ti on and si n (1 Peter 5:8).
So then l et us not sl eep as others do, but l et us be al ert and
sober (1 Thessal oni ans 5:6).
Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the Lord; awake as
i n the days of ol d, the generati ons of l ong ago. Was i t not
Thou Who cut Rahab i n pi eces, Who pi erced the dragon?
(I sai ah 51:9).
Take heed, keep on the al ert; for you do not know when the ap-
poi nted ti me i s. I t i s l i ke a man, away on a journey, who upon
l eavi ng hi s house and putti ng hi s sl aves i n charge, assi gni ng to
each one hi s task, al so commanded the doorkeeper to stay on
the al ert. Therefore, be on the al ert – for you do not know
when the master of the house i s comi ng, whether i n the eve-
ni ng, at mi dni ght, at cockcr owi ng, or i n the morni ng — l est he
come suddenl y and fi nd you asl eep. And what I say to you I
say to al l , “Be on the al ert!” (Mark 13:33-37).
Slaying Dragons: The Character to C’on$-ont 235
Chri sti ans need to be aware of what i s goi ng on. They need
to be i nformed.
Ai mee Kui per i s a vol unteer at an aborti on al ternati ves cen-
ter sponsored by her church. But just two years ago, she was an
avi d supporter of Pl anned Parenthood. “I donated money, vol -
unteered my ti me, and used my i nfl uence to spread thei r pro-
grams i n the school s; she tol d me. “As stupi d as thi s may sound,
I was just i gnorant of the facts. I di dn’t know what was goi ng on.
Most peopl e don’t. I ’m convi nced that most peopl e woul d be
shocked beyond bel i ef i f they coul d ever fi nd out what’s real l y
goi ng on i n our school s and at Pl anned Parenthood’s cl i ni cs.
I guess, i n a way, i fs a character fl aw that they aren’t more al ert. I
know i t was for me.”
“Through knowl edge the ri ghteous are del i vered” (Proverbs
11:9), but they are “exi l ed for the l ack of knowl edge” (I sai ah 5 :13).
I f knowl edge of the truth does not prol i ferate, a soci ety i s
doomed (Hosea 4:6). The educati onal system cannot convey
that knowl edge. And the establ i shed medi a wi l l not. The fact i s,
“the sensel ess have no knowl edge” (Psal m 92:6), “fool s shun
knowl edge” (Proverbs 1:29), and “the ungodl y hate knowl edge”
(Proverbs 1:29). I f Chri sti ans are not sober, watchful , and al ert,
acti vel y di ssemi nati ng accurate i nformati on about Pl anned
Parenthood, no one wi l l .
I t i s cruci al , then, that we nurture thi s character trai t i n our
l i ves. We are to seek knowl edge (Proverbs 8:10). We are to store
i t up (Proverbs 10:14). And we are to preserve i t (Mal achi 2:7).
We are to appl y our mi nds to know the truth (Proverbs
22:17). We are to appl y our hearts to recei ve i t (Proverbs ‘23:12).
And we are to appl y our l i ves to spread i t (Proverbs 15:7).
But how are we supposed to obtai n that knowl edge?
Fi rst, and foremost, we need to study the wel l spri ng of
knowl edge, the treasure-trove of knowl edge, the Bi bl e. We need
to understand i ts statutes, commands, and decrees. We need to
grasp i ts di ctates, mandates, and commi ssi ons. We need i ts i n-
si ght, i ts wi sdom, and i ts i nspi rati on. We cannot hope to nurture
Chri sti an character i n our l i ves i f we do not dai l y read i t, study
i t, medi tate on i t, memori ze i t, and cheri sh i t.
Second, we need to di scover the weal th of knowl edge handed
down from generati on to generati on i n Church Hi story. There i s
236 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
no need for us to rei nvent the wheel . The ri ghteous men and
women who have gone before us faced vi rtual l y every si tuati on
that we wi l l ever face. They fought vi rtual l y every fi ght. They
confronted vi rtual l y every evi l . Amazi ngl y, thei r wi sdom, thei r
i nsi ght, and thei r understandi ng i s sti l l avai l abl e (Ephesi ans
4:17). Through thei r l etters, books, tracts, confessi ons, treati ses,
dogmas, l i turgi es, prayers, apol ogi es, and commentari es, they
can speak to us today. Athanasi us, Basi l , Chrysostom, Augusti ne,
Cabasi l as, Cyr i l Lucar i us, Cal vi n, Spur geon, Chester ton,
Schmemann, and Schaeffer: they can al l equi p us for al ertness
i f onl y we wi l l take the effort to seek thei r counsel by readi ng
thei r works.
Thi rd, we need to pass al ong to others the knowl edge we’ve
obtai ned. Wi th knowl edge comes responsi bi l i ty. We need to
teach Sunday School cl asses i n our churches. We need to pri nt
up smal l ci rcul ati on newsl etters for our nei ghborhoods. We need
to teach extensi on cl asses at l ocal school s, col l eges, and uni ver-
si ti es. We need to wri te l etters to the edi tor. We need to i nform
our magi strates and l eaders. We need to conduct home Bi bl e
studi es and i ssue-ori ented di scussi ons. I n other words, we need
to get the word out. Once we’ve l earned the facts, we need to get
those facts wi del y di ssemi nated.
Rnuth, we need to devel op l ocal i nformati on networks. When-
ever a devel opment occurs i n the l egi sl ature, or i n the school s, or
i n the medi a, a l ocal network needs to spri ng i nto acti on. Tel e-
phone trees, photocopi ed noti ces, computer bul l eti ns, cabl e TV
fl ashes, radi o announcements, newsl etter di stri buti on, and
di rect mai l drops can al l be uti l i zed i f a network has been set
up ahead of ti me. We can then bui l d a grassroots response. A
number of “pro-l i fe hotl i nes” have been establ i shed around
the country, but we need many, many more. ZO There are al so
more than three thousand Ri ght-to-Lt~e, Ameri can Li fe League,
Operati on Rescue, Mi ssi onari es to the Pre-Born, and Chri sti an
Acti on Counci l organi zati ons and commi ttees scattered across
the nati on, but agai n, we need more. Pl anned Parenthood’s
howi tzers are very effecti ve agai nst the sl ow and cumbersome
tanks of the federal bureaucracy and the pro-l i fe i nsti tuti ons.
But they are usel ess agai nst a swarm of mosqui toes.
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Conzont 237
F~t/z, we need to devel op nati onal i nformati on networks.
Thi s i s the i nformati on age. We have been bl essed wi th a pro-
l i ferati on of i nformati on technol ogi es. There i s no need for us to
depend on the nati onal medi a any l onger. Sadl y, Chri sti ans
have, by and l arge, fai l ed to real i ze that. We have not yet capi -
tal i zed on those technol ogi es. But, of course, one or two brave
pi oneers coul d qui ckl y and easi l y turn thi ngs around.
Knowl edge produces endurance (Proverbs 28:2). I t mul ti -
pl i es resources (Proverbs 24:4). I t provi des encouragement
(Proverbs 2:10). I t rel eases power (Proverbs 24:5), joy (Eccl esi -
astes 2:26), prudence (Proverbs 13:16), protecti on (Acts 20:31),
and securi ty (Eccl esi astes 7:12).
Confronti ng the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood demands the
sturdy advantage of Chri sti an watchful ness. I t requi res the i n-
formed stami na of Chri sti an soberness. I t necessi tates the ri ght-
eous character of Chri sti an al ertness.
Therefore, gi rd your mi nds for acti on, keep sober i n spi ri t, fi x
your hope compl etel y on the grace to be brought to you at the
revel ati on of Jesus Chri st. As obedi ent chi l dren, do not be con-
formed to the former l usts whi ch were yours i n your i gnorance,
but l i ke the Hol y One Who cal l ed you, be hol y yoursel ves al so
i n al l your behavi or (1 Peter 1:13-15).
Steadfastness
I f we are to expose the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood, we must
al so be fai thful , steadfast, and unwaveri ng. Li ke al ertness, thi s i s
a cornerstone of Chri sti an character.
We are al l cal l ed to stand fi rm i n the fai th (2 Thessal oni ans
2:25). We are to be steadfast i n the mi dst of sufferi ng (1 Peter
5:9), i n the mi dst of strange teachi ng (Hebrews 13:9), and i n
ti mes of tryi ng ci rcumstances (James 1:12).
We are to be steadfast i n good works (Gal ati ans 6:9), i n
enduri ng l ove (Hosea 6:4), i n conduct (Phi l i ppi ans 1:27), i n
deci si on-maki ng (1 Ki ngs 18:21), and i n absol ute l oyal ty to the
Lord God (Proverbs 24:21).
Therefore, my bel oved brethren, be steadfast, i mmovabl e,
al ways aboundi ng i n the work of the Lord, knowi ng that your
toi l i s not i n vai n i n the Lord (1 Cori nthi ans 15:58).
238 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
I t was for freedom that Chri st set us free; therefore keep stand-
i ng fi rm and do not be subject agai n to a yoke of sl avery (Gal a-
ti ans 5:1).
Neverthel ess, the ri ghteous shal l hol d to hi s way, and he who
has cl ean hands shal l grow stronger and stronger (Job 17:9).
Steadfastness i s not an attri bute that we can si mpl y conjure
up by sheer force of wi l l . I t demands a l ong-term convni tnzent.
Marsha Gatl i n i s a member of her l ocal school board and has
been for more than a decade. She fi rst ran for the seat when her
teenage daughter brought home several Pl anned Parenthood
bookl ets from school one day.
“I made up my mi nd then and there; she tol d me, “that I was
goi ng to do somethi ng about the moral pl ague that was i nfecti ng
our chi l dren. My chi l dren. Wel l , I ’l l tel l you, i t’s not been easy.
I t’s been one fi ght after another. Ten years of confl i ct. But I ’m
confi dent that I ’ve been abl e to make a di fference. So, I ’m gonna
conti nue to hang i n there. I ’m not about to back down on my
commi tment now.”
That ki nd of commi tment i s what the Bi bl e cal l s vi si on. I t i s
the wi l l i ngness to sacri fi ce unceasi ngl y for the Gospel ’s sake. I t i s
the wi l l i ngness to bypass i mmedi ate grati fi cati on, i nstant sati s-
facti on, and momentary recogni ti on for the good of the future.
For the good of Chri st’s Ki ngdom. Where~ai th i s “the assurance
of thi ngs hoped for” (Hebrews 11:1), vi si on i s “the hope of thi ngs
assured of.” Where faith i s “the convi cti on of thi ngs not seen”
(Hebrews 11:1), oi si on i s “the seei ng of those convi cti ons.”
Vi si onary men and women are confi dent, assured, and un-
daunted even i n the face of cal ami ty and catastrophe, because
they can see beyond the present. They can remai n sure, secure,
and steadfast, because they have a broader perspecti ve. They
can l ook past petty defeats and setbacks. They can pl ot and pl an
fhr i n advance of the day of vi ndi cati on and vi ctory. They have a
fi ture-ori entati on. They bel i eve i n the i dea of progress.
Though that progress may come i n very smal l stages over
very l ong epochs, vi si onary men know that i t eventual l y wi l l
come. They bel i eve i n i ts i nevi tabi l i ty.
And so they remai n fai thfi d. Toi l i ng day i n and day out, year
i n and year out. Never despi si ng “the day of smal l begi nni ngs”
(Zechari ah 4:10).
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Confront 239
Thi s i s a speci al l egacy of Chri sti ani ty i n modern ci vi l i za-
ti on. I t was thi s Bi bl i cal concepti on of hope, promi se, pati ence,
assur ance, vi ctory, steadfastness, advancement, domi ni on,
confi dence, fai th, convi cti on, and commi tment that set the mod-
ern worl d on i ts course of cul tural , technol ogi cal , and soci ol ogi -
cal progress.
Vi si on catal yzes and empowers fai th. I t i s vi si on that rel eases
fai th from the safety zone of i rrel evancy to the war zone of cul -
tural transformati on.
I t was onl y by exerci si ng vi si onary fai th that bel i evers i n past
ages were abl e to “conquer ki ngdoms, perform acts of ri ghteous-
ness, obtai n promi ses, shut the mouths of l i ons, quench the
power of fi re, escape the edge of the sword, and from weakness
be made stron< (Hebrews 11:33-34).
Just as Josi ah remai ned steadfast (2 Ki ngs 22:2), just as
Davi d remai ned steadfast (1 Samuel 17 :45-49), just as Dani el re-
mai ned steadfast (Dani el 6:5-11), and just as Job (Job 23:11),
Joseph (Genesi s 39:7-16), John (Acts 4:19-20), and Paul (Acts
20:24) al l remai ned steadfast, so we are to retnai n undaunted
and i mmovabl e i n our devoti on to truth, justi ce, and ri ghteous-
ness (Psal m 119: 105-112). Thei rs was the vi si onary determi nati on
to adhere to God’s standards, to uphol d God’s statutes, to appl y
God’s pri nci pl es, and to enforce God’s decrees. I f we are to have
any success whatsoever i n confronti ng the evi l of Pl anned
Parenthood, we must devel op that same ki nd of vi si on.
But how? How are we supposed to i ncul cate that ki nd of un-
swervi ng fai th?
First, we need to feed our fai th. Vi si on demands nurture.
Commi tment necessi tates growth. And the onl y way we can ob-
tai n these thi ngs i s through a dynami c and vi tal spi ri tual l i fe.
Through worshi p, personal devoti on, and fel l owshi p, we must
strengthen and bol ster our steadfastness. We must draw vi tal i ty
and confi dence from the “very great and preci ous promi ses” of
the Word (2 Peter 1:4). We must draw encouragement and
starni na from the “assembl i ng together” of the sai nts (Hebrews
10:25). We must draw l i fe and hope from the gl ori ous presence of
the royal throne room (Revel ati on 5:1-14).
Second, we need to devel op habi ts of personal evangel i sm and
di sci pl eshi p. The best way to “keep the fai th” i s to share i t. Chri st
240 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
commi ssi oned al l Hi s fol l owers to become “fi shers of men” (Mat-
thew 4:19). We shoul d constantl y share the Gospel wi th the l ost
(Col ossi ans 4:5). We shoul d constantl y bui l dup the saved (Col -
ossi ans 3:16-17). And we shoul d constantl y spur on the i nacti ve
(Hebrews 10:24-25). At work, at home, at church, at school ,
around the nei ghborhood, wi th fami l y members, wi th fri ends,
and wi th casuzd acquai ntances, we shoul d be i ncessantl y enl i st-
i ng men for the Ki ngdom and for the work of the Ki ngdom. We
shoul d bui l d our fai th by shari ng our fai th.
Thi rQ!, we shoul d undertake one or two projects and see them
through to compl eti on. Chri sti ans are notori ous for never fi ni sh-
i ng what they begi n. And there i s nothi ng that stymi es and
stul ti fi es vi si on more than that. We shoul d pi ck out one or two
l ong-term projects that we know we can remai n fai thful to, and
then actual l y go the whol e di stance. Tackl e the school board, or
cl ose down the school -based cl i ni c, or defund Pl anned Parent-
hood’s l ocal tax-pai d aborti on cl i ni c, or boycott busi nesses that
support afi i l i ate programs, or mai ntai n a regul ar pi cket vi gi l , or
vol unteer at an al ternati ve center, or pl edge fi nanci al support to
a pro-l i fe mi ni stry, or di stri bute appropri ate l i terature, or i nstal l
a speakers bureau at the l ocal hi gh school : We need to choose a
battl e and fi ght i t to the end. That i s vi si on made practi cal . That
i s steadfastness made tangi bl e.
Confronti ng the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood demands the
undaunted vi si on of Chri sti an fai thful ness. I t requi res the un-
waveri ng commi tment of Chri sti an vi gi l ance. I t necessi tates the
ri ghteous character of Chri sti an steadfastness.
Therefore, my bel oved brethren whom I l ong to see, my joy snd
crown, so stand fi rm i n the Lord, my bel oved (Phi l i ppi ans 4:1).
Courage
I f we are to expose the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood, we must
al so be val i ant, courageous, and brave. Li ke al ertness and stead-
fastness, thi s i s a cornerstone of Chri sti an character.
We are al l cal l ed to be fearl ess i n the Lord (I sai ah 12:2). We
are to be brave i n the face of our enemi es (Deuteronomy 31:6),
and brave i n the mi dst of chasti sement (Job 5:17-24).
We are to demonstrate val or i n our obedi ence to the Word of
God (Joshua 23:6), for the sake of Hi s peopl e (2 Samuel 10:12), .
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Conzont 241
and i n al l our servi ce (1 Chroni cl es 28:20). Because we know
that God i s soverei gn, we are to be courageous (2 Chroni cl es
32: 7). Because we know that God i s ever present, we are to be
courageous (Psal m 118: 6). Because we know that God compre-
hends al l thi ngs, we are to be courageous (Psal m 139:13-19). We
are to take heart and remai n certai n even i n the face of terri fy-
i ng ci rcumstances (Psal m 91:5) or utter di smay (Joshua 10:25).
The wi cked fl ee when no one i s pursui ng, but the ri ghteous are
bol d as a l i on (Proverbs 28:1).
God i s our refuge and strength, a very present hel p i n troubl e.
Therefore we wi l l not fear, though the earth shoul d change,
and though the mountai ns sl i p i nto the heart of the sea; though
i ts waters roar and foam, though the mountai ns quake at i ts
swel l i ng pri de (Psal m 46:1-3).
For God has not gi ven us a spi ri t of ti mi di ty, but of power and
l ove and di sci pl i ne (2 Ti mothy 1:7).
Courage means standi ng agai nst the ti de, struggl i ng for
ri ght to the bi tter end, and i nvesti ng our al l -i n-al l for the cause
of the Ki ngdom.
Mark Dury i s a hi gh school seni or who has had to l earn about
courage the hard way. “I had a teacher that constantl y tri ed to
bai t me; he sai d. “She desperatel y wanted to shake my fai th.
The thi ng was, she was a real l y popul ar teacher, so whenever I
tri ed to oppose some of the stuff she was doi ng — l i ke showi ng
our cl ass hard-core porn and stuff— I caught a l ot of gri ef from
the other ki ds. When I found out that she was counsel i ng gi rl s to
go to Pl anned Parenthood for bi rth control , wel l , that was just
too much. I went to the admi ni strati on about i t. That onl y made
the persecuti on i ncrease. But, hey, that’s i nevi tabl e. I ’ve gotta
stand up for what i s ri ght. There’s no way I can compromi se .“
The fact i s, “al l those who desi re to l i ve godl y l i ves wi l l be
persecuted” (2 Ti mothy 3:12). There i s no way around i t. Perse-
cuti on i s i nevi tabl e.
Jesus expl ai ned thi s fact to Hi s di sci pl es, sayi ng:
I f the worl d hates you, you know that i t has hated Me before i t
hated you. I f you were of the worl d, the worl d woul d l ove i ts
242 GEMND ILLUSIONS
own; but because you are not of the worl d, but I chose you out
of the worl d, therefore the worl d hates you. Remember the
word that I sai d to you, “A sl ave i s not greater than hi s master.”
I f they persecuted Me, they wti al so persecute you; i f they kept
My word, they wi l l keep yours al so (John 15:18-20).
We need not be di sheartened by thi s. Persecuti on does not
just bri ng wi th i t pai n and pri vati on; i t al so bri ngs great purpose
and promi se. I t bri ngs wi th i t the hope of re.n.mecti m.
“God causes al l thi ngs to work together for good to those
who l ove God, to those who are cal l ed accordi ng to Hi s pur-
pose” (Remans 8:28). When we refuse to compromi se, we may
ri sk rejecti on or rebuke. But we know al l the whi l e that rejec-
ti on and rebuke become opportunities under the soverei gn di rec-
ti on of God Al mi ghty.
Joseph ri sked everythi ng he had by refusi ng to compromi se
hi s obedi ence to God (Genesi s 39:7-16). As a resul t, he was
thrown i nto pri son (Genesi s 39:19-20). But God used hi s pri son
experi ence for good. I t became the fi rst stage of domi ni on for
hi m. I t was not l ong before Joseph was rai sed up out of the depths
to rul e over the whol e l and (Genesi s 41:37-45). Because he re-
mai ned courageous and uncompromi si ng, he emerged vi ctori ous.
Davi d, too, ri sked al l that he had by refusi ng to compromi se
hi s obedi ence to God (1 Samuel 18:1-6). As a resul t, he was cast
i nto exi l e (1 Samuel 19:11-18). But God used hi s exi l e experi ence
for good. I t became the fi rst stage of domi ni on for hi m. I t was
not l ong before Davi d was rai sed up out of the depths to rul e
over the whol e l and (2 Samuel 2:4). Because he remai ned cour-
ageous and uncompromi si ng, he emerged vi ctori ous.
Si mi l arl y, Dani el ri sked al l that he had by refusi ng to com-
promi se hi s obedi ence to God (Dani el 6:10). As a resul t, he was
thrown i nto the l i ons’ den (Dani el 6:16-17). But God used hi s
l i ons’ den experi ence for good. I t became the fi rst stage of do-
mi ni on for hi m. I t was not l ong before Dani el was rai sed up out
of the depths to rul e over the whol e l and (Dani el 6:23-28).
Because he remai ned courageous and uncompromi si ng, he
emerged vi ctori ous.
The earl y Chri sti ans al so ri sked al l that they had by refusi ng
to compromi se thei r obedi ence to God (Acts 4:19-20). As a
resul t, they were thrown i nto pri son (Acts 5:19). But God used
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Confront 243
thei r pri son experi ence for good. I t became the fi rst stage of
domi ni on for them. I t was not l ong before they were rai sed up
out of the depths to rul e over the whol e l and (Acts 19:26).
Because they remai ned courageous and uncompromi si ng, they
emerged vi ctori ous.
Thi s same pattern runs al l throughout the Bi bl e. I t underl i es
the stori es of Abraham (Genesi s 12:10-20), Esther (Esther 3:6-15;
8:1-7), Job (Job 1:13-22; 42:10-15), Jeremi ah (Jeremi ah 37:11-16;
39:11-12), El i jah (1 Ki ngs 17 :1-16; 18:20-46), Hosea (Hosea 1:2-9;
3:1-5), Mi cai ah (1 Ki ngs 22:7-12, 24-40), and the Apostl e Paul
(Phi l i ppi ans 1:7; 3:8-16). Each of these heroes of the fai th wi t-
nessed the resunvcti m power of Al mi ghty God. Each of them saw
the most di ffi cul t and oppressi ve ci rcumstances transformed i nto
gl ori ous vi ctory. Each of them went from death to l i fe, from
bondage to l i berty, and from pri son to promi se. Each of them
mi rrored and i l l umi ned the Gospel by thei r great courage:
For I del i vered to you as of fi rst i mportance what I al so re-
cei ved, that Chri st di ed for our si ns accordi ng to the Scri ptures,
and that He was buri ed, and that He was rai sed on the thi rd
day accordi ng to the Scri ptures (1 Cori nthi ans 15:3-4).
Jesus r efused to compr omi se (Luke 22:42; Phi l i ~pi ans
2:5-8). As a resul t, He was abandoned to the shame of the cross
and the pri son of the grave (Matthew 16:21). But God used
both the cross and the grave, the shame and the pri son, for
good. They became the fi rst stage of domi ni on for Hi m. On the
thi rd day, Jesus arose out of the depths to rul e and rei gn over
the whol e l and (Phi l i ppi ans 2:9-11). That i s the very essence of
the Gospel .
When we remai n courageous, faci ng persecuti on head on,
wal ki ng “by fai th and not by si ght” (2 Cori nthi ans 5:7), we
afFi rm the very essence of the Gospel . We are al so i nvi nci bl e.
So, how are we to nurture such courage?
Fi rst, we need to devel op a personal program of obedi ence.
We need to demonstrate courage i n the smal l er arenas of l i fe be-
fore we attempt to conquer the worl d – or Pl anned Parenthood.
We need to show an i ndi vi dual wi l l i ngness to i mpl ement God’s
pl an for marri age, chi l dreari ng, fi nanci al responsi bi l i ty, busi ness
i ntegri ty, i nterpersonal ethi cs, and moral upri ghtness. We need
244 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
to show oursel ves fai thful i n the smal l thi ngs before God can gi ve
us responsi bi l i ty over the bi g thi ngs (Luke 16:10).
Second, we need to devel op l eadershi p recrui tment and trai n-
i ng programs. We must fi nd the wi l l i ng, trai n the eager, and en-
courage the hesi tant. We need to scour the hedgerows and beat
the bushes (Luke 14:21-23). Courage i s both taught and caught.
I t i s, thus, our responsi bi l i ty to gather the next wave of Chri sti an
warri ors, trai ni ng them for val or whi l e, at the same ti me, model -
i ng val or for them.
Thi rd, we need to transform our churches i nto both hi ves of
acti vi ty and havens of rest. We shoul d be equi pped to do the
whol e work of the mi ni stry at church (Ephesi ans 4:12). That
means that pi cketers for the l ocal Pl anned Parenthood shoul d be
enl i sted, trai ned, and mobi l i zed there. That means that vol un-
teers for the l ocal al ternati ves center shoul d be encouraged and
commi ssi oned there. But the church shoul d al so be a pl ace
where the courageous can fi nd sanctuary and take refuge. I t
shoul d be a pl ace where we can fi nd refreshment. That ki nd of
bal ance can onl y be found i n true worshi p.
Confronti ng the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood demands the
unfl i nchi ng confi dence of Chri sti an val or. I t requi res the uncom-
promi si ng commi tment of Chri sti an bravery. I t necessi tates the
ri ghteous character of Chri sti an courage.
Be very fi rm, then, to keep and do al l that i s wri tten i n the book
of the l aw of Moses, so that you may not turn asi de from i t to
the ri ght or to the l eft. . . . But you are to cl i ng to the Lord
your God, as you have done to thi s day (Joshua 23:6, 8).
Strength
I f we are to expose the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood, we must
al so be mi ghty, stal wart, dynami c, and strong. Li ke al ertness,
steadfastness, and courage, thi s i s a cornerstone of Chri sti an
character.
We are al l cal l ed to be strong i n Chri st (2 Cori nthi ans
10:3-6). God has not gi ven us a spi ri t of weakness, but of power
(2 Ti mothy 1:7).
The Gospel comes i n power (1 Thessal oni ans 1:5). The Ki ng-
dom comes i n power (1 Cori nthi ans 4:19). And sal vati on comes
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Confront 245
i n power (Remans 1:16). I t i s a power that the wi cked can never
know (Matthew 22:29). But every bel i ever i s al ready anoi nted
wi th i t (Luke 24:49).
We have been endowed wi th the strength to wi tness (Acts
1:8), to l abor (Col ossi ans 1:29), and to do every good thi ng
(Phi l i ppi ans 4:13).
Chri st has gi ven us al l the strength of Hi s mi ght (Ephesi ans
1:9) and the strength of Hi s grace (2 Ti mothy 2:1).
He gi ves strength to the weary, and to hi m who l acks mi ght He
i ncreases power. Though youths grow weary and ti red, and
vi gorous young men stumbl e badl y, yet those who wai t for the
Lord wi l l gai n new strength; they wi l l mount up wi th wi ngs l i ke
eagl es, they wi l l run and not get ti red, they wi l l wal k and not
become weary (I sai ah 40:29-31).
And He has sai d to me, “My grace i s suffi ci ent for you, for
power i s perfected i n weakness.” Most gl adl y, therefore, I wi l l
rather boast about my weaknesses, that the power of Chri st
may dwel l i n me. Therefore I am wel l content wi th weak-
nesses, wi th i nsul ts, wi th di stresses, wi th persecuti ons, wi th
di ffi cul ti es, for Chri st’s sake; for when I am weak, then I am
strong (2 Cori nthi ans 12:9-10).
Fi nal l y, be strong i n the Lord, and’ i n the strength of Hi s mi ght.
Put on the ful l armor of God, that you may be abl e to stand
fi rm agai nst the schemes of the devi l (Ephesi ans 6:10-11).
Strength means harnessi ng the excel l ent power of Chri st to
confront and capti vate the powers and the pri nci pal i ti es and the
rul ers of thi s poor, fal l en worl d.
Ni chol as Brooks i s a l obbyi st for a pro-l i fe network i n a state
noted for i ts very l i beral stance toward aborti on. “Pl anned
Parenthood has an easy ti me of i t i n thi s state, I ’m afrai d; he
tol d me. “Thei r fundi ng l evel s are actual l y hi gher than some
state agenci es. I suppose I coul d l et that get me down. But I be-
l i eve strongl y that, despi te the fact that we’ve got the deck al most
compl etel y stacked agai nst us here, we’ve put together an excel -
l ent statewi de organi zati on. We’re here to demonstrate the
power of the Li vi ng God, to testi fi bol dl y of Hi s great merci es.
We do that, not by takhg over, necessari l y, but by demonstrat-
246 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i ng excel l ence and abi l i ty and ski l l ful ness day i n and day out.
God’s power i s made perfect i n our weakness when we di spl ay
that weakness wi th preci si on and excel l ence.”
As God’s representati ves before men (2 Cori nthi ans 5:20),
we are to “procl ai m Hi s excel l enci es” (1 Peter 2:9). But our proc-
l amati on must not merel y be “i n word or wi th tongue, but i n
deed and wi th truth” (1 John 3:18). We procl ai m Hi s mi ghty ex-
cel l ence by our mi ghty excel l ence. I n everythi ng we do and i n
everythi ng we say, we are to mani fest Hi m Who has “cal l ed us
by Hi s own gl ory and excel l ence” (2 Peter 1:3). As we fol l ow
after Hi m (Matthew 4:19), as we wal k i n Hi s footsteps (1 Peter
2:21), and as we i mi tate Hi s attri butes (1 Peter 1:16), excel l ence i s
to be the hal l mark of our strength.
God expects nothi ng l ess.
He Who l ong ago demanded excel l ent sacri fi ces (Mal achi
1:8-10), excel l ent arti stry (Exodus 28: 2), and excel l ent servi ce
(Proverbs 12:4), has i n no way al tered Hi s standards of di sci pl e-
shi p. We are to l i ve l i ves marked by moral excel l ence (2 Peter 1:5).
We are to keep our behavi or excel l ent at al l ti mes (1 Peter 1:1-2).
Our mi nds are to dwel l constantl y on excel l ence (Phi l i ppi ans 4:8).
We are to wal k i n the way of excel l ence (1 Cori nthi ans 12:31),
mani festi ng cul tural excel l ence (Genesi s 1:28), economi c excel -
l ence (Proverbs 31:10-31), spi ri tual excel l ence (Phi l i ppi ans 1:10),
and evangel i sti c excel l ence (Matthew 28:18-20). The power of
God cannot be expressed through medi ocri ty and tri vi al i ty.
The great God of excel l ence and power has cal l ed us to be men
and women of excel l ence and power (1 Thessal oni ans 4:1, 10).
And how i s thi s excel l ence to be nurtured and mani fested?
Fi rst, we need to determi ne just what our gi fts and tal ents
are. We need to di sci pl i ne and harness those abi l i ti es for the
Ki ngdom. Focusi ng our energi es on those thi ngs that we are
qual i fi ed to handl e enabl es us to do those thi ngs wi th excel l ence.
We are abl e to accompl i sh more. We are abl e to attai n ful fi l l -
ment. And we are abl e to mani fest our strength i n Chri st. God’s
power i s made mani fest.
Second, we need to make sure that whatever tasks we deter-
mi ne to undertake, we take pai ns to perform to the best of our
abi l i ti es. Sl oppy, shoddy work does nothi ng to advance the cause
of Chri st. There i s real l y no excuse for i t. Each of us has areas of
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Confront 247
experti se that we can consecrate for the Ki ngdom. Whatever
those areas are, we need to concentrate on hei ghteni ng our ski l l -
ful ness and perfecti ng our abi l i ti es.
Third, we need to support the causes and mi ni stri es that are
real l y accompl i shi ng somethi ng.
The scandal ous goi ngs-on i n TV evangel i sm have onl y served
to underscore the need to careful l y target our gi vi ng and to sup-
port the works of genui ne excel l ence. Mi ni stri es that are l i ttl e
more than fundrai si ng operati ons or personal i ty cul ts shoul d be
avoi ded at al l costs. Causes that do l i ttl e more than stoke the
star-maker machi nery are worse than worthl ess. Ti me, re-
sources, and money are i n preci ous short suppl y. They shoul d be
di stri buted onl y to those mi ni stri es that actual l y mani fest the ex-
cel l ent power of God.
Fourth, we need to promote and support youngsters that
show genui ne promi se. Schol arshi ps must be secured for Chri s-
ti an students i n journal i sm, medi ci ne, economi cs, pol i ti cal
sci ence, phi l osophy, hi story, educati on, fi ne arts, bi ol ogy, and
busi ness. And support must be devel oped for those few i nsti tu-
ti ons that are actual l y taki ng those young, i mpressi onabl e stu-
dents and tmmi ng them i nto excel l ent champi ons for Chri st,
dynami c acti vi sts for the Ki ngdom, and mi ghty workers for l i fe
and truth.
Confronti ng the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood demands the
unbendi ng forti tude of Chri sti an mi ght. I t requi res the excel l ent
dynami c of Chri sti an power. I t necessi tates the ri ghteous charac-
ter of Chri sti an strength.
For thi s reason, I bow my knees before the Father, from whom
every fami l y i n heaven and on earth deri ves i ts name, that He
woul d grant you, accordi ng to the ri ches of Hi s gl ory, to be
strengthened wi th power through Hi s Spi ri t i n the i nner man;
so that Chri st may dwel l i n your hearts through fai th; and that
you, bei ng rooted and grounded i n l ove, may be abl e to com-
prehend wi th al l the sai nts what i s the breadth and l ength and
hei ght and depth, and to know the l ove of Chri st whi ch sur-
passes knowl edge, that you may be fi l l ed up to al l the ful l ness of
God. Now to Hi m who i s abl e to do exceedi ng abundantl y
beyond al l that we ask or thi nk, accordi ng to the power that
works wi thi n us, to Hi m be the gl ory i n the church and i n
Chri st Jesus to al l generati ons forever and ever. Amen (Ephe-
si ans 3:14-21).
248 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Love
I f we are to expose the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood, we must
be respectful , ti ecti onate, l ovi ng, and tenderhearted. Li ke
al ertness, steadfastness, courage, and strength, i t i s a corner-
stone of Chri sti an character.
We are al l cal l ed to be l ong-sufferi ng i n l ove and tenderness
(Phi l i ppi ans 1:3-11). We are to show l ove to strangers (Deuter-
onomy 10:19), as wel l as nei ghbors (Levi ti cus 19:18). We are
to show l ove to enemi es (Matthew 5:44), as wel l as brethren
(1 Peter 3:8).
I n al l thi ngs, at al l ti mes, we are to be exampl es of l ove
(1 Ti mothy 4:12). We are to abound i n l ove (Phi l i ppi ans 1:9).
We are to wal k i n l ove (Ephesi ans 5:2). We are to comfort one
another i n l ove (Ti tus 3:5), provoke one another i n l ove
(Hebrews 10:24), and l abor wi th one another i n l ove (1 Thessa-
l oni ans 1:3). For l ove i s the Royal Law (James 2:8).
And so, as those who have been chosen of God, hol y and be-
l oved, put on a heart of compassi on, ki ndness, humi l i ty, gentl e-
ness and pati ence; beari ng wi th one another, and forgi vi ng
each other, whoever has a compl ai nt agai nst anyone; just as the
Lord forgave you, so al so shoul d you. And beyond al l these
thi ngs put on l ove, whi ch i s the perfect bond of uni ty (Col os-
si ans 3:12-14).
Behol d, how good and how pl easant i t i s for brothers to dwel l
together i n uni ty! I t i s l i ke the preci ous oi l upon the head,
comi ng down upbn the beard, even Aaron’s beard, comi ng
down upon the edge of hi s robes. I t i s l i ke the dew of Hermon,
comi ng down upon the mountai ns of Zi on; for there the Lord
commanded the bl essi ng–l i fe forever (Psal m 133:1-3).
A new commandment I gi ve to you, that you l ove one another,
even as I have l oved you, that you al so l ove one another. By
thi s al l men wi l l know that you are My di sci pl es, i f you have
l ove for one another (John 13:34-35).
Jan Oberhol tzer i s a si dewal k counsel or. Every Saturday, she
spends about fi ve hours tal ki ng wi th gi rl s outsi de a Pl anned
Parenthood abortuary, provi di ng them wi th i nformati on that
they woul d never recei ve i nsi de the cl i ni c.
Slaying Dragons: The Character to Confront 249
“Most of the gi rl s have never been gi ven any i nformati on
about fetal devel opment or fetal pai n,” she tol d me. “They know
absol utel y nothi ng about the medi cal ri sks of aborti on. They are
total l y mi si nformed about everythi ng from payment schedul es
to l i abi l i ty rel ease forms. So, I ’m out here to try to bri ng a l i ttl e
bal ance to the si tuati on. Someti mes i t’s real l y frustrati ng. I go
home and just weep for the gi rl s that get sucked i n and bel i eve
the l i es. I have to keep remi ndi ng mysel f that I ’m here out of obe-
di ence. Otherwi se, I don’t thi nk I coul d do thi s week after week.
I ’m here out of obedi ence. And that i s the hi ghest l ove of al l .”
Love i s not just a feel i ng. I t i s not a warm and fi zzy affecti on
deep i nsi de our hearts. Love i s somethi ng we do.
Jesus sai d that i f anyone l oves Hi m, he wi l l keep Hi s com-
mandments (John 14: 23). Whoever does not keep the com-
mandments, then, does not have l ove (John 14: 24). Love and
obedi ence are i nseparabl e.
Genui ne l ove can onl y occur when we do what i s ri ght i n the
si ght of the Lord, not turni ng asi de to the ri ght or to the l eft
(2 Ki ngs 22:2). I t can onl y fl ouri sh i n l i ves that are forthri ght i n
the condemnati on of si n (Dani el 4:27), unguarded i n the pro-
nouncement of truth (Dani el 5:13-28), and si ngl e-mi nded i n
adherence to the Word of God (Dani el 6:5).
Love means to hol d fast to Scri pture (Joshua 23:8), to be i m-
movabl e from i t (1 Cori nthi ans 15:58), and to serve the truth
wi th al l our hearts (1 Samuel 12:21-22, 24-25).
So how are we to devel op and demonstrate such l ove?
First, we need to serve others. Servi ce i s a vi si bl e mani festa-
ti on of obedi ent l ove. But i t i s al so a hothouse for the devel op-
ment of obedi ent l ove. As we serve, as we obey, our feel i ngs,
affecti ons, and desi res are brought i nto l i ne. When we serve gi rl s
wi th cri si s pregnanci es by provi di ng them wi th a home and
medi cal care and nurture and sustenance, our l ove i s sti rred and
substanti ated. When we gi ve our ti me to the l ocal hi gh school ,
or to the ci ty government, or to the county jury to oppose the
encroachment of Pl anned Parenthood, our l ove i s devel oped
and demonstrated.
Second, we need to pray for the perpetrators of the Pl anned
Parenthood scandal . When we pray for our enemi es, our hearts
are changed. God answers our prayers by worki ng i n our l i ves as
250 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
wel l as thei rs. We must pray for the doctors, the l awyers, the ad-
mi ni strators, the nurses, the securi ty guards, the recepti oni sts,
the secretari es, the bureaucrats, the judges, and the l egi sl ators
that make the Pl anned Parenthood juggernaut possi bl e. We
must pray both i mprecatori l y and approbati vel y. Then, and
onl y then, wi l l a genui ne, obedi ent l ove permeate our work.
Third, we must work hard at i ntegrati ng obedi ent l ove i nto
our fami l i es. Parents are charged by God wi th the awesome and
fearsome responsi bi l i ty of rai si ng thei r chi l dren up “i n the nur-
ture and admoni ti on of the Lord” (Ephesi ans 6:4). That i s not
the job of the pastor, the Sunday School teacher, the youth di rec-
tor, the summer camp counsel or, the TV evangel i st, or the
Chri sti an school educator. I t i s, fi rst and foremost, the job of
parents. Thus, i t i s our job to i ncul cate prayer habi ts i n our chi l -
dren by actual l y prayi ng wi th them. I t i s our job to establ i sh
Bi bl e study di sci pl i nes i n our chi l dren by actual l y studyi ng wi th
them. I t i s our job to nurture a commi tment to Body l i fe by actu-
al l y fel l owshi pi ng wi th them. I t i s our job to confi rm a respect for
the throne of God by actual l y worshi pi ng wi th them. And i t i s
our job to teach them about thei r bodi es and thei r feel i ngs by not
onl y tal ki ng wi th them but by actual l y fasti ng wi th them, feast-
i ng wi th them, and di spl ayi ng sel f-control i n thei r mi dst .21 That
i s obedi ent l ove.
Confronti ng the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood demands the re-
spectful commi tment of Chri sti an tenderness. I t requi res the
obedi ent l ong-sufferi ng of Chri sti an tenderness. I t necessi tates
the ri ghteous character of Chri sti an l ove.
I f I speak wi th the tongues of men and of angel s, but do not have
l ove, I have become a noi sy gong or a cl angi ng cymbal . And i f
I have the gi ft of prophecy, and know al l mysteri es and al l
knowl edge; and i f I have al l fai th, so as to remove mountai ns,
but do not have l ove, I am nothi ng. And i f I gi ve al l my posses-
si ons to feed the poor, and i f I del i ver my body to be burned,
but do not have l ove, i t profi ts me nothi ng. Love i s pati ent,
l ove i s ki nd, and i s not jeal ous; l ove does not brag and i s not ar-
rogant, does not act unbecomi ngl y; i t does not seek i ts own, i s
not provoked, does not take i nto account a wrong suffered,
does not rejoi ce i n unri ghteousness, but rejoi ces wi th the truth;
bears al l thi ngs, bel i eves al l thi ngs, hopes al l thi ngs, endures al l
thi ngs. Love never fai l s (1 Cori nthi ans 13:1-8).
Slaying Dragons: The Chara&r to Confront 251
Character i n Context
Chri sti an character trai ts are essenti al . Al ertness, stead-
fastness, courage, strength, and l ove are i ndi spensabl e. Con-
fronti ng the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood woul d be i mpossi bl e
wi thout them.
But, by themsel ves, even those character trai ts are not
enough. They must be pl aced i n thei r proper context. And that
context i s the church.
The church has become the spurned and negl ected step-
chi l d of the modern era. I t i s percei ved as bei ng moss-backed
and archai c. Or awkward and i rrel evant. I t i s regarded as l i ttl e
more than a water-boy to the game of l i fe.
Part of the reason for thi s horri bl y l ow esti mati on of the
church i s due to the fact that the church has al ways limped
through hi story.zz Men l ook at the al l too evi dent, al l too appar-
ent, someti mes even gl ari ng, weaknesses of Chri st’s Bri de and
just assume that i ts l ame and cri ppl ed state i s ampl e justi fi cati on
for di smi ssi ng i ts i mportance.
The fact i s, though, the church’s l i mp i s actual l y a co@ma-
ti on of i ts power, rel evance, and si gni fi cance.
After the Fal l , God tol d Satan that the Ri ghteous Del i verer,
Jesus Chri st, woul d crush hi s head. But God al so sai d that, i n
the process, the heel of the Lord woul d be brui sed (Genesi s
3:15). The l i mp, then, that Chri st’s Body di spl ays i s actual l y a
si gn of great vi ctory, not a si gn of defeat or i ncompetence. I t i s
an embl em of tri umph.
Thi s real i ty i s portrayed al l throughout the Bi bl e. For i n-
stance, when Jacob, the father of I srael ’s twel ve tri bes, wrestl ed
through the ni ght at Peni al , he l i mped ever after as a si gn that he
had prevai l ed (Genesi s 32:31).
The Apostl e Paul , father of the Genti l e church, was gi ven a
thorn i n the fl esh. Si nce thorns grow al ong the ground, Paul was
pri cked — at l east symbol i cal l y — i n the foot. I t kept hi m l i mpi ng
i n the eyes of men (2 Cori nthi ans 12:7). Even so, i t was i n thi s
weakness that Chri st’s power was affi rmed and perfected (2
Cori nthi ans 12:9).
Thus, when the church l i mps through hi story, as bel i evers
we need not be frustrated or di scouraged. On the contrary, we
252 GMND ILLUSIONS
shoul d be encouraged that God’s Word i s sure and true. For vi c-
tory has, i ndeed, al ready been won.
The real i ty i s that whatever the church does or doesn’t do
di rectl y affects the course of ci vi l i zati on. I t determi nes the fl ow
of hi stori cal events (Revel ati on 5-6).
The church has the keys to the Ki ngdom (Matthew 16:19).
I t has the power to bi nd and to l oose (Matthew 18:18). I t has the
authori ty to prevai l over the very gates of hel l (Matthew 16:18).
I t i s, thus, the church – not governments or movements or
causes or organi zati ons– that wi l l determi ne our desti ny and the
desti ny of our worl d.
Thus, al l our efforts to confront the evi l of Pl anned Parent-
hood must be pl aced i n the context of the church. Even i f we are
al ert, steadfast, brave, strong, and l ovi ng, i f we separate our-
sel ves from the church, we are doomed to frustrati on. There
si mpl y cannot be any “Lone Rangers.”
The reason for thi s i s threefol d:
l %st, i t i s the church that offers us the source of l i fe. I t offers
the Waters of Li fe (Revel ati on 22:17), the Bread of Li fe (John
6:31, 1 Cori nthi ans 11:24), and the Word of Li fe (1 John 1:1). The
sacramental mi ni stry of the church i s our onl y source for these
grace provi si ons. There i s nowhere el se that we can turn for
these “medi ci nes of i mmortal i ty.”zs They effect a tangi bl e offer-
i ng to God, a consecrati on bejhe God, a communi on wi th God,
and a transformati on i n God. Thus, they actual l y readjust us to
the ul ti mate real i ty, maki ng our al ertness, steadfastness, cour-
age, strength, and l ove forces to be reckoned wi th.
Second, the church offers us accountabi l i ty and di sci pl i ne.
Si n cri ppl es any work. Whenever si n i s casual l y tol erated, al l
our efforts are defi l ed (1 Cori nthi ans 5:6-13), evangel i sm i s sti fl ed
(1 Cori nthi ans 5:1-5), and vi ctory i s deni ed (Joshua 7:1-15). Onl y
the church has the authori ty to di sci pl i ne hei nous si n (Matthew
18:15-20). The purpose of thi s ki nd of accountabi l i ty i s, of
course, protecti ve and restorati ve, not defensi ve or puni ti ve. I t i s
to erect a hedge of responsi bi l i ty and respectabi l i ty around our
efforts to confront the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood.
Thi rd, the church offers us a pl ace of rest. When, as God’s
peopl e, we assembl e oursel ves together, we are at l ast abl e to l i e
down i n green pastures, besi de sti l l waters (Psal m 23:2). As we
Slaying Dragons: The Character to C’on$-ont 253
gather around the throne of grace, we are at l ast abl e to take
refuge and fi nd sanctuary (Psal m 61: 1-4). We are abl e to enter
Hi s gates wi th thanksgi vi ng and Hi s courts wi th prai se (Psal m
100:4). I n other words, i n the church, we are abl e to fi nd rest
(Hebrews 4:1-13), restorati on (Psal m 19:7), reconci l i ati on (Psal m
32:3-6), and recompense (Psal m 73:15-24).
Wi thout the context of the church, even the most dynami c
Chri sti an character i s exposed to atrophy and entropy. But,
wi thi n that context, our al ertness, steadfastness, courage,
strength, and l ove become powerful weapons i n our desperate
confrontati on wi th the evi l of Pl anned Parenthood.
Concl usi on
Nothi ng can compensate for a l ack of i ntegri ty and a defi -
ci ency of character. Not great weal th. Not access to the masses.
Not wi l d-eyed popul ari ty. Not superb organi zati on. And not
mi nd-boggl i ng power. Just ask the ki ngpi ns of the once-proud
empi re of tel evi si on evangel i sm.
The col l apse of tel evangel i st was not due to the unpopul ari ty
of i ts message, but to the i mpi ety of i ts messengers. I t was not due
to the opposi ti on of i ts enemi es, but to the opul ence of i ts al l i es.
Our efforts for l i fe, l i berty, and truth face si mi l ar jeopardy.
Wi thout Chri sti an character, al l our schemi ng and dreami ng
i nevi tabl y comes to naught. Wi thout i t, we are i mpotent i n the
face of wi ckedness and evi l . Wi thout i t, we are hel pl ess before
the Pl anned Parenthood juggernaut.
Our pi cketi ng i s essenti al . Our l obbyi ng i s cruci al . Our edu-
cati on i s vi tal . Our voti ng i s i mperati ve. Our acti vi sm i s
momentous. But i f we are ever to effecti vel y expose and confront
evi l , we must devel op and demonstrate Godl y character.
T H I R T E E N
IDOLS FOR DESTRUCTION:
A STRATEGY FOR
PROPHETS AND PRIESTS
in hoc si~o uincesl
Human a~ai rs ar e moved from deep springs. A spirit moves them. I t is by the
acceptation, the dqial, and the renewal of philosophies that this SOCZ2Y of immmtul
mortals is marked, changed or restored.
2
Hilaire Belloc
Sand was bl owi ng i n off the desert, carri ed i nto the ci ty by
freak Santa Ana wi nds. Carbon arcs, mounted on the roofs of
several pol i ce cars, threw the cracked roadbed i nto stark rel i ef
and made the sand l ook l i ke stati c on a vi deo screen.
Reba El vi n stared at the surreal scene, bl i nki ng back her
tears. Her husband, her son, her pastor, and her Sunday School
teacher had al l just been arrested. For prayi ng outsi de a Pl anned
Parenthood cl i ni c.
“I was i n shock,” she tol d me l ater. “To thi nk that i n Ameri ca
you can be handcuffed and dragged off to jai l for prayi ng on a
si dewal k! I t’s fri ghteni ng. Where wi l l al l thi s end?”
Unfortunatel y for Reba and the members of her smal l Presby-
teri an church, i t di dn’t end that day wi th a tri p to jai l . Three days
l ater, several pro-aborti on groups, i ncl udi ng Pl anned Parenthood,
asked a federal judge to revoke the church’s tax-exempt status, to
force the pastor to hand over the church’s fi l es and fi nanci al records,
and to restrai n the church’s members “and al l those acti ng i n con-
cert wi th them” from any further publ i c protests agai nst aborti on.3
Pl anned Parenthood’s spokeswoman tol d the press the
church was “i n vi ol ati on of I RS restri cti ons on pol i ti cal acti vi ty
255
256 GMND ILLUSIONS
by non-profi t organi zati ons. So, besi des the fact that the pastor
and the membershi p were trespassi ng on pri vate property and
attempti ng to restri ct the consti tuti onal ri ghts of others, they
were al so transgressi ng the ti me-honored . . . wal l of separati on
between church and State.”A
But that i s not exactl y how eye wi tnesses of the i nci dent
reported i t.
“Fi rst of al l ,” Reba tol d me, “no one was on Pl anned Parent-
hood’s property. Everyone was on the publ i c si dewal k i n front of
thei r bui l di ng. No one even stepped on the grass. Secondl y, no
one was attempti ng to restri ct anybody’s consti tuti onal ri ghts.
The peopl e from the church were just there to pray – qui etl y,
peaceabl y, and i n order. No one bl ocked i ngress or egress. No
one stopped cl i ents from enteri ng i f they wanted to. Now real l y,
si nce when i s prayi ng an attempt to restri ct somebody’s ri ghts?
Thi rdl y, thi s wal l of separati on busi ness i s nothi ng more than ‘an
attempt to keep Chri sti ans out of publ i c l i fe. I f we’re ever goi ng
to adequatel y deal wi th groups l i ke Pl anned Parenthood, we’re
goi ng to have to put that myth to rest.’
Church and State
Accordi ng to the desi gn for soci ety outl i ned i n the Bi bl e,
church and state are separate i nsti tuti ons. s They have separate
juri sdi cti ons. They have separate authori ti es. And they have
separate functi ons.
A bal anced soci al order depends on that ki nd of i nsti tuti onal
di fferenti ati on. When any one i nsti tuti on begi ns to encroach
upon another, anarchy and tyranny i nevi tabl y resul t. Checks
and bal ances begi n to break down.
Thus, i t i s i mportant that the state not meddl e i n the affai rs
of the church. That i s si mpl y not i ts concern. The church i s
outsi de of the state’s juri sdi cti on. The framers of the Ameri can
Consti tuti on recogni zed thi s fundamental pl ank of l i berty and,
thus, the fi rst arti cl e i n the Bi l l of Ri ghts states, “Congress shal l
make no l aw respecti ng an establ i shment of rel i gi on, or pro-
hi bi ti ng the free exerci se thereof.”G The state has no authori ty
over the church and, therefore, must not regul ate or i nterfere i n
the work of the church. Local muni ci pal i ti es, and even i ndi vi d-
ual commonweal ths, mi ght render support to the church — as
they often di d– but never were they to control the church.T
church and state are separate.
I dols for Destruction: A StrategY for Prophets and Priests 257
Li kewi se, the church must not meddl e i n the fl ai rs of the
state. That i s si mpl y not i ts concern. The state i s outsi de of the
church’s juri sdi cti on. Agai n, the framers of the Ameri can Con-
sti tuti on wanted to protect thei r fl edgl i ng republ i c from any and
al l tyranni es: both statism – i n the form of i mperi al i sm, soci al -
i sm, or democracy; and ol i garchy — i n the form of eccl esi ocracy, “
agathi sm, or caesaro-papi sm. The church has no authori ty over
the state and, therefore, must not regul ate or i nterfere i n the
work of the state. * They are separate.
Thi s, of course, does not mean that church and state are to
have nothi ng to do wi th each other. On the contrary, i t i s essen-
ti al that they i nteract and cooperate wi th each other. They are to
bal ance each other. They are to serve each other. They are to
check each other. So, even though they are i nsti tuti onal l y sepa-
rate, thei r separati on i s not absol ute and excl usi ve. There i s no
wall of separation. Rather, church and state are di sti nct but
cooperati ve. They are separate but i nterdependent.
The wal l i s a myth.
Joseph Story, perhaps Ameri ca’s foremost ni neteenth-
century l egal hi stori an, underscored thi s truth i n hi s book on the
Consti tuti on sayi ng:
The Fi rst Amendment was not i ntended to wi thdraw the Chri s-
ti an rel i gi on as a whol e from the protecti on of Congress. . . .
At the ti me, the general , i f not uni versal , senti ment i n Ameri ca
was that Chri sti ani ty ought to recei ve encouragement fmm the
state so far as was compati bl e wi th the pri vate ri ghts of con-
sci ence and the freedom of worshi p. . . . Any attempt to l evel
al l rel i gi ons, and to make i t a matter of state pol i cy to hol d al l i n
utter i ndi fference woul d have created . . . uni versal i ndi gnati on.g
The state was to encourage the church.
At the same ti me, the church was to cooperate wi th and en-
courage the state. For i nstance, the church was to teach the ci ti -
zenry the Bi bl e, the common standard of l aw for both church
and state. 10 The church was to i nstruct al l men and women i n
the basi c pri nci pl es of godl y ci ti zenshi p and ri ghteous cul tural
acti on. 11 The church was to mobi l i ze the forces of mercy, truth,
and justi ce i n ti mes of di ffi cul ty or cri si s. 1* The church was to
recrui t from the ranks of the congregati on abl e men and women
for the work of ci vi l servi ce. 13 The church was to confront evi l ,
expose si n, and denounce i njusti ce whenever and wherever i t
258 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
mi ght be found, publ i c and pri vate, ci vi l and congregati onal . 14
The church was to encourage the magi strates, pray for them,
support them, i nstruct them, and advi se them. 15 I n other words,
the church was to serve as soci et~s prophet and pri est.
The Ameri can system was, thus, set up as a decentral i zed,
confederated, and republ i can soci al structure. 16 I t fol l owed the
Bi bl i cal order of mul ti pl e juri sdi cti ons, separate but cooperat-
i ng, under the soverei gnty of God and the rul e of Hi s Law. 17
The current noti on of the wall of separation between church
and state i s, thus, a far cry from what our Foundi ng Fathers
i ntended. 18 I t i s, i n fact, a deni al of the mul ti pl i ci ty of i nsti tu-
ti ons and juri sdi cti ons. I t cri ppl es the church and exal ts the
state. 19 I t asserts the absol ute authori ty of the state and ex-
cl udes bel i evers from parti ci pati on i n the cul tural , soci al , and
pol i ti cal processes .20
The wal l ofwparation i dea was sl ow to catch on i n our nati on.
Unti l the War Between the States erupted, Chri sti ani ty was uni -
versal l y encouraged at every l evel of the ci vi l government .21
Then, i n 1861, under the i nfl uence of the radi cal Uni tari ans, the
Northern Uni on rul ed i n the courts that the ci vi l sphere shoul d
remai n “i ndi fferent” to the church.zz After the war, that judg-
ment was i mposed on the Southern Confederati on as wel l . 23
One hundred years l ater, i n 1961, the erosi on of the Ameri can
system of checks and bal ances conti nued wi th the judi ci al decl a-
rati on that al l fai ths were to be “l evel ed” by the state .24 By 1963,
the courts were protecti ng and favori ng a new rel i gi on – /zwnan-
i w-z had been decl ared a rel i gi on by the Supreme Court i n 1940 —
whi l e persecuti ng and l i mi ti ng Chri sti ani ty.*5 The government i n
Washi ngton, much to the del i ght of groups l i ke Pl anned Parent-
hood, began to make l aws “respecti ng an establ i shment of re-
l i gi on” and “prohi bi ti ng the free exerci se thereof.”zG I t banned
posti ng the Ten Commandments i n school rooms, al l owed the
Bi bl e to be read i n tax-supported i nsti tuti ons onl y as an hi stor-
i cal document, forbade prayer i n the publ i c domai n, censored
seasonal di spl ays at Chri stmas, Easter, and Thanksgi vi ng,
regul ated church school s and outreach mi ssi ons, demanded
I RS regi strati on of rel i gi ous i nsti tuti ons, and deni ed equal ac-
cess to the medi a for Chri sti an spokesmen. 27 I n short, i t has
stri pped the church of i ts juri sdi cti on and di smantl ed the i nsti -
tuti onal di fferenti ati on the Foundi ng Fathers were so careful to
I dols for Destruction: A Strate~ for Prophets and Priests 259
construct. z* I t has robbed the church of i ts propheti c and
pri estl y functi ons. zg
I f our soci ety i s ever to return to the bal ance and i ntegri ty
that the Founders i ntended, then the church wi l l have to
recl ai m i ts l egacy. And that won’t be easy. Unpl easant i nci dents,
l i ke the one Reba El vi n and her church had outsi de Pl anned
Parenthood, demonstrate that.so Even so, such sacri fi ces maybe
necessar y.
When the ri ghteous i ncrease, the peopl e rejoi ce, but when a
wi cked man rul es, peopl e groan (Proverbs 29: 2).
For the sake of l i fe and l i berty i n our l and, the church must
reassert i ts propheti c and pri estl y rol es.
The Propheti c Church
Part of the reason the church i s i n such bondage today i s
that i t has fai l ed to teach the truth. I nstead of nurturi ng God’s
Peopl e wi th the ri ch truths of practi cal Bi bl i cal i nstructi on, we
have i ndul ged i n theol ogi cal junk food, sectari an arcani a, and
i ntel l ectual i rrel evanci es. I nstead of cul ti vati ng commi tment on
the unwaveri ng foundati on of God’s Word, we have humored
oursel ves wi th eccl esi asti cal whi te el ephants.
Therefore My peopl e go i nto exi l e for thei r l ack of knowl edge;
and thei r honorabl e men are fami shed, and thei r mul ti tude i s
parched wi th thi rst (I sai ah 5:13).
‘Behol d, days are comi ng: decl ares the Lord God, “when I wi l l
send a fami ne on the l and, not a fami ne for bread or a thi rst for
water, but rather for heari ng the words of the Lord. And peopl e
wi l l stagger from sea to sea, and from the north even to the
east; they wi l l go to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, but
they wi l l not fi nd i t” (Amos 8:11-12).
When Sava of Trnova vi si ted the Ki evan Chri sti an republ i c i n
1202, he was struck by the gl ori ous archi tecture of the churches,
by thei r magni fi cent musi c, by thei r extravagant art, and by
thei r el aborate l i turgi es. But i t was the preachi ng that i mpressed
hi m the most. ‘The vaunted greatness of thi s l and; he wrote, “i s
surel y rooted i n the vaunted greatness of i ts church. The
260 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
vaunted greatness of i ts church, though steeped i n the mi ghty
wei gh of orthodoxy, i s surel y rooted i n the power and suasi on of
i ts propheti c procl amati on from the pul pi t.”sl The church taught
i ts peopl e then. And, as a resul t, those peopl e had bui l t a mar-
vel ous cul ture wi th l i berty and justi ce for al l .
When Al exi s de Tocquevi l l e vi si ted the Uni ted States i n
1830, he had a si mi l ar experi ence. He attri buted much of the
greatness he observed i n the l and to the vi brancy and rel evancy
of the church’s propheti c rol e. He noted that vi rtual l y every
communi ty i n the vast new republ i c was i ndel i bl y marked by
“pul pi ts afl ame wi th ri ghteousness.”sz The church taught i ts peo-
pl e then. And, as a resul t, those peopl e had bui l t a marvel ous
cul ture wi th l i berty and justi ce for al l .
The propheti c church appl i es the Bi bl e to every sphere of
l i fe: art, musi c, i deas, government, educati on, medi ci ne, hi s-
tory, economi cs, agri cul ture, and sci ence.ss I t bel i eves that “the
Bi bl e i s authori tati ve on everythi ng of whi ch i t speaks.”
34
And i t
bel i eves that “i t speaks of everythi ng.’”ss I t bel i eves that “al l Scri p-
ture i s God-breathed, and i s useful for teachi ng, rebuki ng, cor-
recti ng, and trai ni ng i n ri ghteousness, so that the man of God
may be thoroughl y equi pped for every good work” (2 Ti mothy
3:16-17). I t bel i eves that “not one jot or ti ttl e” has i n any wi se
passed from i t (Matthew 5:18). I t bel i eves that i t i s “settl ed i n
heaven” (Psal m 119:89), and “establ i shed on earth” (Psal m
119:90). I t bel i eves the Bi bl e, and i t teaches i t systemati cal l y at al l
ti mes, “i n season and out of season” (2 Ti mothy 4:2).
Jesus therefore was sayi ng to those Jews who had bel i eved
Hi m, “I f you abi de i n My word, then you are trul y di sci pl es of
Mi ne; and you shal l know the truth, and the truth shal l make
you free” (John 8:31-32).
The propheti c church does not just teach the Bi bl e though. I t
al so appl i es i t. The word prophet l i teral l y means gui de. Whenever
and wherever si n exi sts, the propheti c church i s there: expos-
i ng, rebuki ng, reprovi ng, correcti ng — and gui di ng.
Let no one decei ve you wi th empty words, for because of these
thi ngs the wrath of God comes upon the sons of di sobedi ence.
Therefore do not be partakers wi th them; for you were for -
I dols for Destruction: A Strate~ for Prophets and Priests 261
merl y darkness, but now you are l i ght i n the Lord; wal k as chi l -
dren of l i ght (for the frui t of the l i ght consi sts i n al l goodness
and ri ghteousness and truth), tryi ng to l earn what i s pl easi ng to
the Lord. And do not parti ci pate i n the unfrui tful deeds of
darkness, but i nstead even expose them (Ephesi ans 5:6-11).
When Pl anned Parenthood, and i ts al l i es i n government and
the medi a, rattl e thei r sabers agai nst the poor, the hel pl ess, and
the uni nformed, the church must ari se and expose them. The
church must gui de.
Son of man, speak to the sons of your peopl e, and say to them,
“I f I bri ng a sword upon a l and, and the peopl e of the l and take
one man from among them and make hi m thei r watchman;
and he sees the sword comi ng upon the l and, and he bl ows on
the trumpet and warns the peopl e, then he who hears the sound
of the trumpet and does not take warni ng, and a sword comes
and takes hi m away, hi s bl ood wi l l be on hi s own head. He
heard the sound of the trumpet, but di d not take warni ng; hi s
bl ood wi l l be on hi msel f. But had he taken warni ng, he woul d
have del i vered hi s l i fe. But i f the watchman sees the sword
comi ng and does not bl ow the trumpet, and the peopl e are not
warned, and a sword comes and takes a person from them, he
i s taken away i n hi s i ni qui ty; but hi s bl ood I wi l l requi re from
the watchman’s hand” (Ezeki el 33:2-6).
I f the church refuses the propheti c mantl e of John the Bap-
ti st (Matthew 4:3-12), of El i jah (1 Ki ngs 21:1-25), and of Nathan
(2 Samuel 12:1-13) i n exposi ng the evi l deeds of darkness and
gui di ng the peopl e i nto al l truth then the i nnocent are sure to
peri sh, and God’s vast army wi l l sl umber through one Megi ddo
after another.
For i f the bugl e produces an i ndi sti nct sound, who wi l l prepare
hi msel f for battl e? (1 Cori nthi ans 14:8).
The Pri estl y Task
Man’s chi ef end “i s to gl ori fy God and enjoy Hi m forever.”sc
We are supposed to gl ori fy and enjoy Hi m i n every area of l i fe
and wi th every acti vi ty. But we are to do i t parti cul arl y i n wor-
shi p. 37
262 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Man i s not merel y one speci es among many. He i s not a
naked ape. He i s not si mpl y homo sapiens — or thi nki ng man. I n-
stead, he i s homo adorans — or worshi pi ng man as wel l . I t i s hi s
abi l i ty to know and serve God that sets man apart from al l the
rest of creati on. 38
When Moses went before Pharaoh to l obby for I srael ’s l i b-
erty, he di d not say, “Let my peopl e go that they may start a new
pol i ti cal movement.” Nor di d he say, “Let my peopl e go that they
may establ i sh a Chri sti an nati on .“ No, i nstead, he sai d, “Let my
peopl e go that they may hol d a feast to Me i n the wi l derness”
(Exodus 5:1). And, agai n, “Let my peopl e go that they may serve
Me i n the wi l derness” (Exodus 7:16).
As author Davi d Chi l ton has wri tten, “We know the story of
I srael . God forces Pharaoh to rel ease them and they went on to
i nheri t the Promi sed Land. But the real l y cruci al aspect of the
whol e Exodus event, as far as the peopl e’s acti vi ty was con-
cerned, was worshi p .=39 And so i t conti nues to be today. Chi l ton
concl udes, “The orthodox Chri sti an fai th cannot be reduced to
personal experi ences, academi c di scussi ons, or cul ture-bui l di ng
acti vi ty — as i mportant as al l these are i n varyi ng degrees. The
essence of Bi bl i cal rel i gi on i s the worshi p of God. . . . True
Chri sti an reconstructi on of cul ture i s far from bei ng si mpl y a
matter of passi ng Law X and el ecti ng Congressman Y. Chri sti -
ani ty i s not a pol i ti cal cul t. I t i s the di vi nel y ordai ned worshi p of
the Most Hi gh God.nAo
Noti ce what happens when God’s peopl e– homo adorans–
forget thi s very fundamental truth:
I n the second year of Dari us the ki ng, on the fi rst day of the
si xth month, the word of the Lord came by the prophet Haggai
to Zer ubbabel the son of Sheal ti el , governor of Judah, and to
Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the hi gh pri est sayi ng, ‘Thus says
the Lord of hosts, ‘thi s peopl e says, “The ti me has not yet come,
even the ti me for the house of the Lord to be rebui l t .“’”
Then the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet sayi ng,
‘I s i t ti me for you yoursel ves to dwel l i n your panel ed houses
whi l e thi s house l i es desol ate?” Now therefore, thus says the
Lord of hosts, ‘Consi der your ways! You have sown much, but
harvest l i ttl e; you eat, but there i s not enough to be sati sfi ed;
I dols for Destruction: A Strate~ for Prophets and Pn”ests 263
you dri nk, but there i s not enough to become drunk; you put on
cl othi ng, but no one i s warm enough; and he who earns, earns
wages to put i nto a purse wi th hol es .“ Thus says the Lord of
hosts, “Consi der your ways! Go up to the mountai ns, bri ng
wood and rebui l d the templ e, that I may be pl eased wi th i t and
be gl ori fi ed: says the Lord. “You l ook for much, but behol d, i t
comes to l i ttl e; when you bri ng i t home, I bl ow i t away. Why?”
decl ares the Lord of hosts, “Because of My house whi ch l i es des-
ol ate, whi l e each of you runs to hi s own house” (Haggai 1:1-9).
When we negl ect the pri estl y rol e of the church, when we
negl ect worshi p, al l el se goes to seed.
I f our fi rst response to Pl anned Parenthood – or any other
evi l , for that matter — i s pol i ti cal , or soci al , or organi zati onal , or
l i ti gal , or judi ci al , we are no better than they, for we have put
our trust i n human. action as the ul ti mate determi ner of hi story.
The pri estl y church bel i eves i n the power of worshi p (Rev-
el ati on 8:1-8). I t bel i eves i n the pri macy of worshi p (John
4:23-24). I t bel i eves i n the preemi nence of worshi p (Mat-
thew 16:19). I t bel i eves that worshi p reori ents us to God’s pl an,
God’s purpose, and God’s program (Psal m 73:1-28). I t bel i eves
that worshi p i s the starti ng poi nt for cul tural transformati on
(1 Ti mothy 2:1-4), for i t i s worshi p that ul ti matel y bri ngs about
the demi se of the wi cked and the exal tati on of the ri ghteous
(Psal m 83:1-18).
O come, l et us si ng for joy to the Lord; l et us shout joyful l y to
the rock of our sal vati on. Let us come before Hi s presence wi th
thanksgi vi ng; l et us shout joyful l y to Hi m wi th psal ms. For the
Lord i s a great God, and a great Ki ng above al l gods, i n whose
hand are the depths of the earth; the peaks of the mountai ns are
Hi s al so. The sea i s Hi s, for i t was He who made i t; and Hi s
hands formed the dry l and. Come, l et us worshi p and bow
down; l et us kneel before the Lord our Maker. For He i s our
God, and we are the peopl e of Hi s pasture, and the sheep of
Hi s hand (Psal m 95:1-7).
The pri estl y church does not just payfonn worshi p though. I t
al so applies it. The word Pri est l i teral l y means guardian. Thus, a
pri est i s someone who guards. He protects. He preserves. He
stays the hand of destructi on and defi l ement.
264 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Adam was cal l ed to be a pri est. He was to “cul ti vate and
guard the garden” (Genesi s 2:15). When he fai l ed to do hi s duty,
the Fal l resul ted and judgment fel l on the l and (Genesi s 3:1-20).
Aaron was cal l ed to be a pri est. He was to guard the peopl e
from si n and shame (Exodus 32: 25). When he fai l ed to do hi s
duty, the peopl e began to worshi p and revel before a gol den cal f
and judgment fel l on the l and (Exodus 32:1-6).
The Levi tes were cal l ed to be pri ests. They were gi ven that
honor and pri vi l ege because they guar&d the i ntegri ty of God when
al l the rest of I srael was consumed wi th i dol atry (Exodus 32:26-29).
I t was not unti l they compl etel y fai l ed to do thei r duty that con-
demnati on and judgment befel l the l and (Jeremi ah 6:13-15).
Jesus commi ssi oned the church to take up the pri estl y task
(Matthew 28:19-20; 1 Peter 2:5). I t was to preserve, protect, and
guard the nati ons.
You are the sal t of the earth; but i f the sal t has become taste-
l ess, how wi l l i t be made sal ty agai n? I t i s good for nothi ng any-
more, except to be thrown out and trampl ed under foot by
men (Matthew 5:13).
I f the church refuses the pri estl y mantl e of Adam, Aaron,
and the Levi tes, the poor and hel pl ess wi l l , i ndeed, be trampl ed
under foot by men. They wi l l be crushed by the l i kes of Pl anned
Par enthood.
So now, i n practi cal terms, just exactl y how i s the church to
mani fest i ts Prophetic and prie+ rol es i n the struggl e for l i fe?
Once bel i evers have been taught, exhorted, equi pped, and com-
mi ssi oned, what then? Once they have worshi ped, prayed, and
procl ai med, what then? What do Chri sti ans do once they l eave
the four wal l s of the church?
Very si mpl y, we go out and change the worl d.Al We serve the
whol e of soci ety gui di ng and guardi ng the l and: i n the school s,
i n the medi a, i n l ocal government, i n the l egi sl ature, i n the
courts, and i n the bureaucracy.
The School s
‘A nati on at ri sk.”AZ That i s how the Uni ted States Depart-
ment of Educati on descri bes the state of the Uni on, as vi ewed
from the cl assroom.
I dols for Destrudion: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 265
Publ i c educati on i n thi s country i s a di smal fai l ure. Johnny
can’t read and Susi e can’t spel l . Wi l l i e can’t wri te and Al i ce can’t
add. Teacher competency i s down. Admi ni strati ve effecti veness
i s down. Student advancement i s down. Test scores are down.
Everythi ng to do wi th our publ i c school system i s down – every-
thi ng, that i s, except cri me, drug abuse, i l l i ci t sex, and the cost
to taxpayers .43
As many as twenty-three mi l l i on adul ts i n thi s country are
functi onal l y i l l i terate.** An addi ti onal thi rty-fi ve mi l l i on are
al i terate – they can read a few basi cs wi th di ffi cul ty, but that i s
about al l .4s SAT score compari sons reveal an unbroken decl i ne
from 1963 to the present .*G Average verbal scores have fh.l l en
over fi fty poi nts and mathemati cs scores have dropped nearl y
forty poi nts.4T Among the one hundred fi fty-ei ght member na-
ti ons of the Uni ted Nati ons, the Uni ted States now ranks forty-
ni nth i n i ts l i teracy l evel s.** And thi s despi te one of the most ex-
tensi ve and expensi ve school systems the worl d has ever seen.*g
Educati on i s, i n fact, the second l argest i ndustry i n the nati on,
spendi ng more than a quarter tri l l i on dol l ars every year, wi th
nearl y three mi l l i on teachers and admi ni strators, and the l argest
uni on i n the worl d .SO Despi te that, more than forty-fi ve percent
of al l the products of that system cannot even read the front page
of the morni ng newspaper.sl
I nto the morass of medi ocri ty, Pl anned Parenthood has
stepped, wreaki ng havoc. As i f thi ngs weren’t bad enough al -
ready. Wi th guest speakers, i nformati on bureaus, sex educati on,
curri cul a, fi l ms, l i terature di stri buti on, and school -based
cl i ni cs, Pl anned Parenthood has l aunched a ful l -scal e i nvasi on
of our school s.
52
I f we are goi ng to serve soci ety as prophets and pri ests, gui d-
i ng and guardi ng the l and, we are goi ng to have to reach out to
our school s.
There are several thi ngs that each of us can do to do just that.
I %t, we can go to l ocal PTA meeti ngs. Bel i eve i t or not, a
great deal can be accompl i shed at thi s grassroots l evel . Why not
gather a smal l packet of Pl anned Parenthood materi al s, quotes,
and stati sti cs, and pass i t around to the parents at a monthl y
meeti ng? Or vol unteer to speak on the subject of sex educati on?
Or, perhaps, form a task force group to i nvesti gate the school ’s
266 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
programs and procedures? The PTA has a tremendous amount
of i nfl uence on the school admi ni strati on and even the School
Board. I f we can catal yze a bottom-up surge of concern, or even
outrage, we may be abl e to turn thi ngs around yet.
Second, we can go to School Board meeti ngs. Mandates are
often devel oped on the nati onal l evel . Programs are formul ated
on the state l evel . But al l the i mpl ementati on and spendi ng deci -
si ons ul ti matel y pass through the School Board. Because Board
members are el ected offi ci al s, they are general l y responsi ve to
those who attend thei r meeti ngs. Of course, that i s the catch.
Hardl y anyone ever actual l y makes i t to those meeti ngs. Why
not commi t to attendi ng just a coupl e of meeti ngs a year? Or
maybe we coul d get a group from our church to swi tch off so
that each of the meeti ngs i s moni tored. A few wel l -phrased pro-
posal s, a few wel l -ti med testi moni es, a few wel l -thought-out
comments, a few wi sel y-pl aced books, and a few attended meet-
i ngs coul d mean the di fference between Pl anned Parenthood’s
recei vi ng another School Di stri ct contract, or some responsi bl e
soci al servi ce provi der’s recei vi ng i t.
Thi rd, we can vol unteer to put together an al ternati ve
speakers bureau for the school s. Why not contact several l ocal
pro-l i fe doctors and nurses and educators and get them i nto the
school s i nstead of the Pl anned Parenthood staffers? Why not get
a l i st of speakers and suggested assembl y i deas to every heal th
teacher, school nurse, gym teacher, coach, counsel or, and pri nci -
pal i n our school di stri ct? A l i ttl e ti me, a l i ttl e effort, and a l i ttl e
creati vi ty can make al l the di fference i n the worl d.
Fourth, we can buy good books, fi l ms, vi deos, and curri cu-
l um and donate them to our school I i brari es.sq The school s often
operate on a very ti ght budget so they are not l i kel y to buy much
more than the requi red i tems. So, why not stock the shel ves of
the l i brary wi th good, whol esome, and hel pful i tems? Perhaps
we coul d even sponsor a book fai r so that Chri sti ans from
throughout the communi ty can parti ci pate i n your project. A
school can’t very wel l use what i t doesn’t have.
F~th, we can get i nvol ved wi th the students oursel ves. Why
not start a youth Bi bl e study after school ? Or maybe vol unteer
wi th an exi sti ng Youth. for Christ or Navigator or Ybung L@ or Cam-
pus Crusade or Fellowship of Christian Athletes or Chi Alpha pro-
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 267
gram? Bui l di ng rel ati onshi ps wi th the students and di sci pl i ne
them for Chri st wi l l do more to stymi e Pl anned Parenthood than
al most anythi ng el se.
One way or another, we need to reach out to our school s. We
need to serve them as prophets and pri ests, gui di ng and guard-
i ng the l and.
The Medi a
Pl anned Parenthood, for al l i ntents and purposes, has the
medi a i n i ts pocket. I t has accompl i shed that feat i n part by
shrewdl y devel opi ng and crafti l y i mpl ementi ng a comprehensi ve
system of news rel eases, news contacts, medi a spokesmen, data
retri eval , source procurement, publ i c rel ati ons campai gns, ex-
pert anal ysi s, adverti si ng, and i ntervi ew l eads.sA As a resul t, i t
has been abl e to nurture stori es, do l ead generati on, ti me break-
i ng events, create desi rabl e publ i ci ty, snowbal l feature i tems,
and shape publ i c opi ni on. 55
Why has the church fai l ed to devel op that ki nd of medi a
acumen? Why have pro-l i fe groups not been abl e to expl oi t the
medi a as a wedge agai nst publ i c pol i cy the way Pl anned Parent-
hood has? Certai nl y, i t i s not because the opportuni ti es are l ack-
i ng. I t i s not because the technol ogy i s unavai l abl e. Nor i s i t
because the resources are i naccessi bl e. But, for some reason, we
have yet to make the l ong-term commi tments necessary to turn
the medi a around.
That must change. I f we are goi ng to serve our soci ety as
prophets and pri ests, gui di ng and guardi ng the l and, we are
goi ng to have to recapture the medi a.
There are several thi ngs that each of us can do to do just that.
Fi rst, we can wri te l etters to the edi tor. I f we have somethi ng
to say, we ought to say i t. I nstead of constantl y murmuri ng and
compl ai ni ng about the bi ased coverage i n our l ocal newspapers
and magazi nes, we can voi ce our opi ni on. Why not offer an al -
ternati ve perspecti ve of the l atest Pl anned Parenthood i ni ti ati ve?
Or, perhaps, we can gai n publ i ci ty for the posi ti ve programs that
our l ocal church or al ternati ve center i s offeri ng? A bri ef,
pol i te, respectful , and wel l -phrased l etter may be abl e to spark
a communi ty-wi de di al ogue where the facts about Pl anned
Parenthood can actual l y come to l i ght.
268 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Second, we can put together press packets and medi a contact
networks oursel ves. I t i s hard to di spute facts. And i t i s hard to
i gnore facts that are constant~ presented i n an ami abl e and pro-
fessi onal manner. Why not begi n to ci rcul ate to l ocal reporters
and newsmen a few sel ected fact sheets, stati sti cal surveys,
fi nanci al charts, pamphl ets, and books on Pl anned Parenthood?
Or, perhaps, devel op a seri es of press rel eases that we hand de-
l i ver to one or two sympatheti c broadcasters? I f we pl an ahead
and prepare properl y, we can, at the very l east, l et the medi a
know that we’re here and that we mean busi ness.
Third, we can hol d press conferences. I f we regul arl y recover
the broken bodi es of chi l dren from the dumpsters behi nd a
Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni c, there i s no reason i n the worl d why
we shoul dn’t l et the worl d know. Why not cal l out the camera
crews, contact the newspapers, and noti fy the radi o stati ons? I f
we can consi stentl y del i ver hard news, controversi al stori es, and
substanti al i ntervi ews, they wi l l keep comi ng back to us. We can
then begi n to use them i nstead of the other way around.
Fourth, even i f every avenue i s cl osed i n our communi ty, we
can sti l l get the word out. Why not start a radi o program? Or
even a TV show? 56 Many stati ons around the country sel l ai r
ti me at very reasonabl e rates. I f we can put together a cri sp, pro-
fessi onal , responsi bl e, and i nformati ve program, we can go
strai ght to the communi ty. Then, i nstead of constantl y havi ng to
fi ght wi th the medi a, we become the medi a. I f radi o i s out of the
questi on, why not try a newsl etter? Even a smal l , l i ttl e mi meo-
graphed nei ghborhood i nformati on sheet can cause Pl anned
Parenthood al l ki nds of headaches i f i t presents accurate, up-to-
date, hard-hi tti ng i nformati on.
Ftfih, we can sway adverti sers and sponsors to press for more
objecti ve coverage. A boycott i s not the onl y ki nd of l everage
that we can use wi th busi nesses to get them to spend thei r publ i -
ci ty dol l ars more responsi bl y. A cl ear presentati on of the facts
can do wonders. Why not i ncl ude major adverti sers and publ i c
rel ati ons fi rms i n our press rel ease l i st? Or, perhaps, we coul d
devel op a rel ati onshi p wi th the deci si on-makers, hel pi ng them to
real i ze what ki nd of i mpact they have on the communi ty. The
medi a wi l l not conti nue to support Pl anned Parenthood i f they
see thei r adverti si ng space droppi ng off si gni fi cantl y.
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 269
One way or another, we need to recapture the medi a. We
need to serve i t as prophets and pri ests, gui di ng and guardi ng
the l and.
Local Governments
Local governments are trul y the nuts and bol ts of the Ameri -
can system. Wi thout the admi ni strati on of ci ti es, counti es, par-
i shes, di stri cts, preci ncts, zones, commi ssi ons, muni ci pal i ti es,
and states, ci vi l stabi l i ty woul d surel y di si ntegrate. The Found-
i ng Fathers of our nati on recogni zed that, and the system of gov-
ernment that they desi gned was purposeful l y decentral i zed and
l ocal i zed.sT They wanted to make certai n that the vi l l ages,
townshi ps, communi ti es, and states shaped the pol i ci es of the
nati on and the pri ori ti es i n Washi ngton, not vi ce versa.
Napol eon once asserted that the way to capture a nati on i s
not to “storm the pal aces,” but to “capture the countrysi de.” He
was ri ght.
The i mpact of Pl anned Parenthood has been enhanced as
much by l ocal zoni ng ordi nances, heal th codes, and fundi ng ap-
prai sal s as i t has by court rul i ngs and l egi sl ati ve packages. There
i s a basi c pri nci pl e at work here — not just a consti tuti onal pri nci -
pl e, but a Bi bl i cal pri nci pl e: whoever wi l l be fai thful wi th “few
thi ngs” and “smal l thi ngs: wi l l be made master over “many
thi ngs” and “gwat thi ngs” (Matthew 25:14-30).
I f we are goi ng to serve soci ety as prophets and pri ests,
we are goi ng to have to parti ci pate i n, and i nfl uence, our l ocal
governments.
There are several thi ngs that each of us can do to do just that.
First, we can attend meeti ngs. Agai n, i t i s the smal l meeti ng
that determi nes the course of communi ty l i fe: ci ty counci l meet-
i ngs, county heal th board meeti ngs, uti l i ty di stri ct meeti ngs, tax
apprai sal meeti ngs, county devel opment meeti ngs, and envi ron-
mental i mpact meeti ngs. Onl y a ti ny handful of peopl e — about
one tenth of one percent of the regi stered voters — attend those
meeti ngs on a regul ar basi s. Onl y about two percent of the el ec-
torate ever attend such meeti ngs. Needl ess to say, that mi nuscul e
mi nori ty has an i nordi nate amount of i nfl uence over the day-to-
day admi ni strati on of thei r l ocal governi ng bodi es. So why not
be a party to that powerful mi nori ty? Why not si t on a few com-
270 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
mi ttees, put together a few budget proposal s, and devel op al ter-
nati ves to the present programs? I f we woul d, Pl anned Parent-
hood woul d surel y be exposed for what i t i s.
Second, we can parti ci pate i n preci nct caucuses. The preci nct
i s the l owest common denomi nator i n the Ameri can pol i ti cal
process. Basi cal l y, i t i s an el ecti on di stri ct. I t i s the pl ace where
votes are cast and counted. But i t i s al so the hub of party organi -
zati on. I t i s there i n the preci nct that our pol i ti cal parti es recei ve
thei r di recti on, support, conti nui ty, pl atform, and purpose. What
a party i s, whom i t nomi nates, and even where i t i s goi ng are al l
determi ned i n those smal l meeti ngs al l across the country, i n
school s, Ameri can Legi on hal l s, and pol l i ng booths, not under
the bri ght l i ghts of the nati onal conventi on. And the thi ng i s,
anyone who votes i n a party’s pri mary i s el i gi bl e to parti ci pate i n
the preci nct caucus. Onl y about three percent ever actual l y doss
So, why not l et that three percent be us? Why not submi t resol u-
ti ons that hi t hard on Pl anned Parenthood’s programs of l ust and
greed? Why not el ect pro-l i fe acti vi sts as preci nct chai rmen,
el ecti on marshal s, pol l watchers, and conventi on del egates? We
can actual l y make a di fference i f onl y we wi l l .
Thi rd, we can parti ci pate i n l ocal campai gns and el ecti ons.
Every vote real l y matters. Si nce onl y about si xty percent of the
ci ti zens of thi s country are regi stered to vote, and onl y about
thi rty-fi ve percent actual l y bother to go to the pol l s, a candi date
onl y needs the support of a smal l el i te group of peopl e to wi n. sg
I t onl y takes about fourteen percent of the el ectorate to gai n a
seat i n the Senate.GO I t takes about el even percent to gai n a seat
i n the House. 61 Onl y about ni ne percent i s needed to wi n a gov-
ernorshi p. G* And i t takes a mere seven percent to take an aver-
age mayoral or ci ty counci l post .63 Any race i s wi nnabl e. Why
not get i nvol ved i n a worthy campai gn? Why not work to get
magi strates i n offi ce who wi l l defund Pl anned Parenthood? Why
not gi ve up a few weekends to stuff some envel opes, post some
yard si gns, man a phone bank, host a candi date forum, di stri b-
ute bumper sti ckers, or mount a voter regi strati on dri ve? We
trul y can make every vote count.
One way or another, we need to parti ci pate i n, and i nfl u-
ence, our l ocal governments. We need to serve them as prophets
and pri ests, gui di ng and guardi ng the l and.
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests
271
The Legi sl ature
Ostensi bl y, Congress i s the source of al l federal l aw i n thi s
country. The presi dent cannot make l aw; he onl y admi ni sters i t.
The courts cannot make l aw; they onl y adjudi cate i t. Onl y the
combi ned efforts of the two branches of Congress — the House
and the Senate — can make l aw.
The House of Representati ves has four hundred thi rty-fi ve
members apporti oned on the basi s of popul ati on, and el ected
every two years from among the fi fty states. The Senate has one
hundred members, two from each state, el ected to staggered si x-
year terms. Together those fi ve hundred thi rty-fi ve magi strates
have the power to stop aborti on, defund Pl anned Parenthood,
cl ean up our school s, regul ate the profl i gate bi rth control drug
trade, revoke tax-exempt status for abortuari es, enforce par-
ental consent, and i ncrease l egal and medi cal l i abi l i ti es .64 I f
onl y they woul d.
And they woul d i f we coul d onl y bri ng the ri ght ki nd of pres-
sure to bear.
I f we are goi ng to serve our soci ety as prophets and pri ests,
gui di ng and guardi ng the l and, we are goi ng to have to i nfl uence
the l egi sl ature.
There are several thi ngs that each of us can do to do just that.
Fi rst, we can i ni ti ate correspondence wi th our l egi sl ators.
Onl y one out of every twenty Ameri cans has ever wri tten to thei r
Congressmen.Gs Onl y one out of every two hundred has wri tten
more than once .66 And onl y one out of every ten thousand has
wri tten more than fi ve ti mes. 67 So whi l e the mai l room on
Capi tol Hi l l may recei ve several thousand l etters every day, onl y
a few hundred actual l y address speci fi c pol i cy i ssues — the rest
are tri vi al or i ntercessory. Because the congressi onal staff tabu-
l ates these l etters and then surveys them i n the manner of a pol l ,
any one l etter can l eave a tremendous i mpact on the pol i cy-
maki ng process. And a regul ar, consi stent correspondence may
mean the di fference between a pro or con vote on somethi ng as
i mportant as Ti tl e XX appropri ati ons for Pl anned Parenthood
or Hyde Amendment restri cti ons or a Freedom of Choi ce Act or
a Fetal Harvesti ng bi l l . So why not i nvest the pri ce of a stamp and
fi fteen mi nutes’ ti me and wri te a l etter? But not just one l etter. Why
not devel op a habi t of correspondence? I nformati ve, cordi al ,
272 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fact-l aden, acti on-ori ented, posi ti ve, and hel pfhl l etters l aunched
the fi rst Ameri can Revol uti on.@ Perhaps they can l aunch a second.
Second, we can attend our l egi sl ator’s home di stri ct meeti ngs.
Most Congressmen come home for town meeti ngs, or i ssues
semi nars or fundrai sers or soci al events or campai gn stops or
hol i day cel ebrati ons. Onl y a very smal l part of the consti tuency
regul arl y attends these meeti ngs. Why not take i t upon oursel ves
to make as many of those appearances as we possi bl y can? Or
del egate vari ous meeti ngs out to several peopl e i n the church
who can report back to the whol e group? I f our l egi sl ator knows
that a very i nformed, very acti ve, very vocal core of hi s consti tu-
ency i s unal terabl y opposed to Pl anned Parenthood fundi ng and
contracti ng and coddl i ng, he i s much more l i kel y to exami ne the
i ssues wi th some degree of care. And i f we have the opportuni ty
at those personal appearances to hand hi m fact sheets, press ki ts,
tracts, or books, then al l the better.
Thi rd, we can respond to our l egi sl ator’s pol l s. Most Con-
gressmen use the mai l s to gauge consti tuency concerns. Why not
make the most of those pri me opportuni ti es? Why not answer
hi s pol l s thoughtful l y and careful l y wi th hand-wri tten comments
i n the margi ns? A personal , neat, wel l -composed comment
shows congressi onal staffers that we real~ care about an i ssue,
and they are more l i kel y to consi der our thoughts.
Four t/z, we can testi fy before congressi onal commi ttee and
sub-commi ttee heari ngs. There are at l east si xteen di fferent
stages that a bi l l must pass through before i t actual l y becomes
l aw. I t must be i ntroduced. I t must be referred to commi ttee. I t
must proceed through the appropri ate sub-commi ttees wi thi n
that commi ttee. I t must then be subjected to heari ngs and mark-
up. Next, the bi l l must be reported to the ful l House. Then i t i s
put on the cal endar. When the date for di scussi on on the fl oor
fi nal l y comes up, consi derati on must be obtai ned. Then di s-
cussi on, amendment, and debate occurs. Next comes the voti ng
stage. I f the bi l l passes the House i t i s referred to the Senate
where a si mi l ar, al bei t shorter, consi derati on, commi ttee, and
fl oor process i s fol l owed. Once the Senate passes i ts versi on, the
bi l l goes before a joi nt commi ttee of both branches to consol i date
any di fferences. The compl eted bi l l then goes to the presi dent
for si gni ng. Onl y then does the bi l l become l aw. The thi ng i s,
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 273
anywhere al ong the way, the bi l l can be al tered, adjusted, or
scrapped al together. That i s why commi ttee and sub-commi ttee
heari ngs are so cruci al . Debate, di scussi on, and expert testi -
mony i n those earl y stages of a bi l l can deci de whether i t wi l l be a
strong moral and ethi cal pi ece of l egi sl ati on or one more capi tu-
l ati on to the powers that be at Pl anned Parenthood. Why not get
the doctors, l awyers, teachers, and counsel ors we know to go to
Washi ngton and testi fy for the several commi ttees and sub-
commi ttees consi deri ng fami l y pl anni ng l egi sl ati on? Why
shoul d Pl anned Parenthood’s experts be the onl y ones cal l ed on?
We can just as easi l y make the cal l s and wri te the l etters and pul l
the stri ngs to get our peopl e i n as they can.
One way or another we need to i nfl uence the l egi sl ature. We
need to serve i t as prophets and pri ests, gui di ng and guardi ng
the l and.
The Courts
The judi ci ary has become a vi rtual pl ayground for Pl anned
Parenthood – despi te twel ve years of conservati ve judi ci al appoi nt-
ments. Besi des the i nfamous Roe v. Whal e deci si on, at l east a dozen
other deci si ons have been handed down by the Supreme Court
that vi ol ate the sancti ty of l i fe and undermi ne the vi abi l i ty of the
Consti tuti on.G9 I n most of them, Pl anned Parenthood pl ayed a
central rol e, as ei ther the pl ai nti ff or as a “fri end of the court .“70
I n Doe V. Bol ton, i n 1973, the Court i nval i dated a Georgi a
statute l i mi ti ng aborti ons to “accredi ted medi cal faci l i ti es .“ The
deci si on al so broadened the defi ni ti on of “maternal heal th” to i n-
cl ude a broad range of factors i ncl udi ng “general maternal wel l -
bei ng” as a justi fi cati on for l ast tri mester aborti ons.
I n Bigelow u. Virginia, i n 1975, the Court struck down a state
l aw restri cti ng aborti on cl i ni c adverti si ng pol i ci es.
I n Singleton u. Wulj, i n 1976, the Court gave aborti oni sts the
ri ght to chal l enge government aborti on fundi ng restri cti ons “on
behal f of thei r pati ents.” Thus, the i ndustry was gi ven free rei n
to act as pl ai nti ffs and l obby for themsel ves through the courts.
I n Planned Parenthood of Missouri v. Danforth, also i n 1976, the
Court struck down provi si ons i n the state l aw requi ri ng abor-
ti oni sts to save the l i fe of the aborted chi l d when possi bl e. I t al so
i nval i dated a spousal consent statute.
274 GMND ILLUSIONS
I n Colautti u. Franklin, i n 1979, the Court struck down a
Pennsyl vani a statute creati ng a standard for the determi nati on
of the vi abi l i ty of unborn chi l dren.
I n Bel l otti U. Bai rd, al so i n 1979, the Court i nval i dated a Mas-
sachusetts statute requi ri ng parental consent for mi nor chi l dren
recei vi ng aborti ons.
I n Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, i n 1983, the
Court struck down a ci ty ordi nance requi ri ng al l second and
thi rd tri mester aborti ons to be performed i n hospi tal s. I t al so i n-
val i dated a statute requi ri ng aborti oni sts to i nform thei r pati ents
of the medi cal ri sks of aborti on and of possi bl e al ternati ves to
aborti on. I t argued, i n essence, that the “pro-choi ce movement”
need not provi de women wi th choi ces.
I n Planned Parenthood of Kansas Ci~ v. Ashcroft, also i n 1983,
the Court i nval i dated a state statute requi ri ng second tri mester
aborti ons be performed i n hospi tal s.
I n Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecolo-
gists, i n 1986, the Court struck down al l mi l d forms of aborti on
regul ati on, i ncl udi ng restri cti ons for i nformed consent, i nforma-
ti onal reporti ng requi rements, and performance of aborti ons
after vi abi l i ty. The deci si on, for al l i ntents and purposes, made
aborti on the on~ compl etel y unregul ated surgi cal procedure i n
the Uni ted States.
I n Webster v. Reproductive Services, i n 1989, the Court opened
the door for state prerogati ve i n regul ati ng aborti on faci l i ti es.
Heral ded as a vi ctory for “anti -choi ce” forces by the medi a, the
rul i ng i n fact di d not stri ke down a si ngl e provi si on i n Roe or
create any form of restri cti on on chi l d-ki l l i ng procedures.
I n Rust u. Su/ liuan, i n 1991, the Court uphel d the ri ght of the
federal government to determi ne who coul d and who coul d not
recei ve Publ i c Heal th Servi ce bl ock grants. Agai n, though wi del y
adverti sed as a “pro-l i fe” vi ctory, the deci si on di d not stri ke down
any aspect of the chi l dki l l i ng standards of Roe.
I n Planned Parenthood v. Caxy, i n 1992, the so-cal l ed “conserva-
ti ve” Court actual l y rei nforced and uphel d the chi l d-ki l l i ng-on-
demand pri nci pl es of Roe whi l e at the same ti me confi rmi ng the
“compel l i ng i nterest of the vari ous states .“
The great l i berti es that we enjoy i n Ameri ca have been secured
agai nst the arbi trary and fi ckl e whi ms of men and movements
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Pra”ests 275
bytherul eo~kuw Our system of government does not depend
upon the benevol ence of the magi strates, or the al trui sm of the
weal thy, or the condescensi on of the powerful . Every ci ti zen,
ri ch or poor, man or woman, nati ve-born or i mmi ~ant, hal e or
handi capped, young or ol d, i s equal under the standard of un-
changi ng, i mmutabl e, and i mparti al justi ce.
As Thomas Pai ne wrote i n Cornrnorz Sew., the powerful book-
l et that hel ped spark the War for I ndependence, “I n Ameri ca,
the l aw i s ki ng.”T 1
I f l eft to the mere di screti on of human authori ti es, statutes,
edi cts, and ordi nances i nevi tabl y devol ve i nto tyranny. There
must therefore be an absol ute agai nst whi ch no encroachment of
prejudi ce or preference may i nterfere. There must be a founda-
ti on that the wi nds of change and the waters of ci rcumstance
cannot erode. There must be a basi s for l aw that can be depended
upon at al l ti mes, i n al l pl aces, and i n every si tuati on.
Apart from thi s Chri sti an i nnovati on i n the affai rs of men there
can be no freedom. There never has been before, and there never
wi l l be agai n. Our Foundi ng Fathers knew that onl y too wel l .
The openi ng refrai n of the Decl arati on of I ndependence
afhrms the necessi ty of an absol ute standard upon whi ch the rul e
of l aw must be based:
We hol d these truths to be sel f-evi dent, that al l men are created
equal ; that they are endowed by thei r Creator wi th certai n
i nal i enabl e ri ghts; that among these are l i fe, l i berty, and the
pursui t of happi ness. That, to secure these ri ghts, governments
are i nsti tuted among men, deri vi ng thei r just powers from the
consent of the governed.
Appeal i ng to the “Supreme Judge of the Worl d” for gui dance,
and rel yi ng on Hi s “Di vi ne Provi dence” for wi sdom, the Framers
commi tted themsel ves and thei r posteri ty to the absol ute standard
of “the l aws of nature and nature’s God .“ And the essence of that
standard, they sai d, were the i nal i enabl e, God-gi ven, and sover-
ei gnl y endowed ri ghts of [z~e, liber~, and the Pursuit of happiness. A
just government exi sts, they argued, sol el y and compl etel y to
“provi de guards” for the “future securi ty” of that essence. Take i t
away, and the rul e of l aw i s no l onger possi bl e.
Thomas Jefferson asserted that:
276 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
The chi ef purpose of government i s to protect l i fe. Abandon
that and you have abandoned al l . 72
Abraham Li ncol n pressed the same i ssue home when he
questi oned the i nsti tuti on of sl avery on the basi s of the sancti ty
of al l human l i fe and the rul e of l aw:
I shoul d l i ke to know i f taki ng thi s ol d Decl arati on of I ndepend-
ence, whi ch decl ares that al l men are equal upon pri nci pl e, and
maki ng excepti ons to i t, where i t wi l l stop. I f one man says i t
does not mean a Negro, why not another say i t does not mean
some other man?’s
Because Pl anned Parenthood– and i ts pro-death bedfel l ows
on the Supreme Court – have been so di l i gent i n thei r assaul t on
the unborn, the aged, and the i nfi rmed, the rul e of l aw i n our
l and i s now i n real jeopardy. No one i s absol utel y secure, because
absol uteness has been thrown out of our consti tuti onal vocabul ary.
Now that the ri ght to l i fe has been abrogated for at l east some
ci ti zens, all the l i berti es of al l the ci ti zens are at ri sk because
suddenl y arbi trari ness, rel ati vi sm, and randomness have
entered the l egal equati on. The checks agai nst petty parti al i ty
and bl atant bi as have been di sabl ed.
Thi s i s not the rul e of l aw. I t i s the brutal i mposi ti on of
fashi on and fancy by pri vi l eged i nterl opers.
Ronal d Reagan i n hi s book Abotiion and tb Conscience of the
Nation, poi nted out that, “Our nati on-wi de pol i cy of aborti on on
demand through al l ni ne months of pregnancy was nei ther voted
for by our peopl e nor enacted by our l egi sl ators – not a si ngl e
state had such unrestri cted aborti on before the Supreme Court
decreed i t to be nati onal pol i cy i n 1973 .“74 The pro-death stance
of the court was, he sai d, “an act of raw judi ci al power.”7s I t was
a deni al of the rul e of l aw. I t was a tyranni cal usurpati on of l i fe,
l i berty, and the pursui t of happi ness because, as the Presi dent sai d,
‘We cannot di mi ni sh the val ue of one category of human l i fe –
the unborn – wi thout di mi ni shi ng the val ue of al l human l i fe.”TG
Al though these truths are “sel f-evi dent” i n the sense that they
are wri tten on the fl eshl y tabl et of every man’s heart, they are by
no means uni versal l y accepted (Remans 1:19-22). I n fact, such
reasoni ng i s, to some a “stumbl i ng bl ock,” and to others “mere
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 277
fool i shness” (1 Cori nthi ans 1:23). That i s because the rul e of l aw
i s a Chri sti an i dea, made possi bl e onl y by the revel ati on of l aw
from on hi gh. And al l too many men “suppress” that truth i n one
way, shape, form or another (Remans 1:18).
Thomas Jefferson acknowl edged thi s sayi ng:
Can the l i ber ti es of a nati on be sur e when we r emove thei r onl y
fi rm basi s, a convi cti on i n the mi nds of the peopl e, that these
l i berti es are the gi ft of God? That they are not to be vi ol ated
but wi th hi s wrath? I ndeed, I trembl e for my country, when I
refl ect that God i s just; that Hi s justi ce cannot sl eep forever,
that revol uti on of the wheel of fortune, a change of si tuati on, i s
among possi bl e events; that i t may become probabl e by super-
natural i nfl uence! The Al mi ghty has no attri bute whi ch can
take si de wi th us i n that event. 77
I n order to protect and preserve any ri ghts we must protect
and preserve al l ri ghts — begi nni ng wi th the fundamental ri ghts
of l i fe, l i berty, and the pursui t of happi ness. But i n order to protect
those ri ghts, we must return to that di sti nctl y Chri sti an noti on
that the God who provi denti al l y rul es the affai rs of men has
al ready i nal i enabl y endowed these ri ghts to each of us.
Agai n and agai n the Court has undercut the rule of law pri n-
ci pl e and rei nforced the barbari sm of chi l d-ki l l i ng — thus i t has
undercut the very standard of l i berty i tsel f.
The l ower courts have proven to be equal l y hosti l e to l i fe and
l i berty. Repeatedl y sti ff sentences have been handed down to
aborti on protesters, al ternati ve servi ce provi ders, and pro-l i fe
organi zers, often on trumped-up charges.
Cl earl y, i f we are goi ng to serve soci ety as prophets and
pri ests, gui di ng and guardi ng the l and, we are goi ng to have to
hel p turn the courts around.
There are several thi ngs we can do to do just that.
Fi rst, we can uti l i ze our vote. Many of the judges that wreaked
havoc on l i fe and l i berty i n our l and are el ected to the bench and
they must stand for re-el ecti on. So, why not mount a campai gn
to repl ace pro-aborti on, anti -fami l y judges? Why not spend as
much ti me and energy on those obscure judi ci al races as we do
on l egi sl ati ve campai gns? I n that way we can cut ri ght to the
heart of the matter.
278 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Second, we can begi n to exerci se the pri nci pl e of jury nul l i fi -
cati on. The purpose of a jury i s to put a check on the power of
the magi strates by putti ng ul ti mate power i n the hands of i ndi -
vi dual ci ti zens. I n a very real sense, the Foundi ng Fathers gave
each ci ti zen three votes: the fi rst was the free el ecti ons vote i n or-
der to choose thei r representati ves; the second was the Grand
Jury vote i n order to prevent overzeal ous prosecutors from
harassi ng the ci ti zenry; and the thi rd was the jury vote i n order
to restrai n the courts from unjustl y appl yi ng l egi ti mate l aws or
from l egi ti matel y appl yi ng unjust l aws. Thus, the true functi on
of the jury i s to try not onl y the acti ons and the moti ves of the de-
fendant, but the acti ons and the moti ves of the prosecuti on, the
court, and the l aw as wel l .
Accordi ng to the 1972 deci si on of US. u l l ougher~, juri es
have the “unrevi ewabl e and i rreversi bl e power . . . to acqui t i n
di sregard of the i nstructi on on the l aw gi ven by the tri al judge.”
I n other words, the jury can i gnore the prosecutor, i gnore the
judge, and even i gnore the l aw i f the courts and the l aw seem to
be out of l i ne wi th Bi bl i cal di recti ves. Thi s i s the cheri shed doq-
tri ne of jury nul l i fi cati on that men l i ke John Adams, James
Madi son, John Jay, Al exander Hami l ton, and John C. Cal houn
struggl ed for for so l ong. 78
Sadl y, i t i s an al most forgotten doctri ne. That i s why i t i s so
essenti al that we become i nformed jurors, to hol d the courts i n
check. Thus, we need to a.r~i re to jury duty, not avoid it. We need
to appl y oursel ves di l i gentl y so that we can be sel ected. We need
to be certai n never to di squal i fy oursel ves i n pro-l i fe cases just
because we hol d moral convi cti ons on those matters. Moral con-
vi cti on i s just exactly what the courts need ri ght now.
So, why not take the opportuni ty next ti me jury duty comes up
and serve wi l l i ngl y? Why not exerci se jury nul l i fi cati on and throw
a l egal wrench i n ti e judi ci zd works? I t can onl y hel p matters.
Third, we can begi n to go on the offensi ve. Why shoul d we
al ways be on the defensi ve? Why shoul d Pl anned Parenthood be
the onl y organi zati on to take cases before the courts as a means
of pol i cy advocacy?
Al though a few Chri sti an pro-l i fe groups, l i ke the Ruther-
ford I nsti tute, the Ameri can Center for Law and Justi ce, and the
Nati onal Legal Foundati on have begun to scratch the surface i n
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 279
these areas, much more needs to be done. Li ti gati on needs to pour
forth from the Chri sti an communi ty i n torrents. Parents need to
sue school di stri cts over the debauched curri cul um programs.
Women abused by aborti on need to sue Pl anned Parenthood and
other abortuari es for medi cal mal practi ce. Pro-l i fe l eaders need
to sue the vari ous medi a outl ets for sl ander and del i berate mi s-
representati on of the facts. And churches need to sue zoni ng
commi ssi ons for di scri mi natory regul ati on. I n the same way that
Pl anned Parenthood has smothered bel i evers over the l ast thi rty
years wi th thei r l awsui ts, we need to take to the courts, fi ghti ng
fi re wi th fi re. We need to stop wai ti ng unti l we are sued to uti l i ze
the system to save the system. Why not i ni ti ate a few l awsui ts?
Or, perhaps, sponsor some of our fri ends i n a court fi ght? Pl anned
Parenthood has had the courts to themsel ves for l ong enough now.
Fourth, we can begi n to uti l i ze the defense of necessi ty. The
ak~wse o~necessi ty i s a l egal maneuver that argues that “l esser l aws
may be broken so that a greater good mi ght be done .“ So, for i n-
stance, breaki ng and enteri ng a burni ng house to save a vi cti m
from the fl ames i s not a cri me. Li kewi se, assaul t and battery on
a rapi st i n order to free hi s vi cti m i s a justi fi ed act. The defense of
necessity may al so be uti l i zed to test l aws that protect aborti oni sts.
Si t-i ns i n the Pl anned Parenthood cl i ni cs where the unborn chi l -
dren are butchered i n whol esal e sl aughter are not si mpl e cases of
ci vi l di sobedi ence, but are opportuni ti es to bri ng the defense of ne-
cessity i nto the courts, thereby testi ng the val i di ty of the l aws.
Pl anned Parenthood has been uti l i zi ng the vari ous l egal tests to
throw out Chri sti an l aws for years. I sn’t i t about ti me to turn the
tabl es? Why not begi n to set some l egal precedents i n a few
mi nor tri al s so that the defense of necessity i s avai l abl e for us to use
i n the major cases? I t i s cruci al that we pl an ahead, gai n a foot-
hol d, and forge some vi ctori es.
One way or another we need to hel p turn the courts around.
We need to serve them as prophets and pri ests, gui di ng and
guardi ng the l and.
The Bureaucracy
The bureaucracy i s, perhaps, the most powerful ‘%ranch” of
the Ameri can governmental system. I t i s certai nl y the l argest
and the most expensi ve. Yet i t i s nowhere menti oned i n the Con-
sti tuti on. I t was i n no way envi si oned by the Foundi ng Fathers.
280 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
That makes for a very dangerous si tuati on. Who moni tors
the bureaucracy? Who checks and bal ances i ts admi ni strati on?
Who even knows what i t does?
When secti on 1008 of the Ti tl e X appropri ati ons bi l l for pop-
ul ati on control went i nto effect, the bureaucrati c mi ni ons si mpl y
i gnored i t and di d whatever they jol l y wel l pl eased. Secti on 1008
stated that no funds coul d be i ssued to “any program or agency
where aborti on i s uti l i zed as a method of fami l y pl anni ng.”
Despi te that cl ear i njuncti on, the Department of Heal th and
Human Servi ces has poured mi l l i ons of dol l ars i nto the coffers of
Pl anned Parenthood. Thus, the bureaucracy has i l l egal l y pro-
vi ded more than hal f of the budget for Pl anned Parenthood’s pro-
gram of death, decepti on, and perversi on, out of our tax dol l ars.
Because the bureaucracy i s unmoni tored and unchecked, i t
i s above the l aw. Qui te l i teral l y.
I f we are goi ng to serve soci ety as prophets and pri ests, gui d-
i ng and guardi ng the l and, we are goi ng to have to bri ng the
bureaucracy back under control .
There are several thi ngs we can do to do just that.
Fi rst, we can cal l for the enforcement of exi sti ng l aws. Every
day, the bureaucracy publ i shes several hundred new pages of
rul es, regul ati ons, statutes, pol i ci es, orders, di recti ves, and re-
stri cti ons that carry the force of l aw. But, al l too often, these new
ordi nances i n the Federal Register are contrary to exi sti ng l aw.
They are nothi ng but an attempt to anonymousl y end-run the
l egi sl ature and the” courts.
I f we coul d moni tor both the Federal Register and the pol i cy
programs that go unpubl i shed, hol di ng the vari ous ci vi l servants
accountabl e to exi sti ng l aw, the humani sti c l oophol es woul d be
vi rtual l y cl osed. Pl anned Parenthood woul d l ose i ts tax fundi ng.
The admi ni strati on woul d, at l ong l ast, be returned to the sani ty
of a standard of l aw. Why not speci al i ze i n a parti cul ar area of
the l aw and then hol d the bureaucracy accountabl e to i t? Why
not turn the screws and actual l y make the system work the way
i t i s supposed to work? I f we don’t make i t work, no one wi l l .
Second, we can hol d bureaucrats accountabl e for thei r ac-
ti ons. The great advantage of most ci vi l servants over el ected
magi strates i s the cover of anonymi ty. No one knows who they
are. They are namel ess and facel ess. Thus, the y are abl e to
I dols for Destruction: A Strate~ for Prophets and Priests 281
wi el d power and i nfl uence wi thout fear of exposure or publ i c
repri sal . Often they can work for years behi nd the scenes, doi ng
damage to l i fe and l i berty wi thout any notori ety whatsoever.
They are buri ed beneath a thi ck i nsul ati on of red tape, wel l -
di sgui sed from the penetrati ng gaze of publ i c and medi a.
But what i f these wel l -protected, l ong-anonymous ci vi l ser-
vants were exposed? What i f they were hel d accountabl e for
thei r acti ons? What i f thei r names and faces and acti ons and
acti vi ti es were publ i shed for al l to see? What i f we began to
put them under the same ki nd of scruti ny that el ected offi ci al s
must undergo?
Why not make the bureaucracy accountabl e for i ts pol i ci es
and programs? Why not cal l i ndi vi dual admi ni strators to task
for thei r behi nd-the-scenes acti vi ti es? We need to do the research
necessary to catal og the names, computeri ze the l i sts, and
moni tor the deci si ons so that wayward ci vi l servants can be
made to serue the ci ti zenry once agai n.
Thi rd, we can cl og the machi nery of the bureaucracy wi th
del ays, requests, and i nqui ri es, buyi ng ti me for more permanent
measures. The bureaucracy i s a l umberi ng, bumbl i ng monol i th.
I t i s a vast Gol i ath. A monstrous gi ant. But a few Chri sti ans
properl y prepared can wal k i n Davi d’s footsteps and become
gi ant-ki l l ers.
When Pl anned Parenthood’s cohorts i n the bureaucracy
begi n to l ay waste to justi ce, mercy, and l i berty, we need to
swarm i nto the fray, sl owi ng, stal l i ng, deterri ng, frustrati ng,
di stracti ng, and annoyi ng. Wi th speed, fl exi bi l i ty, and commi t-
ment, a few i nsi gni fi cant mosqui to-l i ke maneuvers can cl og the
bureaucrati c machi nery for months. Why not ask for an offi ci al
i nqui ry, or a heari ng? Or, maybe demand al l the fi l es on a gi ven
subject for the l ast decade under the Freedom of I nformati on
Act? We can make phone cal l s. Or wri te l etters. Or ask ques-
ti ons. Or vi si t offi ces. Or tal k to supervi sors. Or make appeal s.
By buyi ng ti me, perhaps we can sway the process i n a more sane
and sensi bl e di recti ve.
One way or another, we need to bri ng the bureaucracy back
under control . We need to serve i t as prophets and pri ests,
gui di ng and guardi ng the l and.
282 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Payi ng the Pi per
Servi ng soci ety as prophets and pri ests i s al l too often a
thankl ess task. And, at ti mes, qui te dangerous. You can be sure
that Pl anned Parenthood i s none too thri l l ed to see Chri sti ans
gui di ng and guardi ng thi s nati on’s cul tural and pol i ti cal affai rs.
The fact i s, there si mpl y i sn’t enough room i n i ts pl ural i sm for us.
As a resul t, i t – and a number of other groups –has pressed
for, and won, a number of restri cti ons on Chri sti an acti vi ty i n
the soci ety at l arge. Vari ous I RS regul ati ons, Federal El ecti on
Commi ssi on regul ati ons, and federal statutes constrai n Chri s-
ti ans, and especi al l y mi ni sters and church congregati ons, from
engagi ng i n parti cul ar pol i ti cal acti ons.
I f a church i s regi stered wi th the government as a 501(c)(3)
organi zati on, the mi ni ster and the membershi p must pay cl ose
attenti on to the detai l s of these restri cti ons. Not al l of them are
fai r, or just, or ri ght, but they do exi st, and churches shoul d at
the very l east know what the boundari es and ri sks are.
Accordi ng to the I RS and the FEC, a church or mi ni ster
“may not di rectl y or i ndi rectl y parti ci pate i n, i ntervene i n (i n-
cl udi ng the publ i shi ng or di stri buti ng of statements) any pol i ti -
cal campai gn on behal f of or i n opposi ti on to any candi dates for
publ i c offi ce.”Tg
Even so, the regul ati ons do have l oophol es.
For i nstance, the courts have rul ed that a mi ni ster may al l ow
hi s name to be used i n pol i ti cal ads i n support of parti cul ar i ssues.
He may be i denti fi ed i n the ad as the mi ni ster of a parti cul ar
church. He may even work wi th other i ndi vi dual s to establ i sh a
pol i ti cal acti on commi ttee, though that commi ttee must operate
and “be vi ewed” as separate from the church. He may al so
engage i n l obbyi ng acti vi ti es, ci rcul ate peti ti ons, conduct voter
regi strati on dri ves, l oan mai l i ng l i sts, and i ntroduce candi dates
at servi ces. And, of course, the courts have rul ed that he may
speak from the pul pi t to encourage the members of the congre-
gati on to become acti ve i n every aspect of the pol i ti cal process.
He may preach on the i mportance of pol i ti cal acti vi sm and may
pray for el ected offi ci al s as often as he chooses. He may even
l ead publ i c prayers for the el ecti on of candi dates who support a
parti cul ar phi l osophy or cause as l ong as the prayer “cannot be
construed as a di rect endorsement of a candi date or candi dates.’
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 283
At ti mes, i t seems that the l oophol es i n the system are open
so wi de that our propheti c and pri estl y duti es are enti rel y unen-
cumber ed.
Sadl y, there are other ti mes when the l oophol es bui l t i nto the
system cl ose up ti ghter than a drum. Reba El vi n and the mem-
bers of her church found that out the hard way.
There are ti mes, i n fact, when the system seems onl y to work
agai nst the cause of l i fe and l i berty.
Church hi stori ans for years have pondered wi th i nqui si ti ve
awe the uncharacteri sti cal l y feroci ous persecuti on that the New
Testament era bel i evers faced. I n a day of tol erance, prosperi ty,
and governmental stabi l i ty, why di d the i ntense publ i c outrage
break forth?
Was there somethi ng about the earl y church ri tual s that par-
ti cul arl y i rked the Remans?
Al most unquesti onabl y not. The Empi re shel tered wi thi n i ts
fol ds al l manner of esoteri ca and errati ca. I n compari son, the
church was tame to say the l east.
Was there somethi ng about the earl y church doctri ne that
parti cul arl y i rked the Remans?
Agai n, that’s hi ghl y unl i kel y. Mystery cul ts, occul ti c covens,
and theosophi c sects of the wi l dest order thri ved under the tol er-
ant wi ngs of the Empi re .BO
So what was i t that si ngl ed Chri sti ani ty out to be so awful l y
despi sed by the ci vi l magi strates and the popul ace at l arge?
Accordi ng to Franci s Schaeffer, “The earl y Chri sti ans di ed
because they woul d not obey the state i n a ci vi l matter . . . they
were ci vi l rebds. The Roman State di d not care what anybody
bel i eved rel i gi ousl y; you coul d bel i eve anythi ng or you coul d be
an athei st. But you had to pay homage to Caesar as a si gn of
your l oyal ty to the state.”81
The Chri sti ans sai d “no.” That i s why they were thrown to
the l i ons. They were ci vi l rebel s. They were not i mpri soned,
beaten, revi l ed, stoned, exi l ed, and executed because of thei r pe-
cul i ar dogmas. They met wi th persecuti on because they refused
to obey the government.
An excerpt from the fi rst-century Law of the Twelue Tables
states that no Roman ci ti zen was to “have gods on hi s own,
nei ther new ones nor strange ones, but onl y those i nsti tuted by
284 GIWND ILLUSIONS
the state.”Bz A statute i n the second century Ceh..s Tables, ai med ,
speci fi cal l y at the Chri sti ans, stated that “they form among them-
sel ves secret soci eti es that exi st outsi de the system of l aws . . . an
obscure and mysteri ous communi ty founded on reuolt and on the
advantage that accrues from i t .“6S And, accordi ng to the great
second century Chri sti an defense attorney, Athenagoras, prose-
cuti on agai nst bel i evers proceeded on two poi nts: “That we do not
sacri fi ce and that we do not bel i eve i n the same gods as the state.”6q
The hi stori an, Di o Cassi us, confi rmed thi s emphasi s i n
Roman l aw duri ng the rei gn of Domi ti an. He stated that the
Emperor “had executed, among many others, the consul Fl avi us
Cl emens, even though he was a cousi n of hi s, and hi s wi fe,
Fl avi a Domi ti l l a, who was al so rel ated to Domi ti an. The accusa-
ti on agai nst both was that of treuson. On the basi s of thi s accusa-
ti on, many others who had adopted the customs of the Jewi sh
Chri sti ans were al so condemned. Others were, at the very l east,
depri ved of thei r property or suffered bani shment.”ss
Cl earl y, the Roman government saw the Chri sti ans not si m-
pl y as an arcane rel i gi ous group, but as a band of ci vi l i nsurrec-
ti oni sts. They were undermi ni ng the authori ty of the state by
cl ai mi ng a hi gher al l egi ance. Chri sti ani ty knocked the state from
i ts messi ani c pedestal . Thus, i t was anarchy i n the eyes of the
i mperi al protectors.
Any ti me the state attempts to make i tsel f “the center of al l
human l oyal ti es, the goal of al l human aspi rati ons, the source of
al l human val ues, and the fi nal arbi ter of al l huma~ desti ny:
says John W. Whi tehead, “confl i ct becomes i nevi tabl e.”6G
Such was the case i n Rome.
And, al l too often, such i s the case i n our own day.
Why was there such severe persecuti on agai nst Chri sti ans i n
the days of I mperi al Rome? For the same reasons that Chri s-
ti ans are bei ng harassed today so bruti shl y by Pl anned Parent-
hood: the Law of God i s hi gher than the l aw of men. And i n the
monol i thi c modern federal i sm, the l aw of men unavoi dabl y con-
travenes the precepts of Scri pture. Chri sti ans, thus, are branded
as subversi ves to the wel fare of the soci ety.
I f so–so be i t!
Peter, James, and John had to work outsi de the system for a
ti me i n order to get the message of the Gospel out (Acts 4:19-20).
I dols for Destruction: A Strategy for Prophets and Priests 285
Ul ti matel y, the Gospel won and the Roman Empi re was con-
verted. But, unti l that had occurred, the di sci pl es of Chri st had
to fi nd other means to affect the mi ni stry of cul tural acti on.
At the present ti me, the l aws of many states and muni ci pal i -
ti es hi nder us from ful fi l l i ng our God-ordai ned responsi bi l i ti es:
rescui ng the peri shi ng (Proverbs 24:10-12), educati ng our chi l -
dren i n the Law of God (Deuteronomy 6:1-9), and cari ng for the
poor and homel ess (I sai ah 58:6-12). What are we to do when
such ci vi l tyranny actual l y excl udes us from the system? Do we
have to resort i mmedi atel y to ci vi l di sobedi ence?
Not at al l .
I n the Scri ptures, God’s peopl e, at vari ous ti mes and i n vari -
ous si tuati ons, demonstrate a number of di fferent reacti ons to
ci vi l tyranny that i nvol ve worki ng wi thi n the system. When the
state oversteps i ts bounds and begi ns to vi ol ate God’s i mmutabl e
Law, bel i evers have several model s of tacti cal acti on from whi ch
to choose.
For i nstance, Dani el , when asked to vi ol ate Scri pture, si mpl y
uti l i zed the tacti c of the wi se appeal . I nstead of i nstantl y i ndul gi ng
i n bel l i gerent rebel l i on agai nst di vi nel y i nsti tuted authori ty, he
proposed an al ternati ve course of acti on, whi ch ul ti matel y gai ned
for hi m the favor of the court (Dani el 1:8-16).
Si mi l arl y, the Apostl e Paul , when faced wi th an ungodl y and
unscrupul ous jury, exerci sed the tacti c of l awyer del ay. I nstead
of revi l i ng the authori ti es, i nstead of outri ght rebel l i on, and i n-
stead of sul l en submi ssi on, Paul uphel d the i ntegri ty of God’s
l aw through the appel l ate process (Acts 25:1-27).
Moses, when faced wi th the awful oppressi on of God’s peo-
pl e, began a very forthri ght l obbyi ng i ni ti ati ve. Rather than ad-
vocati ng an armed rebel l i on, he sought a change i n Pharaoh’s
tyranni cal pol i cy. Hi s whol e approach, though from wi thout,
was to force the evi l system of Egypt to change from wi thi n
(Exodus 5:1-21).
Obadi ah was the chi ef counsel to Ki ng Ahab, perhaps the
most corrupt and tyranni cal of al l the ki ngs i n I srael ’s hi story. As
a devout bel i ever i n the Lord, Obadi ah was abl e to i nsti gate a
program of reform and renewal ri ght under the haughty noses of
Jezebel and her dastardl y Baal i c courti ers. I nstead of acti vel y
rebuki ng the evi l monarchs and thei r consorts, he worked ar ound
286 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
the system to promote Scri ptural resi stance and posi ti ve
recl amati on (1 Ki ngs 18:3-16).
Jeremi ah counsel ed the peopl e of I srael to submi t to the to-
tal i tari an rul e of Nebuchadnezzar. Many commentators have
taken thi s to be an exampl e of humi l i ty and subservi ence, but
Jeremi ah actual l y exerci sed a tacti c of Scri ptural resi stance. I t i s
what we mi ght cal l the wounded lamb approach. I n contrast to the
wounded water bu~alo strategy so arti cul atel y advocated by hi s
contemporary Hanani ah, Jeremi ah’s pl an was to humi l i ate the
i nvaders through the Godl y goadi ng of thei r own consci ences
(Jeremi ah 44:1-30). Ezeki el , too, avoi ded ci vi l di sobedi ence i n
hi s struggl e agai nst tyranny. Hi s resi stance tacti c i nvol ved
graphi c publ i c protest. He took hi s propheti c message to the
streets and therei n garnered both publ i c and di vi ne favor (Eze-
ki el 4:1-5:17).
Each of these heroes of the fai th was forced by ci rcumstance
to work for cul tural reform. But they al l understood that when
the messi ani c state begi ns to vi ol ate i ts di vi ne trust, there are sti l l
a wi de vari ety of tacti cal opti ons avai l abl e to them short of ci vi l
di sobedi ence. Li ke them, we can work wi thi n the system wi th
the wi se appeal , l awyer del ay, l obbyi ng, l egi sl ati ve reform,
sufferi ng servanthood, and publ i c protest. Even when faced wi th
awful debi l i tati ng oppressi on, bel i evers shoul d draw on these al -
ternati ve avenues of resi stance before resorti ng to more di re
strategi es. A veri tabl e arsenal of Scri ptural tacti cs has been sup-
pl i ed to the bel i ever i n order to stay hi m from the l ast resort of
rebel l i ous confrontati on.
Scri ptural respect for di vi ne i nsti tuti ons must forever remai n
foremost i n our mi nds (Remans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-25). Though
tyranny may i ncl i ne us toward l i bertari an acti vi sm, though god-
l essness may provoke gri ef i n our bowel s of compassi on, though
the barbari sm of Pl anned Parenthood may rankl e our wrathful
i re, bel i evers have a Scri ptural mandate to do God’s work, God’s
way, i n God’s ti me. Unti l the tacti cs of the wi se appeal , l awyer
del ay, l obbyi ng, l egi sl ati ve reform, sufferi ng servanthood, and
publ i c protest have been exhausted and enti rel y fmstrated, ci vi l
di sobedi ence i s not a l i ve opti on. Agai n, we must say ci vi l di s-
obedi ence i s a last resort. There i s no ground whatsoever i n the
Bi bl i cal narrati ve for ski ppi ng ahead to the drasti c when the
mundane mi ght just as wel l do. To advocate ci vi l di sobedi ence
I dols for Destruction: A Strate~ for Prophets and Priests
287
before the exhausti on of al ternati ve resi stance i s to thwart God’s
redempti ve program and the rul e of Law.
Of course, once every al ternati ve has been exhausted – and
i n many cases they al ready have been — then we may have to go
the way of Peter, James, and John, and stand for the truth of God
regardl ess of the costs: rescui ng the peri shi ng, protecti ng the i n-
nocent, defendi ng the defensel ess, exposi ng i njusti ce. Noti ce, for
i nstance, that Dani el , Paul , Moses, Obadi ah, Jeremi ah, and
Ezeki el al l eventual l y had to exerci se ci vi l di sobedi ence i n order
to protect the i ntegri ty of thei r fai th.
I n thi s day of humani sti c tyranny and the unrel enti ng bar-
bari sm of Pl anned Parenthood, these ki nds of i ssues are, once
agai n, promi nent for the mi ni stry of prophets and pri ests. I t
woul d stand us i n good stead to pay heed to the procedural agenda
as set forth i n Scri pture —and Scri pture al one. Wi tness for i n-
stance, the careful Bi bl i cal parameters set for ci vi l di sobedi ence
by the parti ci pants i n aborti on cl i ni c rescues .
87
Teari ng Down the Hi gh Pl aces
I n hi s remarkabl e book, I dolsfor Destruction, Herbert Schl oss-
berg asserted, “When a ci vi l i zati on turns i dol atrous, i ts peopl e
are profoundl y changed by that experi ence. I n a ki nd of reverse
sancti fi cati on, the i dol ater i s transformed i nto the l i keness of the
object of hi s worshi p.”ss
As the Psal mi st put i t:
Those who make i dol s are l i ke them and thus are al l who put
thei r trust i n them (Psal m 115:8).
“Bl ood-thi rsty gods produce bl ood-thi rsty peopl e: Schl ossberg
conti nues. “I f someone thi nks that chance rul es the uni verse, hi s
acti ons are l i kel y to appear random. I f peopl e i ncreasi ngl y thi nk
that mal evol ence rul es . . . we can expect more human sacri -
fi ce. I f there i s a decl i ne i n the number of peopl e who bel i eve
that God i s l ove, we can expect fewer who thi nk that acti ons of
l ove are moral i mperati ves. For any i ndi vi dud or soci ety, there-
fore, the rel i gi ous questi ons are the ul ti mate ones that govern
human conduct, whether they bel i eve i t or not .“
89
Thi s i s why i t i s so cruci al for us, as prophets and pri ests gui d-
i ng and guardi ng the l and, to do more than poi nt out the dan-
gerous i dol atri es of Pl anned Parenthood. We must destroy every
i dol and we must tear down the hi gh pl aces. Whatever the cost.
288 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Asa was a good ki ng who rul ed over the ki ngdom of Judah for
forty-one years. “He di d what was ri ght i n the si ght of the Lord,”
and he wal ked i n the steps of “Davi d, hi s father” (1 Ki ngs 15:11).
He i nsti tuted a number of cruci al reforms, i ncl udi ng the removal
of mal e cul t prosti tutes and the destructi on of Asherah i mages
(1 Ki ngs 15:12-13). But, despi te al l the good that he di d, he i s re-
membered most for what he di d not do. Hi s fi nal epi taph was si m-
pl y that he had fai l ed to remove the hi gh pl aces (1 Ki ngs 15:14).
He was good. He was moral . But he just di d not go far enough.
Asa’s son, Jehoshaphat, was al so a good ki ng. He rei gned i n
Jerusal em for twenty-fi ve years, “doi ng ri ght i n the si ght of the
Lord” (1 Ki ngs 22:42-43). He, too, i nsti tuted i mportant reforms
but, l i ke hi s father, he just di d not go far enough. “The hi gh
pl aces were not taken away, and the peopl e sti l l sacri fi ced and
burnt i ncense there” (1 Ki ngs 22:43).
Si mi l arl y, Jehoash was a good and moral ki ng. He rei gned i n
Jerusal em for forty years (2 Ki ngs 12:1). And he “di d ri ght i n the
si ght of the Lord al l hi s days” (2 Ki ngs 12:2). But he di d not go far
enough: “the hi gh pl aces were not taken away” (2 Ki ngs 12:3).
Amazi ah was a good and moral ki ng for twenty-ni ne years i n
Jerusal em (2 Ki ngs 14:2). He, too, “di d ri ght i n the si ght of the
Lord” (2 Ki ngs 14:3). And, yet, “the hi gh pl aces were not taken
away” (2 Ki ngs 14:4). He si mpl y di d not go far enough.
Azari ah, son of Amazi ah, rei gned fi fty-two years i n Jerusal em
(2 Ki ngs 15:2). Li ke hi s father, “he di d ri ght i n the si ght of the
Lord” (2 Ki ngs 15:3). And, yet, he, too, i s remembered for the
epi taph: “the hi gh pl aces were not taken away” (2 Ki ngs 15:4).
He was good. He was moral . But he just di d not go far enough.
Jotham was another of the good ki ngs of Judah. He rei gned
si xteen years i n Jerusal em (2 Ki ngs 15:33), “and he di d what was
ri ght i n the si ght of the Lord” (2 Ki ngs 15:34). Sadl y, though,
“the hi gh pl aces were not taken away” (2 Ki ngs 15:35). He was
good and moral , but he di d not go far enough.
Each of these ki ngs ul ti matel y fai l ed, despi te thei r good
works and good i ntenti ons, because they di d not utterl y destroy
the i dol s of the l and. And, bi t by bi t, the i dol atry eroded thei r
cul ture unti l one day i t compl etel y destroyed i t (2 Ki ngs
25:8-21). Each of the ki ngs fai l ed to serve thei r soci ety as proph-
ets and pri ests, gui di ng and guardi ng the l and.
I dols for Destruction: A Strateg for Prophets and Priests 289
May we not make the same terri bl e mi stake. May we sti r up
wi thi n oursel ves the courage to remove al l the hi gh pl aces and to
destroy al l the i dol s.
Concl usi on
On January 22, 1988 whi l e more than fi fty thousand pro-l i fe
workers assembl ed on Capi tol Hi l l , Ronal d Reagan i ssued an
hi stori c procl amati on establ i shi ng the sancti ty of al l human l i fe,
i ncl udi ng unborn chi l dren. I n that procl amati on he wrote: “I ,
Ronal d Reagan, Presi dent of the Uni ted States, by vi rtue of the
authori ty vested i n me by the Consti tuti on and l aws of the
Uni ted States, do hereby procl ai m and decl are the unal i enabl e
personhood of every Ameri can from the moment of concepti on
unti l natural death, and I do procl ai m, ordai n, and decl are that
I wi l l take care that the Consti tuti on and the l aws of the Uni ted
States are fai thful l y executed for the protecti on of Ameri ca’s un-
born chi l dren. Upon thi s act, si ncerel y bel i eved to be an act of
justi ce, warranted by the Consti tuti on, I i nvoke the consi derate
judgment of manki nd, and the graci ous favor of Al mi ghty God?gO
Despi te thi s, i n the years si nce, aborti on has proceeded
apace. Despi te thi s, Pl anned Parenthood has proceeded apace.
Apparentl y a l ot has changed si nce the days when presi denti al
procl amati ons actual l y meant somethi ng– si nce the days of
Abraham Li ncol n.gl
There i s an i mportant l esson for us i n thi s: Presi denti al pol i -
ti cs, presi denti al pol i ci es, and presi denti al personal i ti es cannot
and wi l l not effect the ki nds of changes we need i n order to protect
the hel pl ess, the di senfranchi sed, the poor, the despi sed, and the
negl ected. Si mi l arl y, a pro-aborti on presi dent i s not necessari l y
an i mpenetrabl e i mpedi ment agai nst ri ghteous acti on. The great
l esson of the twenti eth century i s that i deol ogi cal pol i ti cs i s very
l i mi ted i n i ts abi l i ty to effect l ong-term change. Symbol i c gestures
si mpl y are not suffi ci ent.
The church must reassert i ts pri estl y and propheti c rol es,
guardi ng and gui di ng the l and i n the school s, i n the medi a, i n
l ocal government, i n the l egi sl ature, i n the courts, and i n the
bureaucracy. Anythi ng l ess i s just not enough.
F O U R T E E N
ALTARS FOR
CONSTRUCTION:
AN AGENDA FOR
THE FUTURE
adeste~delesl
A man who knows that the earth is round but lives among men who beliae it to be
@t ought to hamn-wr in his doctrine @t& earthk roundness up to thepoint ofarrest,
imprisonment, or even death. Realip will conirm him, and he is not so much
t-at@ing to the world as it is – which k worth nothing – as to Him who made the
world, and Who is worth more thun all things.
2
I ts
Hilaire Belloc
We can’t fi ght something wi th nothing.
That i s a basi c truth that the church has al ways understood.s
great struggl es against darkness, defi l ement, death, and
decepti on through the ages have si mul taneousl y been struggl es
for l i ght, l ovel i ness, l i fe, and l i berty. Wi ckedness was al ways met
wi th ri ghteousness, not just ri ghteous i ndi gnati on.
Thus, i n our efforts to defend the hel pl ess, the hopel ess, and
the harassed i n our own day, i t i s i mportant that we not si mpl y
say “no” to Pl anned Parenthood; we must say “yes” to the ful l ness
of the Chri sti an fai th and i ts di sci pl i nes.
John Chrysostom knew onl y too wel l that you can’t fi ght
somethi ng wi th nothi ng. The great fourth century sai nt was
renowned far and wi de for hi s sci nti l l ati ng and propheti c
oratory. Hi s sermons, fi rst i n the ci ty of Anti och and then i n
Constanti nopl e i tsel f, attracted throngs of rapt l i steners. He was
known as the “gol den tongued” preacher and gl ori ous revi val
291
292 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fol l owed hi m wherever he went. Thi s despi te the fact that he
readi l y denounced si n i n hi gh pl aces, he unhesi tati ngl y confronted
vi ce and corrupti on, and he fearl essl y exposed the powers and
the pri nci pal i ti es.
Why W>S he so popul ar? He seemed to break every homi l eti -
cal rul efi the book. Hi s messages were too l ong. Hi s arguments
were too compl ex. Hi s rhetori c was too harsh. And hi s counsel
was too demandi ng. How then was he abl e to so mesmeri ze the
crowds and to catal yze repentance?
Accordi ng to Thrasymachos of Trace, a fi fth-century church
hi stori an, Chrysostom’s sermons were al most enti rel y Bi bl i cal
and thus had “al l the vi brancy and authori ty and suasi on of Hol y
Wri t i tsel f.”A He bel i eved that “the di spensati on of the Word to
the peopl e was sacramental ” and thus necessi tated “a carefi .d ex-
egesi s of Scri pture” as wel l as “a practi cal exposi ti on of Scri pture
every ti me he took to the pul pi t .“s Unl i ke many of the preachers
i n hi s day, he refused to i ndul ge i n ei ther “phi l osophi cal specul a-
ti on or recreati onal pl easantry.”b He avoi ded ‘pastoral mun-
dani a and communal absurdi a” servi ng hi s l i steners i nstead “the
pure meat of the Gospel , turni ng nei ther to the ri ght nor the l eft,
di stracted from hi s Hol y Duty by nei ther cl amori ng urgency nor
beckoni ng tyranny.”T
Chrys~stom was a Bi bl i cal preacher. And no doubt that al one
set hi m apart from many, i f not most, of hi s contemporari es.
Even so, that sti l l does not adequatel y expl ai n hi s great
power and popul ari ty. And Thyrasymachos admi ts as much. “As
i mportant as hi s Bi bl i o-centri ci t y was ,“ noted the hi stori an, “i t
was hi s spi ri tual estate that l ent Chrysostom such anoi nti ng and
favor. . . . I t was hi s personal commi tment to the basi c di sci -
pl i nes of the fai th . . . al msgi vi ng, prayer, and fasti ng.”s
John Chrysostom di d not si mpl y say “no” to si n and mal e-
vol ence; he sai d “yes” to the ful l ness of the Chri sti an fai th and
i ts di sci pl i nes.
Jan Hus al so knew that you can’t fi ght somethi ng wi th noth-
i ng. The great fourteenth-century reformer was, l i ke Chrysos-
tom, renowned far and wi de for hi s sci nti l l ati ng and propheti c
preachi ng. Hi s sermons, fi rst i n the ci ty of Prague and then i n
the countrysi de surroundi ng Bohemi a, attracted enthusi asti c and
rapturous crowds. He was known as the “fi rebrand of the Czechs”
and renewal broke out spontaneousl y wherever he went. Thi s
despi te the fact that he openl y chal l enged papal excl usi vi ty, he
Aharsfor Construction: An Agenda for the Future 293
courageousl y condemned the sel l i ng of i ndul gences, si mon y, and
eccl esi asti cal l arceny, and he forthri ghtl y demanded uncom-
promi si ng di sci pl eshi p from every bel i ever.
Why was he so popul ar? Agai n, he seemed to break every
homi l eti cal rul e i n the book. He expl oded popul ar bel i efs. He
condemned common practi ces. And he stood agai nst the ti de of
hi s enti re generati on. How then was he abl e to become a pas-
si onatel y l auded nati onal hero?
Accordi ng to Herve Kotasek, a si xteenth-century Czech hi s-
tori an, i t was Hus who fi rst gave currency to the noti on of Sol a
Scn@ra – Scri pture onl y – a doctri nal cornerstone of the Refor-
mati on. “The Bi bl e was hi s al l -i n-al l ,” Kotosek asserted.”g He
adhered to the fai th of the Engl i shman, John Wycl i f, fi rmi ng
the supremacy of the Hol y Ordi nances.nl o Preachi ng exposi tori l y
through the Gospel s, he emphasi zed a “precept upon precept,
l i ne upon l i ne, verse upon verse mi ni strati on, taki ng ful l upon
hi msel f the necessi ty to feed hi s fl ock.”11 Unl i ke many of the
preachers i n hi s day, “he refused to pander to the ri ch and
esteemed.” ‘z He remai ned ‘enti rel y uni nterested i n the most
popul ar of i ntri gues, sacred or secul ar, hol y or profane.”l s I n-
stead, he studi ousl y mai ntai ned the “sacramental offi ce of
preachi ng the Word of Li fe, unadorned and unadul terated wi th
tri vi al concerns.”14
Hus was a Bi bl i cal preacher. And no doubt that al one set
hi m apart from many, i f not most, of hi s contemporari es.
Even so, that sti l l does not expl ai n hi s great power and popu-
l ari ty. And Kotasek admi ts as much. “Though thoroughl y com-
pel l i ng i n the pul pi t: the hi stori an commented, “hi s al l ure was
assured by as much i n what he was, as what he sai d . . . for i n-
deed the hol i ness of Hus was great. He gave of hi msel f unto the
poor . . . . He gave of hi msel f unto the prayers, and. . . . He
gave of hi msel f unto the fasts of the year . . . hol di ng sway o’er
unri ghteousness wi th an anoi nti ng that may del i ght upon onl y
those who wal k i n the footsteps of the Master.”15 Jan Hus di d not
si mpl y say “no” to si n and mal evol ence; he sai d “yes” to the ful l -
ness of the Chri sti an fai th and i ts di sci pl i nes.
Charl es Haddon Spurgeon al so knew that you can’t fi ght
somethi ng wi th nothi ng. The great ni neteenth-century pastor
and evangel i st was, l i ke Chrysostom and Hus, renowned far and
wi de for hi s sci nti l l ati ng and propheti c preachi ng. Hi s sermons,
294 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
fi rst i n Vi ctori an London, and then al l around the gl obe, drew
unprecedented crowds week after week, year after year, and dec-
ade after decade. He was known as the “pri nce of preachers” and
enthusi asti c revi val fol l owed hi m wherever he went. Thi s despi te
the fact that he was uncompromi si ng i n hi s doctri nal fi del i ty, he
was forthri ght i n hi s non-conformi ty, and he was unfl i nchi ng i n
hi s opposi ti on to vi ce and corrupti on.
Why was he so popul ar? He seemed to break every homi l eti cal
rul e i n the book. Hi s sermons were too coarse. Hi s theol ogy was
too ri gi d. Hi s passi on was unbri dl ed. And hi s temperament was
col l oqui al . How then was he abl e to attract such a l oyal fol l owi ng?
Accordi ng to Spurgeon’s contemporary W. C. Wi l ki nson,
the great preacher’s sermons were a “steady unfai l i ng ri ver of
Bi bl i c~ Utterace .“ 16 Duri ng hi s remarkabl e mi ni stry, he hekl to
‘an absol ute, si mpl e, si ngl e fi del i ty, mai ntai ned by hi m through-
out, mai ntai ned uni ntermi tti ngl y, from the juveni l e begi nni ng
to the cul mi nati ng maturi ty of hi s work— the serene, unper-
turbed, untempted fi del i ty of mi nd, of heart, of consci ence, of
wi l l , of al l that was i n hi m, and al l that was of hi m, to the mere
and pure and unchanged and unaccommodated Gospel of Jesus
Chri st, the same yesterday, today, and forever. That stands up
and out i n hi s sermons, that l i fts i tsel f and i s emi nent, l i ke a peak
of the Hi mal ayas, hi gh regnant over al l the subjected hi gh tabl e-
l and of thi s nobl e church.”l T What hi s preachi ng di d “was to
present to hi s hearers the one unchangi ng Gospel i n countl ess
changes of form, each perfectl y l evel to the comprehensi on of al l .
He turned and turned the kal ei doscope of the sermon, and ex-
hi bi ted to hi s hearers, never weary of behol di ng, the same
preci ous Bi bl i cal truths, over and over agai n.”l B Unl i ke many
preachers i n hi s day, he was never tempted to entertai n “the l i ttl e
waves of sci enti fi c guess, of new theol ogi c shi ft, or of fi l i al cul ture
seeki ng to repl ace Bi bl i cal ethi cs wi th pagan aestheti cs .“ 19 He
never “stood before hi s hearers l i ke a reed shaken wi th the
wi nd.”zo I nstead, “he stood sol i d on the Rock of Scri pture, wi th
the whol e bal anced wei ght of hi s great persona.”zl Wi l ki nson
concl uded sayi ng, “Spurgeon was one of the greatest preachers
of al l ti mes and of al l cl i mes. Such i s the i ndefeasi bl e heri tage of
anoi nted exposi ti on .“**
Spurgeon was a Bi bl i cal preacher. And there i s no doubt
that hi s pul pi t prowess set hi m apart from most, i f not al l , of
hi s contemporari es.
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 295
Even so, that sti l l fai l s to adequatel y expl ai n hi s phenomenal ,
worl dwi de, mul ti generati onal , l ong-l asti ng popul ari ty, i nfl uence,
and power. And Wi l ki nson admi ts as much. “Hi s remarkabl e
greatness was not si mpl y due to hi s magni fi cent gi ft of el o-
quence, that steady unfai l i ng ri ver of Scri ptural utterance, that
wi nni ng, manl y, patheti c voi ce, l i ke a si l ver trumpet, l i ke a fl ute,
l i ke an organ. Nay, i t was hi s i nexhausti bl e hol i ness of mi nd and
body and di sci pl i ne. I t was hi s commi tment to the poorest of the
poor . . . . I t was hi s commi tment to prayer and fasti ng. . . . I t
was hi s nobi l i ty of Chri sti an di sci pl i ne and character.”*s
Li ke John Chrysostom and Jan Hus before hi m, Charl es
Haddon Spur geon di d not si mpl y say “ no” to si n and
mal evol ence; he sai d “yes” to the ful l ness of the Chri sti an fai th
and i ts di sci pl i nes.
The Brass Tacks
At the heart of Hi s great Sermon on the Mount, Jesus detai l s
for Hi s fol l owers three essenti al di sci pl i nes: al msgi vi ng, prayer,
and fasti ng. (Matthew 6:2-18). Noti ce that i n Hi s di scussi on
about these thi ngs, He never sai d, “I f you gi ve,” or “~~ you pray”
or “I f you fast.’ These di sci pl i nes were not opti ons to Hi m. He
unequi vocal l y sai d, “When you gi ve” (Matthew 6:3), and “W’hen
you pray” (Matthew 6:5), and “When you fast” (Matthew 6:17).
Genui ne fai th i n Chri st wi l l always be expressed i n these ways.
Throughout the hi story of the church, these three practi ces
have been the recogni zed and recogni zabl e marks of true spi ri -
tual i ty. Godl y character ul ti matel y mani fests them. Pri estl y
compassi on necessari l y embraces them. Propheti c fervor i n-
evi tabl y rel i es on them.
Adei mantos of Thessi l y, the great seventh-century l i turgi st
often asserted that “upon these three hang the whol e of our fai th,
the whol e of our hope, and the whol e of our l ove.”Z4
Cephal os of Chal cedon, a famed ei ghth-century phi l an-
thropi st and physi ci an, argued that “the care of our Chri sti an
cul ture woul d surel y di si ntegrate, shoul d we ever abandon our
three Beati fi c Di sci pl i nes: al ms, i ntercessi ons, and fasti ngs.”
25
Otto Bl umhardt, the great seventeenth-century Lutheran
mi ssi onary to Afri ca, cl ai med that “on the day the church aban-
dons i ts care of the poor, i ts fervent mi ni stry of suppl i cati on, and
296 GRAND ILLUS1ONS
i ts i ntentl y chosen fast, we wi l l undoubtedl y see i ts cl ergy dragged
off i n wi ckedness and promi scui ty, i ts pari shes awhori ng after
greed and avari ce, and i ts congregants awash i n every vai n i m-
agi nati on and unspeakabl e perversi on. On that day the church
wi l l no l onger be the church. May i t never be. May i t never be.
Stay the day wi th the hand of fai thful di l i gence, I pray.”zG
Li ke Chrysostom, Hus, and Spurgeon, each of these men,
and thousands, or even mi l l i ons of others recogni zed that
Chri st’s three essenti al di sci pl i nes were the dynami c upon whi ch
genui ne grace turned. I mpeccabl e character wi thout fai th-
provoked deeds – al ms, prayer, and fasti ng– i s l i fel ess (James
2:14-26). El oquent exposi tory preachi ng wi thout fai th-provoked
works — al ms, prayer, and fasti ng — i s i mpotent (James 1:22-27).
Al msgi vi ng
Jesus was a servant. He came to serve, not to be served
(Matthew 20:28). And He cal l ed Hi s di sci pl es to si mi l ar l i ves of
sel fl essness. He cal l ed them to be servants (Matthew 19:30).
Oddl y, servanthood i s a much negl ected and l argel y forgot-
ten Chri sti an vocati on today. Most of us who bear the banner of
Chri st are obsessed wi th l eadi ng. We want headshi p. We want
promi nence. We want power, pri vi l ege, and presti ge. We want
domi ni on, not servi tude.
But Jesus made i t pl ai n that i f we want to hel p transform the
worl d — doi ng God’s wi l l on earth as i t i s done i n heaven — we
must not grasp at the rei ns of power and i nfl uence. We must
serve. We must gi ve. We must sacri fi ce. Onl y then wi l l we be fi t
for l eadershi p. Jesus sai d, “Whoever wi shes to be chi ef among
you, l et hi m be your servant ,“ (Matthew 20:27). Our atti tude, i n
fact, “shoul d be the same as Chri st’s, who, bei ng i n very nature
God di d not consi der equal i ty wi th God somethi ng to be
grasped, but made Hi msel f nothi ng, taki ng the very nature of a
servant, bei ng made i n human l i keness. And bei ng found i n ap-
pearance as a man, He humbl ed Hi msel f and became obedi ent
to death, even death on a cross. Therefore God exal ted hi m to
the hi ghest pl ace and gave Hi m the name that i s above every
name” (Phi l i ppi ans 2:5-9).
Thi s basi c pri nci pl e i s rei terated throughout Scri pture. The
theme of the sufferi ng servant who l ater tri umphs, who serves
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 297
fai thful l y and then succeeds, i s one of the most common Bi bl i cal
paradi gms. We see i t i n the l i ves of Jacob (Genesi s 31:1; 36-42),
Joseph (Genesi s 39:1,7-20; 41:38-43), Davi d (1 Samuel 16-19; 23;
24: 20), Dani el (Dani el 6:3-28), and the Apostl e Paul (Ga.l ati ans
1:10; Remans 1:1).
I t i s no acci dent then that those of us who are commi ssi oned
by the Ki ng of ki ngs and the Lord of l ords to be “wi tnesses i n
Jerusal em, Judea, Samari a, and to the uttermost parts of the
earth” (Acts 1:8), and “to make di sci pl es of al l nati ons” (Matthew
28:19) are commi ssi oned as servants. Not as overl ords.
When the Apostl e Paul wrote to Ti tus, the young pastor of
Crete’s pi oneer church, he pressed home thi s fundamental truth
wi th i mpressi ve persi stence and urgency. The task before Ti tus
was not an easy one. Cretan cul ture was marked by decei t,
ungodl i ness, sl oth, and gl uttony (Ti tus 1:12). And he was to pro-
voke a total Chri sti an revi val there! He was to i ntroduce peace
wi th God through Chri st. Thus, Paul ’s i nstructi ons were
strategi cal l y preci se and to the poi nt. Ti tus was to preach the
Word di l i gentl y, but he was al so to l i ve out the Word practi cal l y.
Chari ty was to be a central pri ori ty.
Paul wrote:
For the grace of God that bri ngs sal vati on has appeared to al l
men, teachi ng us that, denyi ng ungodl i ness and worl dl y l usts,
we shoul d l i ve soberl y, ri ghteousl y, and godl y i n the present
age, l ooki ng for the bl essed hope and gl ori ous appeari ng of our
great God and Savi or Jesus Chrkt, who gave Hi msel f for us,
that He mi ght redeem us from every l awl ess deed and puri fi
for Hi msel f Hi s own speci al peopl e, zeal ous for good works
(Ti tus 2:11-14).
Word and deed. Bi bl i cal preachi ng and al msgi vi ng.
Thi s was a very fami l i ar theme for Paul . I t wasn’t excl usi vel y
ai med at the troubl esome Cretan cul ture. He returned to i t at
every opportuni ty. Earl i er, he had wri tten to the Ephesi an
church sayi ng:
For by grace you have been saved through fai th, and that not of
yoursel ves; i t i s the gi ft of God, not of works, l est anyone
shoul d boast. For we are Hi s workmanshi p, created i n Chri st
298 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Jesus for good works, whi ch God prepared beforehand that we
shoul d wal k i n them (Ephesi ans 2:8-10).
God saves us by grace. There i s nothi ng we can do to meri t
Hi s favor. We stand condemned under Hi s judgment. Sal vati on
i s compl etel y unearned — except by Chri st — and undeserved —
except to Chri st. But we are not saved capri ci ousl y, for no reason
and no purpose. On the contrary, “We are Hi s workmanshi p,
created i n Chri st Jesus for good works.” We are “Hi s own posses-
si on,” set apart and puri fi ed to be “zeal ous for good deeds.” Word
and deed are i nseparabl e. Judgment i s answered wi th grace.
Grace i s answered wi th chari ty. Thi s i s the very essence of the
Gospel message.
So, Paul tel l s Ti tus he must order hi s fl edgl i ng mi ni stry
among the Cretans accordi ngl y. He hi msel f was “to be a pattern
of good deeds” (Ti tus 2:7). He was to teach the peopl e “to be
ready for every good work” (Ti tus 3:1). The ol der women and
the younger women were to be thus i nstructed, so “that the
Word of God mi ght not be di shonored” (Ti tus 2:5). And the
bondsl aves, “that they mi ght adorn the doctri ne of God our
Savi or i n al l thi ngs” (Ti tus 2:10). They were al l to ‘l earn to mai n-
tai n good works, to meet urgent needs, that they mi ght not be
unfi -ui tful ” (Ti tus 3:14). There were those wi thi n the church
who professed “to know God, but i n works they deni ed Hi m,
bei ng abomi nabl e, di sobedi ent, and di squal i fi ed for every good
work” (Ti tus 1:16). These, Ti tus was to “rebuke . . . sharpl y,
that they mi ght be sound i n the fai th” (Ti tus 1:13). He was to
affi rm constantl y, “that those who bel i eved i n God woul d be care-
fi .d to mai ntai n good works” (Ti tus 3:8).
As a pastor, Ti tus had i nnumerabl e tasks that he was respon-
si bl e to ful fi l l . He had admi ni strati ve duti es (Ti tus 1:5), doctri nal
duti es (Ti tus 2:1), di sci pl i ne duti es (Ti tus 2:2-10), preachi ng
duti es (Ti tus 2:15), counsel i ng duti es (Ti tus 3:12), and arbi trat-
i ng duti es (Ti tus 3:12-13). But i ntertwi ned wi th them al l , funda-
mental to them al l , were hi s char i tabl e duti es. Al msgi vi ng was to
be central to hi s task.
What was true for Paul and Ti tus i n the fi rst century i s just
as true for us today, for “these thi ngs are good and profi tabl e for
al l men” (Ti tus 3:8).
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 299
Chrysostom understood that. So di d Hus and Spurgeon.
Genui ne di sci pl eshi p al ways weds Word and deed. I t al ways
combi nes Bi bl i cal preachi ng wi th al msgi vi ng. I t al ways has. I t
al ways wi l l .
The Bi bl e tel l s us that i f we woul d obey the command to be
generous to the poor, we woul d oursel ves be happy (Proverbs
14:21), God woul d preserve us (Psal m 41:1-2), we woul d never
suffer need (Proverbs 28: 27), we woul d prosper and be sati sfi ed
(Proverbs 11:25), and even be rai sed up from beds of affl i cti on
(Psal m 41:3). God woul d ordai n peace for us (I sai ah 26:1-3). He
woul d bl ess us wi th peace (Psal m 29:11). He woul d gi ve us Hi s
peace (John 14: 27). He woul d gui de our feet i nto the way of peace
(Luke 1:79). He woul d ever and al ways speak peace to us (Psal m
85:8). And He woul d grant peace to the l and (Levi ti cus 26:6).
Therefore l et us be “zeal ous for good works” (Ti tus 2:14).
I s thi s not the fast whi ch I chose, to l oosen the bonds of wi ck-
edness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to l et the oppressed
go free, and break every yoke? I s i t not to di vi de your bread
wi th the hungry, and bri ng the homel ess poor i nto the house;
when you see the naked, to cover hi m; and not to hi de yoursel f
from your own fl esh? Then your l i ght wi l l break out l i ke the
dawn, and your recovery wi l l speedi l y spri ng forth; and your
ri ghteousness wi l l go before you; the gl ory of the Lord wi l l be
your rear guard. Then you wi l l cal l , and the Lord wi l l answer;
You wi l l cry, and He wi l l say, ‘Here I am.” I f you remove the
yoke from your mi dst, the poi nti ng of the fi nger, and speaki ng
wi ckedness, and i f you gi ve yoursel f to the hungry, and sati sfi
the desi re of the afl i i cted, then your l i ght wi l l ri se i n darkness,
and your gl oom wi l l become l i ke mi dday. And the Lord wi l l
conti nual l y gui de you, and sati sfy your desi re i n scorched
pl aces, and gi ve strength to your bones; and you wi l l be l i ke a
watered garden, and l i ke a spri ng of water whose waters do not
fai l . And those from among you wi l l rebui l d the anci ent rui ns;
you wi l l rai se up the age-ol d foundati ons; and you wi l l be cal l ed
the repai rer of the breach, the restorer of the streets i n whi ch to
dwel l (I sai ah 58:6-12).
We can’t fi ght something wi th nothi ng. We can’t si mpl y say “no”
to Pl anned Parenthood; we must say “yes” to the ful l ness of the
Chri sti an fai th and i ts di sci pl i nes. We must say “yes” to good
300 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
works to the needy and negl ected. We must say “yes” to gi rl s i n
cri si s pregnanci es, and teens caught i n the web of i mmoral i ty,
and fami l i es trapped i n fi nanci al di ffi cul ty. We must say “yes” to
al msgi vi ng and servanthood.
But how do we go about doi ng that?
Fi rst, we must begi n to i mpl ement effecti ve programs of
Bi bl i cal chari ty i n our churches that transform poverty i nto pro-
ducti vi ty.zT I n 1950, one i n twel ve Ameri cans l i ved bel ow the
poverty l i ne.ZB I n 1979, that fi gure had ri sen to one i n ni ne.zg
Today, one i n seven fal l bel ow the l i ne – nearl y thi rty-four mi l l i on
Peopl e.so More than one fourth of al l Ameri can chi l dren l i ve i n
poverty.sl And for Bl ack chi l dren under the age of si x, the fi gures
are even more di smal : more than fi fty percent .32 Today, ei ghty-
one percent of el derl y women, l i vi ng al one, l i ve i n poverty, al l too
often i n abject poverty. 33 Tens of thousands of Ameri cans are
homel ess, l i vi ng out of the backs of thei r cars, under bri dges, i n
abandoned warehouses, atop street-si de heati ng grates, or i n
l i ce-i nfested publ i c shel ters.sq Even at the hei ght of the Great
Depressi on, when dust-bowl refugees met wi th the “grapes of
wrath” on Ameri ca’s hi ghways and byways, there have neuer
been so many di spossessed wanderers.ss The fact i s, the economi c
recovery of the ei ghti es barel y reached i nto the cavernous depths
of the bottom thi rd of the economy.sG Shel ters are bul gi ng at the
seams .s7 And soci al servi ce agenci es are buri ed under an aval anche
of need. 38 And the si tuati on here at home i s nothi ng compared to
that of the Thi rd Worl d.sg
Even so, we coul d make a dramati c di fference si mpl y by
practi ci ng Bi bl i cal chari ty.qo I f onl y we woul d. Not onl y woul d
~ the poor be cared for and the oppressed set free, but we woul d be
abl e to recl ai m the moral hi gh ground from groups l i ke Pl anned
Parenthood as wel l .
Second, we must begi n to fi nd ways to encourage, uphol d, and
support worki ng mothers i n our nati on. Over the l ast decade,
per capi ta fami l y i ncome has i ncreased about seven percent .41
At the same ti me, however, the consumer pri ce i ndex has i n-
fl ated more than el even percent.4z Add to that the fact that onl y
one out of every fi ve jobs actual l y pays enough to l i ft a fami l y of
four above the poverty l i ne, the fact that the tax burden fal l s on
poor fami l i es especi al l y hard, the fact that home busi nesses and
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 301
cottage i ndustri es are heavi l y restri cted, that occupati onal
l i censi ng has cl osed many tradi ti omd fami l y trades to the fami l y,
and that cul tural and soci etal pressures have tai nted the vocati on
of homemaki ng, and worki ng mothers become a foregone con-
cl usi on .*S I n 1970, onl y thi rty-ni ne percent of Ameri ca’s mothers
had entered the work force.4q By 1980, fi fty-four percent were
worki ng.qs And by 1985, si xty-one percent were .46 Accordi ng to
the Bureau of Labor Stati sti cs, al most hal f of those worki ng
mothers have chi l dren under the age of si x.qT The emoti onal
pressure, the physi cal fati gue, and the spi ri tual entropy that
worki ng mothers face day i n and day out can be utterl y debi l i tat-
i ng. 48 And wi th no rel i ef i n si ght. Ever.
Agai n, though, we coul d make a di fference.qg I f onl y we
woul d. Not onl y woul d fami l i es be strengthened and mothers be
protected, but we woul d be abl e to recl ai m the moral hi gh
ground from groups l i ke Pl anned Parenthood as wel l .
Thi rd, we must begi n to come to the ai d of wi dows and di s-
pl aced homemakers i n our soci ety. The l i beral i zati on of di vorce
l aws, the breakdown of fami l y sol i dari ty, and run-away i mmor-
al i ty have combi ned to create a whol e new undercl ass i n Ameri -
can soci ety: the abandoned housewi fe. The number of di spl aced
homemakers rose twenty-ei ght percent between 1973 and 1983 to
more than three mi l l i on women. Sc’ Another twenty percent i n-
crease from 1983 to 1993 brought that number to more than four
mi l l i on. 51 An astoni shi ng si xty-one percent of those women sud-
denl y l eft al one had chi l dren under the age of ten at home.
52
Often wi thout job ski l l s and stranded wi thout al i mony or chi l d
support, as many as seventy percent of these women make l ess
than ten thousand dol l ars a year, and fi fty percent are empl oyed
at mi ni mum wage or l ess. 53 I t i s, thus, readi l y apparent why a
ful l seventy-fi ve percent of al l Ameri cans l i vi ng bel ow the pov-
erty l i ne i n the Uni ted States are women and thei r chi l dren. 54
Caught between tradi ti onal i sm and femi ni sm, these women
have no advocate. No matter where they turn, they don’t fi t i n.
They know no context.
Once agai n, though, through a proper and Bi bl i cal admi ni s-
trati on of al ms, we coul d make a real di fference.ss I f onl y we
woul d. Not onl y woul d the wi dows and orphans be cared for, but
we woul d be abl e to recl ai m the moral hi gh ground from groups
l i ke Pl anned Parenthood as wel l .
302 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
l %wth, we must devel op compassi onate and di gni fi ed mi ni s-
tri es for and to the handi capped. They are the forgotten and the
negl ected. And there are mi l l i ons of them. As many as si xteen
percent of al l Ameri cans suffer from some sort of cri ppl i ng di s-
abi l i ty — congeni tal or acci dental .sG There are al most seven mi l -
l i on mental l y retarded Ameri cans, wi th an addi ti onal fi fteen
mi l l i on sufferi ng from severe l earni ng di sorders.sT There are at
l east a mi l l i on men, women, and chi l dren wi th total heari ng
l oss, and si x and a hal f mi l l i on wi th total vi sual i mpai rment .58
Sti l l another seven mi l l i on are restri cted by paral ysi s, atrophy,
deformi ty, amputati on, degenerati on, or i mmobi l i ty.sg Aban-
doned by fami l i es, shunned by peers, fi -ustrated by dependency,
targeted by Pl anned Parenthood, Uni ted Way, and the March of
Di mes, and i ncapaci tated by l onel i ness and doubt, the handi -
capped are al l too often soci ety’s pari ah.
But, we coul d make a di fference wi th mi ni stri es of compas-
si on. A r eal di fference. I f onl y we woul d. Not onl y woul d the
handi capped be abl e to vouchsafe thei r di gni ty and worth, but
we woul d be abl e to recl ai m the moral hi gh ground from groups
l i ke Pl anned Parenthood as wel l .
F@i , we must l end fi .dl support to exi sti ng pro-l i fe mi ni stri es:
al ternati ve cl i ni cs, adopti on agenci es, shepherdi ng homes, maternal
care hospi tal s, natural fami l y pl anni ng centers, absti nence-based
sex educati on programs, mi ssi onary organi zati ons, acti vi st groups,
rescue outreaches, research organi zati ons, and chari tabl e out-
reaches. And i n order to do thi s, not onl y are we goi ng to have
to open our homes, vol unteer our ti me, and dedi cate our tal ents,
we are goi ng to have to l oosen our purse stri ngs as wel l . Pl anned
Parenthood has i nvested vast sums of money i n i ts dastardl y
programs. I t has marshal ed tremendous resource pool s. I t has
funded, subsi di zed, and capi tal i zed for maxi mum i mpact. I t has
wi thhel d nothi ng from the cause.
But weal th i s a gi ft from God, set asi de for one purpose and
one purpose onl y: to confi rm the Covenant and to establ i sh the
Ki ngdom (Deuteronomy 8:18). Even the weal th of the wi cked
wi l l one day be converted to Ki ngdom purposes (Proverbs
13: 22). That i s why the Bi bl e pl aces so much emphasi s on stew-
ardshi p. Every Chri sti an shoul d be a gi ver (Deuteronomy
16:17). We shoul d gi ve to the church through ti thes (Mal a-
chi 3:10). We shoul d gi ve to speci al projects through offeri ngs
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 303
(1 Cori nthi ans 16:1-2). And we shoul d gi ve to those who have
mi ni stered to us through gi fts (Gal ati ans 6:6). Gi vi ng i s an
aspect of worshi p (Deuteronomy 16:10-11). Thus i t shoul d be
done wi th a cheerful heart (2 Cori nthi ans 9:7), whether out of
prosperi ty (1 Cori nthi ans 16:2), or pauci ty (2 Cori nthi ans 8:2).
After al l , gi vi ng i s an i nvestment i n the Ki ngdom of God (Mat-
thew 6:19-21).
We can’t fi ght something wi th nothing. We can’t si mpl y say “no”
to Pl anned Parenthood; we must say “yes” to the ful l ness of the
Chri sti an fai th and i ts di sci pl i nes. Li ke Chrysostom, Hus, and
Spurgeon, we must say “yes” to good works. We must say “yes”
to al msgi vi ng.
Pr ayer
I f we are goi ng to conform oursel ves to God’s hol y and per-
fect wi l l , we must pay heed to the eternal and establ i shed Word
of Truth.
The grass wi thers, the fl ower fades, but the Word of our God
stands forever (I sai ah 40:8).
The Law of the Lord i s perfect, converti ng the soul ; The testi -
mony of the Lord i s sure, maki ng wi se the si mpl e (Psal m 19:7).
The entrance of Your Words gi ves l i ght; I t gi ves understandi ng
to the si mpl e (Psal m 119:130).
For the Commandment i s a l amp, and the Law i s l i ght;
Reproofs of i nstructi on are the way of l i fe (Proverbs 6:23).
To ever go btyond Scri pture woul d mean to evade the pur-
poses of God (1 Cori nthi ans 4:6). That i s why the heroes of the
fai th were so dri ven to the di sci pl i ne of prayer. Di l i gence i n
prayer al ways grounds God’s peopl e i n a dependence on Hi s
Word. Such was the case of Davi d (Psal m 51:1-19), Nehemi ah
(Nehemi ah 1:1; 2:1), Jeremi ah (Lamentati ons 5:1-22), Jonah
(Jonah 2:2-9), the di sci pl es of Jesus (Acts 1:8-14), and the fi rst
Jerusal em church (Acts 2:1-47).
A fai l ure to seek God i n prayerful fel l owshi p l eads i nvari abl y
to a vi ol ati on of God’s Word and a rejecti on of Hi s purposes. Such
was the case wi th Cai n (Genesi s 4:3-8), Korah (Numbers 16:1-35),
Bal aam (Numbers 22:2-40), and Saul (1 Samuel 13:5-14).
304 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
That i s why the Bi bl e makes i t pl ai n that Chri sti ans are to be
constant i n prayer. We are to pray i n the morni ng (Mark 1:35).
We are to pray at noon (Psal m 55:17). We are to pray i n the
eveni ng (Mark 6:46). We are to pray duri ng the ni ght watch
(Luke 6:12). I n fact, we are to pray unceasi ngl y (1 Thessal o-
ni ans 5:17). God has gi ven us access to Hi s throne (Hebrews
4:16). He has gi ven us fel l owshi p wi th Chri st (1 Cori nthi ans
1:9) and counsel wi th the Hol y Spi ri t (John 14: 26). Therefore,
we are to make use of the gl ori ous pri vi l ege of prayer at ev~y oP-
portuni ~ (1 Ti mothy 2:8).
The fact i s though, prayer doesn’t si mpl y make us more
cogni zant of God’s Word. Prayer changes thi ngs. By the grace
of God.
No matter how bad thi ngs may l ook, no matter how omi nousl y
the odds may be stacked agai nst the cause of truth, justi ce, and
mercy, prayer can transform i t al l . GO Pl anned Parenthood may
seem to have a fri ghteni ng advantage i n money and manpower.
They may seem to have unendi ng resources and unfl aggi ng en-
ergy. But Chri sti ans have prayer. And prayer i s the most potent
force i n al l the cosmos avai l ed to mere mortal men. Prayer bi nds
and i t l ooses (Matthew 18:18). I t casts down and i t rai ses up
(Mark 11:23-24). I t ushers i n peace (1 Ti mothy 2:1-2), forgi ve-
ness (Mark 11: 25), heal i ng (James 5:14-15), l i berty (2 Cori nthi -
ans 3:17), wi sdom (1 Ki ngs 3:3-14), and protecti on (Psal m 41:2).
We can’t fi ght somethi ng wi th nothi ng. We can’t si mpl y say “no”
to Pl anned Parenthood; we must say “yes” to the ful l ness of the
Chri sti an fai th and i ts di sci pl i nes. Li ke Chrysostom, Hus, and
Spurgeon, we must say “yes” to prayer. We must pray wi th
whol eheartedness (Jeremi ah 29:13). We must pray wi th contri -
ti on (2 Chroni cl es 7:14). And we must pray fai thful l y (Mark
11:24), ferventl y (James 5:16), obedi entl y (1 John 3:22), and con-
fi dentl y (John 15: 7).
But how do we go about doi ng thi s i n a conzprehemi ve, practi-
cal, and e~ective way?
First, we must devel op a deep and abi di ng commi tment to
persomd and devoti onal prayer. We must pray for nati onal and
cul tural revi val . We must i ntercede mi ghti l y and persi stentl y for
our magi strates and l eaders. And we need to be speci fi c: nami ng
names, stati ng i ssues, cl ai mi ng promi ses, and i nvoki ng Scri p-
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 305
ture. I t i s cruci al that we cry out from our prayer cl osets for jus-
ti ce and mercy to bl anket the l and l i ke a sweet morni ng dew. I t i s
l udi crous for us to pi cket, l obby, and l abor agai nst Pl anned
Parenthood i f we have not fi rst honed our pri nci pal weapons.
For though we wal k i n the fl esh, we do not war accordi ng to the
fl esh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the fl esh, but di -
,
vi nel y powerfi d for the destructi on of fortresses. We are destroyi ng
specul ati ons and eve~ l ofty thi ng rai sed up agai nst the knowl edge
of God, and we are taki ng every thought capti ve to the obedi -
ence of Chri st, and we are ready to puni sh al l di sobedi ence,
whenever your obedi ence i s compl ete (2 Cori nthi ans 10:3-6).
Second, we must effect corporate prayer di sci pl i nes. We must
i nfuse church worshi p wi th the uncti on and gumpti on that can
onl y come by fervent i ntercessi on. We need to pray corporate
benedi cti on and bl essi ng for al l those who honor God’s Word
(Psal m 69:13-19). And we need to pray mal edi cti on and cursi ng
for al l those who i mpugn God’s Word (Psal m 69: 20-28). The
practi ce of si ngi ng Approbati ve Psal ms – the vari ous hymns of
bl essi ng from the Psal ter: 5, 7, 9, 20, 23, 25, 65, 75, and 113 –
and I mprecatory Psal ms —the vari ous hymns of cursi ng from
the Psal ter: 2, 10, 35, 55, 69, 79, 83,94, 109, and 140 –has l ong
been the fi rst recourse for the church i n ti mes of di stress and
di smay.Gl So, why have we fai l ed to i nsti gate seasons of prayer?
Why has the church not gathered i ts peopl e i n mourni ng and
humi l i ati on, i n weepi ng and suppl i cati on to pray for the end of
the aborti on hol ocaust and the demi se of i ts perpetrators? Why
hasn’t a profusi on of cottage prayer meeti ngs, spontaneous re-
vi val s, prayer breakfasts, al l -ni ght vi gi l s, and fasts fl ooded the
heavenl i es wi th our urgent pl eas for rel i ef? And how can we l e-
gi ti matel y rai l agai nst Pl anned Parenthood when we have yet to
do these thi ngs? Real l y?
Third, we must devel op prayer networks and hotl i nes both
on the l ocal and on the nati onal l evel s. We desperatel y need to
fi nd ways to respond qui ckl y and deci si vel y to the vari ous
machi nati ons of Pl anned Parenthood’s medi cal , l egal , educa-
ti onal , and juri sdi cti onal juggernaut. We need to be abl e to re-
spond to the trumpet cal l (Joshua 2:15). We need to be abl e to
sound the al arms (Amos 3:6). We need to be abl e to rush to one
306 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
another’s defense (Gal ati ans 6:2). Wi th phone trees, computer
l i nkups, newsl etter s, radi o broadcasts, el ectroni c bul l eti n
boards, and short wave ski p beams, we need to ti e al l the forces
for l i fe together wi th the strong bonds of prayer.
The bottom l i ne i s si mpl y that we can’t fi ght somethi ng wi th
nothi ng. We can’t just say “no” to Pl anned Parenthood; we must
say “yes” to the ful l ness of the Chri sti an fai th and i ts di sci pl i nes.
Li ke Chrysostom, Hus, and Spurgeon, we must say “yes” to fer-
vent i ntercessi on. We must say “yes” to prayer.
Fasti ng
Fasti ng — or absti nence from food for a ti me — i s not excl u-
si vel y a Chri sti an practi ce. I t exi sts i n many other rel i gi ons. I t i s
practi ced by some for heal th reasons. I t i s even practi ced by
some for pol i ti cal reasons. So when Jesus commanded Hi s di s-
ci pl es to fast, He was not i ntroduci ng a novel custom at al l
(Matthew 6:16, 18). He di d however gi ve fasti ng a di sti ncti ve
meani ng. He connected the practi ce of fasti ng wi th the very
mystery of l i fe and death.
Accordi ng to the Bi bl e, si n i s not onl y the transgressi on of
God’s standards l eadi ng to judgment and i mputed gui l t
(Remans 3:10-23); i t i s al so the muti l ati on of l i fe (Remans 5:12).
“The wages of si n i s death” (Remans 6:23). I t i s for thi s reason
that the Bi bl e’s narrati ve of the ori gi nal si n i s cast agai nst the
backdrop of eati ng (Genesi s 3:1-7). Food i s a means of l i fe. I t
affords us vi tal i ty. I t l ends us strength. I t bol sters our heal th. But
i t i s not the source of l i fe, because l i fe i s not merel y bi ol ogi cal .
The fact i s, food has no l i fe i n and of i tsel f. Onl y Chri st has l i fe
and i s Li fe (John 1:4). Cal ori es don’t enabl e food to bestow l i fe.
God does. By Hi s di rect command. Jesus sai d, “Man does not
l i ve by bread al one” (Matthew 4:4). I f he tri es, he di es (Proverbs
16: 25). To trul y l i ve, man must l i ve “by every Word that comes
from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4).
Adam and Eve rejected the ful l ness of l i fe preferri ng “bread
al one.” They tri ed to i gnore the l i fe-sustai ni ng Word of God
(Genesi s 3:4-6). As a resul t, not onl y were they al i enated from
God, i ncurri ng Hi s wrath, but they di ed (Genesi s 5:5). Though
they ate, food coul d not and woul d not sustai n them. Thus,
hunger came to be a remi nder to them that they were ul ti matel y
Altars for Comtruction: An Agenda for the Future 307
dependent on somethi ng more than food. They were depend-
ent upon God. Fasti ng then i s an i nvi tati on to remember. I t i s a
di sci pl i ne that enabl es bel i evers to reckon thei r dependency
upon God.
Unl i ke those who fast to secure better heal th, or to obtai n
pol i ti cal concessi ons or even to accrue some asceti c meri t, Chri s-
ti ans fast i n order to renew thei r fel l owshi p wi th the Lord God.
For us, fasti ng i s not a matter of pragmati sm – a ri tual or obl i ga-
ti on desi gned to make something happen. We don’t fast forpersonal
benefi t or to make a show of our pi ety (I sai ah 58:3-5). Rather,
we fast “unto the Lord ,“ recogni zi ng our utter and compl ete
rel i ance on Hi m (Zechari ah 7:5).
Our fasti ng may be absol ute (Ezra 10:6; Deuteronomy 9:9;
Exodus 34:28) or parti al (Dani el 10:3; 1 Ki ngs 17:1-24). I t maybe
enti rel y pri vate (Nehemi ah 1:1-4, 2:1; Matthew 6:16-18) or demon-
strabl y publ i c (Jeremi ah 36:6; Joel 2:15). I t may be occasi onal
(Ezra 10:6; Esther 4:16; Acts 13:3) or seasonal (Levi ti cus 23:27;
Psal m 35:13; Zechari ah 9:19). But one thi ng i s certai n: i f we are
seri ousl y seeki ng to do the wi l l of God, obeyi ng Hi s Word and
wal kl ng i n dependence on Hi m, we wi l l fast (Matthew 6:18).
We shoul d fast i n ti mes of di stress (Esther 4:3; Nehemi ah
1:4). We shoul d fast duri ng seasons of repentance (Ezra 10:6;
Nehemi ah 9:1). We shoul d fast whi l e seeki ng God’s di recti on
(Acts 13:3; Luke 2:37). We shoul d fast whi l e awai ti ng an out-
pouri ng of grace (Psal m 69:10; Joel 2:12), an endowment wi th
power (Judges 20:1-48; Mark 9:29), and a l i berati on from cap-
ti vi ty (I sai ah 58:6; Matthew 17: 21). I t i s onl y as we humbl y fast
that we have the spi ri tual wherewi thal to gui de and guard the
l and as prophets and pri ests (2 Chroni cl es 7:14).
Bl ow a trumpet i n Zi on, consecrate a fast, procl ai m a sol emn
assembl y, gather the peopl e, sancti ~ the congregati on, assem-
bl e the el ders, gather the chi l dren and the nursi ng i nfants. Let
the bri degroom come out of hi s room and the bri de come out of
her bri dal chamber (Joel 2:15-16).
We can’t fi ght something wi th nothing. We can’t si mpl y say “no”
to Pl anned Parenthood; we must say “yes” to the ful l ness of the
Chri sti an fai th and di sci pl i nes. Li ke Chrysostom, Hus, and
Spurgeon, we must say “yes” to fasti ng.
308 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
I t has been so l ong si nce the church has taken seri ousl y i ts
mandate to fast we have al l but forgotten how! So what can we
do to recl ai m thi s l ost l egacy of obedi ence, commi tment, de-
pendency, and power?
1%.st, we must begi n to teach God’s peopl e the meani ng, the
purpose, the i mportance, and the practi ce of fasti ng. Sermons
need to be preached. Books need to be di stri buted.Gz Bi bl e
studi es need to be taught. Fami l i es need to be di sci pl ed. And
congregati ons need to be catal yzed. Techni ques, heal th pri nci -
pl es, and spi ri tual exerci ses need to be communi cated to every
bel i ever so that the church can once agai n bear i ts mantl e of
strength i n the worl d.
Second, we must renew an individual commi tment to fasti ng.
Li ke the heroes of fai th i n bygone days, we each need to fal l on
our faces before God i n di stress, humi l i ati on, weepi ng, and
mourni ng for the awful perversi ty that i s ravagi ng our l and.
Pl anned Parenthood’s juggernaut shoul d dri ve us to sackcl oth
and ashes. I t shoul d sti r i n us a desperati on to seek God wi th
vi gor. I t shoul d throw us passi onatel y before Hi m, utterl y
rel i ant, compl etel y dependent upon Hi s sustai ni ng grace. I t
shoul d provoke us to regul ar fasti ng, to seasons of fasti ng, to
unremi tted fasti ng.
Third, we must cal l our churches to days of publ i c fasti ng
and suppl i cati on. We must sancti fi our ti me as congregati ons.
No Chri sti an’s ti me i s hi s own. I t i s not ours to di spose of as we
choose. We have “been bought wi th a pri ce” (1 Cori nthi ans
6:20), therefore, we are to set our days, weeks, and years apart
to the Lord for Hi s gl ory (Remans 14:6-12). I n the Ol d Testa-
ment, the days were di vi ded i nto ei ght peri ods: dawn, morni ng,
mi dday, dark, eveni ng, and three ni ght watches. These were
di sti ngui shed by ti mes and seasons of prayer (Psal m 55:17; Dan-
i el 6:10). I n the New Testament, the val ue of thi s ki nd of di sci -
pl i ne was affi rmed by the earl y Chri sti ans who punctuated thei r
urgent task of evangel i zati on wi th the pati ent di sci pl eshi p of reg-
ul ar spi ri tual refreshment (Acts 3:1). Si mi l arl y, the weeks of
God’s peopl e were ordered wi th purpose and bal ance. Centered
i n the Ol d Testament around Sabbath sacri fi ces, and i n the New
Testament around the Lord’s Day sacraments, the weeks estab-
l i shed Bi bl i cal pri ori ti es for the peopl e by gi vi ng form to functi on
Altar.sfor Construction: An Agenda for the Future 309
and functi on to form (Deuteronomy 5:12; Hebrews 10:24-25).
These di sci pl i nes enabl ed them to wai t on the Lord and thus to
“run and not be weary” and to “wal k and not be fai nt” (I sai ah
40:31). Even the years were gi ven speci al structure and si gni fi -
cance. I n anci ent I srael , feasts, festi val s, and fasts paced the
bel i evers’ progressi on through the months (Exodus 13:6-10;
Psal m 31:15). The earl y church conti nued thi s stewardshi p of
ti me, punctuati ng years wi th the Chri sti an hol i days: Advent,
L
Chri stmas, Epi phany, Lent, Easter, Ascensi on, and Pentecost –
each marked by feasts, festi val s, and, of course, fasts. Thus,
God’s peopl e were enabl ed and equi pped to run the race (Phi l i p-
pi ans 2:16), to fi ght the fi ght (Ephesi ans 6:10-18), to fi ni sh the
course (2 Ti mothy 4:7), and to keep the fai th (2 Ti mothy 3:10).
I f we are to attai n to even just a l i ttl e of thei r potency, power, and
prowess, i t i s cruci al that we return to these patterns of humi l i ty
and dependence.
We can’t fi ght something wi th nothing. We can’t si mpl y say “no”
to Pl anned Parenthood; we must say “yes” to the ful l ness of the
Chri sti an fai th and di sci pl i nes. Li ke Chrysostom, Hus, and
Spurgeon, we must say “yes” to utter dependence upon God. We
must say “yes” to fasti ng.
Where the Rubber Meets the Road
Mark Li ncol n i s the pastor of a smal l Presbyteri an church i n
central Cal i forni a. Acti ve i n the pro-l i fe movement for more
than a decade, he recentl y has gone through a ti me of tremen-
dous di scouragement, frustrati on, and burnout. “I guess I just
got to the poi nt where I had come to the end of mysel f,” he sai d.
“I had worked for years and had very l i ttl e fi -ui t to show for i t. Our
church’s cri si s pregnancy center was fl ounderi ng — understafFed,
underfi nanced, and underexposed. Several of the members of
the church had been arrested and then convi cted of trespassi ng
on the property of Pl anned Parenthood duri ng a prayer protest.
Our workers were exhausted and our resources were depl eted.
And we di dn’t have a thi ng to show for any of that. We were al l
ful l of heartache and despai r:
Mark deci ded to take off several days to spend some ti me at a
retreat center. “I needed to regai n some perspecti ve. I needed a
new focus. I t seemed l i ke the enemi es of God were racki ng up al l
310 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
the vi ctori es whi l e the poor pi ti ful Peopl e of God were bei ng
ground i nto the dust. I wanted to know why.”
Taki ng nothi ng but the Bi bl e and an anthol ogy of Patri sti c
Epi stl es, Mark began to read and thi nk and pray. “I t di dn’t take
me very l ong to fi gure out what had gone wrong wi th our efforts.
I t seemed to be wri tten on every page of Scri pture. I t was i l -
l umi ned i n the teachi ngs of the Earl y Church Fathers at every
turn. How I had mi ssed i t before, I ’l l never know. I t was as pl ai n
as day. We had left ourjrst loue. I t was that si mpl e. We had been
tryi ng to fi ght Pl anned Parenthood our own way, through our
own efforts, wi th our own resources, through our own energi es.
The wel l of our strength i s fi ni te, whi l e the wel l of God’s grace i s
i nfi ni te. So as admi rabl e as our struggl e had been, i t was ul ti -
matel y sel f-defeati ng and fool hardy.”
Mark came back from the retreat wi th a renewed commi t-
ment. “I knew that i t was ti me for me to get wn”ous about hal ti ng
the hol ocaust. I knew i t was ti me for me to get seri ous about ex-
posi ng Pl anned Parenthood. But I al so knew that the onl y way
that I could be seri ous was to do thi ngs God’s way. Our church
wi l l sti l l pi cket. We wi l l sti l l l obby, and testi fy, and mobi l i ze, and
carry out rescues, and mount campai gns and al l that. But at the
core of al l we do, we wi l l wal k i n the way of the Lord. We wi l l ex-
erci se spi ri tual di sci pl i ne. We wi l l cl i ng to the fi .dl ness of the fai th.’
‘Because we can’t fi ght somethi ng wi th nothing?” I suggested.
“Yeah, ri ght ,“ he sai d. “Because we can’t fi ght sonzei hi ng wi th
nothing. Not any more, we can’t .“
Concl usi on
I n hi s famous sermon, ‘The Wei ght of Gl ory; C. S. Lewi s made
a penetrati ng assessment about Chri sti an vi rtue. He sai d that:
I f you asked twenty good men today what they thought the
hi ghest of the vi rtues was, ni neteen of them woul d repl y, Un-
sel fi shness. But i f you asked al most any of the great Chri sti ans
of ol d ,he woul d have repl i ed, Love. You see what has hap-
pened? A negati ve term has been substi tuted for a posi ti ve, and
thi s i s of more than phi l ol ogi cal i mportance. The negati ve i deal
of Unsel fi shness carri es wi th i t the suggesti on not pri mari l y of
securi ng good thi ngs for others, but of goi ng wi thout them
oursel ves, as i f our absti nence and not thei r happi ness was the
i mportant poi nt. 63
Altars for Construction: An Agenda for the Future 311
Lewi s understood that Chri sti an vi rtue – at l east as i t was
comprehended and practi ced by the great bel i evers of the past —
was not a negati ve thi ng; i t was posi ti ve.
I t woul d stand us i n good stead to recover that sensi bi l i ty i n
our day. The fact i s, we can accompl i sh very l i ttl e i f we are merel y
anti-abortion or anti -l %nmed Parenthood. We must be pro-l i fe — i n
the sense that we embrace the ful l ness of l ove and l i fe and fai th.
Anythi ng l ess i s l ess than suffi ci ent unto thi s day.
F I F T E E N
THIS TOO SHALL PASS:
GOOD PROVIDENCE
ab ouo wsque ad rnalal
The subtle barrier was drawn which marb tohyj?omyesterday; all the night and
its despondency became past and entered rrwmoy
2
Hilaire Belloc
I l ooked up and saw war i n the sky. Mal evol ent l i ght beams
bathed the cl ouds i n an eeri e sunset of bl ood red and ash gray.
That war shoul d have such a l ovel y refl ecti on made the prospect
of encounteri ng i t al l the more menaci ng— or at l east i t shoul d
have. But I was dri ven by an i rresi sti bl e compul si on. There was
nothi ng to do except go forward.
I was back i n town. I was back where I ’d had the fri ghteni ng
chase through the al l ey, around the corner, and down ‘ti e free;
way wi th a chi l d cradl ed i n my arms. I t was si x months l ater and
my throat sti l l knotted and my eyes sti l l cl ouded whenever I
thought of i t.
My hotel was just a few bl ocks from the abortuary. As soon
as I was settl ed i n and refreshed from my l ong tri p, I yi el ded to
i ts magneti sm and set out wal ki ng.
I trembl ed wi th emoti on. A fl ood of i mages crowded my
senses. Apprehensi on, fear, curi osi ty, l ongi ng, anger, gri ef, and
fi -ustrati on vi ed for my emoti ons. Wi th every step, tensi on
mounted wi thi n me.
I took i n al l the dreary parti cul ars of the ci tyscape. The fi nal
remnants of sunl i ght gl i ttered omi nousl y through a chai nl i nk
fence, sti l l wet from a l ate afternoon rai n. Puddl es pocked the
asphal t wal k, l eaden l i ke pool s of mercury. I recogni zed al l the
el ements of the scene. Yet there was a l ack of coherence about i t.
313
314 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
There al ways i s when the dread of war smears i ts thi ck urgency
upon a l and.
As I came upon the fi nal bl ock, I suddenl y became di zzy
wi th di sori entati on.
I s thi s i t?
No, this cant be it. W%ere is the building?
I t5 gone. The clinic is gone.
How can that be?
I know this is it.
W%ati going on here?
I checked the address. I doubl e checked. There was no ques-
ti on about i t. Thi s was i t. But the cl i ni c was gone. Compl etel y.
Level ed. Vani shed. No trace i n si ght.
I wal ked toward the l ot. Down around the corner was the ol d
retai ner wal l , sti l l scrawl ed wi th gra.fi ti . And out back was the
al l ey, now compl etel y vi si bl e from the street.
A si gn pl anted i n the mi ddl e of the property sai d that the
cl i ni c had moved. Except for the naked and now weed-choked
foundati on and the remembered geography, that was the onl y
hi nt that anythi ng had ever been here.
I wal ked back to the al l ey and stood where the ol d dumpster
had been. And I stooped down to pi ck up a broken pi ece of
rubbi sh.
At the touch, a shi ver went up and down my spi ne. And then
a shudder. Thi s was a pl ace of eterni ty. Of war.
Li ke hymni ng angel s chi me, I whi spered a prayer. Tears fel l
from my eyes l i ke rai n. And then I turned to go.
I real i zed then, al l anew, that i n time God woul d make every-
thi ng ri ght. Li ke thi s pl ace.
I l ooked up at the sky. The col ors of war were sti l l there. But
somehow they di dn’t l ook as forebodi ng now. Somehow they
l ooked ri ght. Coherent.
As I wal ked back to my hotel , I sensed a bal anci ng of my
equi l i bri um –both urgency and pati ence coexi sti ng there.
And I smi l ed.
P A R T F O U R
RESOURCES
The worship of will is the negation of will. To admire mere choice is to rt@.re
to choose. You cannot admire will in general, because the essence of will is
that it is particular Evey act of will is an act of se~-limitation. To desire
a.ztion is to desire limitation. I n that sense ev~y act is an act of self-sacrijice.
14%en you choose anything you rg”ect everything else. 1
G. K. Chesterton
A P P E N D I X A
THE FAITHFUL
WITNESS: MAKING
A PRESENTATION
bona operaz
I n histo~k mixture of good and evil, the thing we should note– the thing the his-
torians will note with amazem..wt – i s the pro~ndip and the rapidity of change. B
Hilaire Belloc
Wi th knowl edge comes responsi bi l i ty (Luke 12:42-48). Now
that you know what you do about Pl anned Parenthood, you
have a responsi bi l i ty to share that i nformati on wi th others. Not
onl y that, you have a responsi bi l i ty to use that i nformati on to
effect justi ce, mercy, and truth i n your fami l y, i n your commu-
ni t y, and i n your ci rcl e of i nfl uence.
I f you are ever gi ven the opportuni ty to speak before a
preci nct caucus, or a PTA meeti ng, or a, School Board sessi on,
or a County Commi ssi oner’s heari ng, i t i s i mportant that you
have your facts strai ght, your materi al organi zed, and your
focus cl earl y i n vi ew.
Maki ng an effecti ve presentati on of the facts about Pl anned
Parenthood need not be a daunti ng experi ence. Most of the
work i s al ready done for you. Al l you need to do i s to pi ck and
choose your quotes, stati sti cs, and anecdotes and, then, bol dl y
go forth (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:8).
Here are a few ti ps on how to do just that:
Fi rst, wri te your whol e presentati on out, even i f onl y i n out-
l i ne form. Thi s wi l l keep you on track and accurate. There i s
nothi ng worse than obscure general i ti es or i rrel evant rabbi t
317
318 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
trai l s. Sti ck to your prepared comments. You’l l be more confi -
dent. And you’l l be more convi nci ng.
Second, use hard evi dence. There aren’t more than one hun-
dred footnotes i n each chapter of thi s book for nothi ng! They are
there for you to use. So use them! Cul l out the startl i ng stati sti cs
and the i ncendi ary quotati ons. Prove your poi nt. Dri ve home
your message. Don’t l eave anythi ng to specul ati on. Chapter two
was especi al l y wri tten so that you coul d take whol e paragraphs
and even whol e secti ons word for word, verbati m, and use them
as ammuni ti on i n your testi mony or presentati on.
Third, al ways make sure you use local exampl es, local stati s-
ti cs, and l ocal quotati ons i n your tal k. Don’t l et the spokesman
for Pl anned Parenthood brush off your arguments as i rrel evant
si mpl y because you’ve fai l ed to do your homework. Go to the
l i brary. Stop by the school s. Vi si t the cl i ni cs. Check the facts.
Leave absol utel y nothi ng to hearsay. Remember, lives depend on
your getti ng everythi ng ri ght.
F’ourt/z, do your best to soften your barrage of stati sti cs,
studi es, and surveys wi th real l i fe stori es. Bri ng your poi nt al l
the way home. Make your presentati on personal and passi onate.
Make i t human. Make i t real . I f at al l possi bl e, have sever aJ
women who have been expl oi ted by the l ocal Pl anned Parent-
hood abortuary to col l aborate your facts wi th thei r anecdotes.
Don’t l et your arguments be di smi ssed and di spatched as mere
ephemeral theory.
F~tk, have pl enty of supporti ng pro-l i fe l i terature, tracts,
books, arti cl es, and research papers avai l abl e for those who may
be i nterested i n further i nvesti gati on. Never show up empty-
handed. Back up your cl ai ms wi th real substance. Chal l enge
your adversari es to read through thi s enti re book. Gi ve them a
copy. Subscri be to pro-l i fe newsl etters i n thei r name. And then
watch the sparks begi n to fl y!
Sixth, be prepared to propose real and practi cal al ternati ves.
I f you tel l the school board that Pl anned Parenthood’s sex educa-
ti on programs have to go, but then fai l to gi ve them some vi abl e
al ternate courses of acti on, you mi ght as wel l save your breath.
Fi nd out about the many fi ne absti nence-based educati onzd pro-
grams for publ i c school s and then be prepared to answer questi ons
on them.4 Learn about the l ocal aborti on al ternati ve centers and
Appendix A: The Faithful Witness 319
then be prepared to defend them. Get i nvol ved wi th one of the
many excel l ent pro-l i fe organi zati ons i n your area, and know
how to counsel , refer, and advi se.
Seventh, be sure that you mai ntai n a pol i te, courteous, and
Chri sti an demeanor throughout. You can say the ri ght thi ng, but
say i t i n the wr ong way, and you’l l l ose your audi ence every ti me.
Part of the success of Pl anned Parenthood has been i ts abi l i ty to
choose wi nsome, arti cul ate, and attracti ve spokesmen for i tsel f.
I t i s cruci al that you counter that advantage wi th a doubl e dose
of Chri sti an chari ty and l ongsufferi ng. Don’t l ash out. Don’t pop
off. Don’t retal i ate. Be tough and unswervi ng, but al ways wi th
an eye toward wi nni ng the weak, champi oni ng the hel pl ess, and
wooi ng the undeci ded (Jude 22-23).
A P P E N D I X B
PRO-LIFE ACTIVISM:
A SOCIAL GOSPEL?
in opm”bus sit abunhntti nwa~
One should never leave a man without giving him something to show, by wv of
token, on the Day of J udgment. Z
Hilaire Belloc
Around the turn of the century, a new theol ogy grew to
promi nence among Li beral Protestants i n Europe and Ameri ca.
I t was dubbed the Social Gospel movement.
Essenti al l y, Soci a/ Gospel advocates promoted a message of
“sal vati on by works .“s They argued that true spi ri tual i ty consi sted
of good deeds i n the real m of pol i ti cs, economi cs, and soci al jus-
ti ce. Very much l i ke the modern-day proponents of Liberation
7?zeology, they reduced the Good News of Jesus Chri st to a revo-
l uti onary i deol ogy.4
By suggesti ng that authenti c Chri sti ani ty wi l l i nevi tabl y con-
cern i tsel f wi th the pl i ght of the poor, i t may seem to some that I
have accepted, at l east i n part, the tenets of thi s aberrant theol -
ogy. Nothi ng coul d be further from the truth, however.
“Sal vati on by works” or “sal vati on by Law” i s the most an-
ci ent of al l heresi es. I t i s i ndeed, “another Gospel ” (Gal ati ans
1:6). I t i s a “di fferent Gospel ” (Gal ati ans 1:7). I t i s a “contrary
Gospel ” (Gal ati ans 1:9). I t i s a Gospel repudi ated throughout
both the Ol d and New Testaments: Abraham condemned i t
(Genesi s 15:6; Romans 4:3; Gal ati ans 3:6); Moses condemned i t
(Deuter onomy 27:26); Davi d condemned i t (Psal m 32:1-2;
Psal m 51:1-17); I sai ah condemned i t (I sai ah 1:10-18); Jeremi ah
condemned i t (Jeremi ah 4:1-9); Amos condemned i t (Amos
5:1-17); Habakkuk condemned i t (Habakkuk 2:4); Paul condemned
321
322 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i t (Remans 9:32; Gal ati ans 3:10; Ephesi ans 2:9); and Peter con-
demned i t (2 Peter 1:3-4; 2:1-22).
“Sal vati on by works” i s hereti cal i n every way i magi nabl e. I t
abol i shes the si gni fi cance of the cross (Gal ati ans 5:11). I t makes
l i ght of Chri st’s sacri fi ce (Gal ati ans 2:21). I t nul l i fi es the work of
the Hol y Spi ri t (Gal ati ans 3:3-5). I t abrogates the necessi ty of
grace (Remans 4:4). “Fai th i s made voi d and the promi se i s
nul l i fi ed” (Remans 4:14) because i t makes man and man’s abi l i ty
the measure of al l thi ngs (Matthew 15:6-9). Thus, the Social Gosp-
el is nothi ng more than another form of Hwnunistic Paganisms
Sal vati on accordi ng to the Bi bl e i s a work of soverei gn grace.
There i s absol utel y nothi ng we can do to meri t God’s favor: “He
saved us, not on the basi s of deeds whi ch we have done i n ri ght-
eousness, but accordi ng to Hi s mercy, by the washi ng of regen-
erati on and renewi ng by the Hol y Spi ri t, whom He poured out
upon us ri chl y through Jesus Chri st our Savi or, that bei ng justi -
fi ed by Hi s grace we mi ght be made hei rs accordi ng to the hope
of eternal l i fe” (Ti tus 3:5-7).
Al l men are wi thout excepti on si nners. And thus, al l men are
both doomed and damned apart from God’s provi denti al and
uni l ateral grace provi si on. Thus, the most fundamental factor i n
understandi ng anthropol ogy i s not i deol ogi cal , psychol ogi cal ,
or soci ol ogi cal . I t i s i nstead soteri ol ogi cal . The most fundamental
factor i n understandi ng anthropol ogy i s the thmatos factor. T
Very si mpl y, because of si n al l men have morbi dl y em-
braced death and apart from Chri st are utterl y wi thout hope
(Remans 5:12).
At the Fal l , manki nd was suddenl y desti ned for death (Jere-
mi ah 15: 2). We were al l at that moment bound i nto a covenant
wi th death (I sai ah 28:15).
There i s a way that seems ri ght to a man, but i ts end i s the way
of death (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25).
Whether we know i t or not, we have chosen death (Jeremi ah
8:3). I t has become our shepherd (Psal m 49:14). Our mi nds are
fi xed on i t (Remans 8:6), our hearts pursue i t (Proverbs 21:6),
and our fl esh i s rul ed by i t (Remans 8:2). We dance to i ts cadences
(Proverbs 2:18) and descend to i ts chambers (Proverbs 7:27).
Appendix B: Pro-Lije Activism 323
The fact i s, “the wages of si n i s death” (Remans 6:23) and “al l
have si nned” (Remans 3:23).
There i s none ri ghteous, not even one; there i s none who
understands, there i s none who seeks for God; al l have turned
asi de, together they have become usel ess; there i s none who
does good, there i s not even one, Thei r throat i s an open grave,
wi th thei r tongues they keep decei vi ng, the poi son of asps i s
under thei r l i ps; whose mouth i s ful l of cursi ng and bi tterness;
thei r feet are swi ft to shed bl ood, destructi on and mi sery are i n
thei r paths, and the path of peace have they not known. There
i s no fear of God before thei r eyes (Remans 3:10-18).
And, al l those who hate God, l ove death (Proverbs 8:36).
I t i s no wonder then that aborti on, i nfh.nti ci de, exposure,
and abandonment have al ways been a normal and natural part
of human rel ati ons. Si nce the dawni ng of ti me, men have con-
tri ved i ngeni ous di versi ons to sati sfy thei r fal l en passi ons. And
chi l d-ki l l i ng has al ways been chi ef among them.
Vi rtual l y every cul ture i n anti qui ty was stai ned wi th the bl ood
of i nnocent chi l dren. I n fact, aborti on, i nfanti ci de, exposure,
and abandonment were so much a part of human soci eti es that
they provi ded the pri mary l i terary lid nwtjfi n popul ar tradi ti ons,
stori es, myths, fabl es, and l egends.
The foundi ng of Rome was, for i nstance, presumed to be the
happy resul t of the abandonment of chi l dren. Accordi ng to the
story, a vestal vi rgi n who had been raped bore twi n sons, Romul us
and Remus. The harsh Etruscan monarch Amul i us or der ed
them exposed on the Ti ber Ri ver. Left i n a basket whi ch fl oated
ashore, they were found by a she wol f and suckl ed by her. Later,
a shepherd di scovered them and took them home to hi s wi fe and
the ki ndl y coupl e brought them up as thei r own. Romul us and
Remus woul d l ater establ i sh the ci ty of Rome on the seven hi l l s
near the pl ace of thei r rescue.
Oedi pus was presumed to be an abandoned chi l d who was
al so found by a shepherd and l ater rose to greatness. I on, the
eponymous monarch i n anci ent Greece mi racul ousl y l i ved
through an aborti on, accordi ng to tradi ti on. Cyrus, the founder
of the Persi an empi re, was supposedl y a fortunate survi vor of
i nfanti ci de. Accordi ng to Homer’s l egend, Pari s, whose amorous
324 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
i ndi screti ons started the Trojan War, was al so a vi cti m of aban-
donment. Tel ephus, the ki ng of Mysi a i n Greece, and HaBi us,
rul er of the Cunetes i n Spai n, had both been exposed as chi l dren
accordi ng to vari ous fol k tal es. Jupi ter, chi ef god of the Ol ympi an
pantheon, hi msel f had been abandoned as a chi l d. He i n turn
exposed hi s twi n sons, Zethus and Arnphi on. Si mi l arl y, other
myths rel ated the fact that Posei don, Aescul api us, Hephai stos,
Atti s, and Cybel e had al l been abandoned to di e.
Because they had been mi red by the mi ni ons of si n and
death, i t was as natural as the spri ng rai ns for the men and
women of anti qui t y to ki l l thei r chi l dren. I t was as i nsti ncti ve as
the autumn harvest for them to summari l y sabotage thei r own
heri tage. They saw nothi ng parti cul arl y cruel about despoi l i ng
the fmi t of thei r wombs. I t was woven i nto the very fabri c of thei r
cul ture. They bel i eved that i t was compl etel y justi fi abl e. They
bel i eved that i t was just and good and ri ght.
But they were wrong. Dreadful l y wrong.
Li fe i s God’s gi ft. I t i s Hi s graci ous endowment upon the
created order. I t fl ows forth i n generati ve frui tful ness. The e~th
i s l i teral l y teemi ng wi th l i fe (Genesi s 1:20; Levi ti cus 11:10; 22:5;
Deuteronomy 14:9). And the crowni ng gl ory of thi s sacred teem-
i ng i s man hi msel f (Genesi s 1:26-30; Psal m 8:1-9). To vi ol ate the
sancti ty of thi s magni fi cent endowment i s to fl y i n the face of al l
that i s hol y, just, and true (Jeremi ah 8:1-17; Remans 8:6).
To vi ol ate the sancti ty of l i fe i s to i nvi te judgment, retri buti on,
and anathema (Deuteronomy 30:19-20). I t i s to sol i ci t devasta-
ti on, i mprecatati on, and destructi on (Jeremi ah 21:8-10).
Do not be decei ved, God i s not mocked, whatsoever a man
sows, that he shal l al so reap (Gal ati ans 6:7).
But the Lord God, who i s the gi ver of l i fe (Acts 17:25), the
fountai n of l i fe (Psal m 36:9), the defender of l i fe (Psal m 27:1),
the pri nce of l i fe (Acts 3:15), and the restorer of l i fe (Ruth 4:15),
di d not l eave men to l angui sh hopel essl y i n the cl utches of si n
and death. He not onl y sent us the message of l i fe (Acts 5:20)
and the words of l i fe (John 6:68), He sent us the l i ght of l i fe as
wel l (John 8:12). He sent us Hi s onl y begotten Son — the l i fe of
the worl d (John 6:51)–to break the bonds of death (1 Cori nthi ans
Appendix B: Pro-LiJ e Activism 325
15:54-56). Jesus “tasted death for everyone” (Hebrews 2:9), actu-
al l y “abol i shi ng death” for our sakes (2 Ti mothy 1:10) and offeri ng
us new l i fe (John 5:21).
For God so l oved the worl d, that He sent Hi s onl y begotten
Son, that whosoever bel i eveth i n Hi m shoul d not peri sh, but
have everl asti ng l i fe (John 3:16).
One of the earl i est Chri sti an documents – actual l y predati ng
much of the New Testament — asserts that ‘There are two ways:
a way of l i fe and away of death.”* I n Chri st, God has ti orded us
the opportuni ty to choose between those two ways– to choose
between fi -ui tful and teemi ng l i fe on the one hand, and barren
and i mpoveri shed death on the other (Deuteronomy 30:19).
Apart from Chri st i t i s not possi bl e to escape the snares of si n
and death (Col ossi ans 2:13). On the other hand:
I f any man be i n Chri st, he i s a new creati on; ol d thi ngs have
passed away; behol d, al l thi ngs have become new” (2 Cori n-
thi ans 5:17).
Al l those who hate Chri st “l ove death” (Proverbs 8:36); whi l e
al l those who recei ve Chri st are made the sweet savor of l i fe
(2 Cori nthi ans 2:16).
Thi s i s the fai th, “once and for al l del i vered to the sai nts”
(Jude 3). Thi s i s not a Social Gospel, i t i s si mpl y I %e Gospel .
Even so, thi s Gospel truth i s not supposed to be mere
dogma, i t i s to be worked out i n every detai l and di mensi on of
l i fe. Thus, al l those who wal k the path of l i fe (Psal m 16:11; Prov-
erbs 2:19; 5:6; 10:17; 15:24), and eat from wi sdom’s tree of l i fe
(Proverbs 3:18; 3:22; 4:13; 4:22-23), are made the champi ons of
l i fe (Proverbs 24:10-12).
Ul ti matel y, thi s i s where the whol e noti on of good works fi ts
i nto Bi bl i cal theol ogy. The Apostl e Paul tel l s us that though we
are saved “by grace through fai th” (Ephesi ans 2:8), “not as a
result of works” (Ephesi ans 2:9), we are “created i n Chri st Jesus
for good works” (Ephesi ans 2:10).
I n other words, good works are somethi ng we do because we
have been justi fi ed, not i n order i !o he justi fi ed. Concern and
care for the i nnocent, hel pl ess, poor, and affl i cted i s an efl ect of
326 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
sal vati on, not the cause of sal vati on. I t i s a way of l z~e, not a way
of salvation. And therei n l i es al l the di fference.
Thi s then i s the fai th “whi ch was once for al l del i vered to the
sai nts” (Jude 3). Thi s i s the fai th that orthodox bel i evers have
hel d to throughout the centuri es – from the Patri sti c Age, through
the Protestant Reformati on, and to the present day:
l gnati us oJAnti oc/2 (14-107). “Carnal peopl e cannot act spi ri -
tual l y, or spi ri tuzd peopl e carnal l y, just as fai th cannot act l i ke
unbel i ef, or unbel i ef l i ke fai th. . . . Those who profess to be
Chri st’s wi l l be recogni zed by thei r acti ons. . . . They wi l l gi ve
and be gi ven graci ousl y unto the poor just as the Lord gave and
was gi ven unto them .“9
Cbn.en.t of Rome (34-100). “Let us not merel y cal l Hi m Lord.
. . . Let us acknowl edge Hi m by our acti ons of mercy and
chari ty.”l o
The Di al whe (110). “Every prophet who teaches the truth but
fai l s to practi ce what he preaches i s a fal se prophet. . . . Mi ni stry
to the afl l i cted i s but a mark of fai th. Yet the absence of that
mark i s evi dence of an absence of that fai th.” 11
Bud of Cwsar ea (330-379). “A man who has two coats or two
pai r of shoes, when hi s nei ghbor has none, evi dences a l ack of
grace i n hi s l i fe. . . . The redi stri buti on of weal th i s i n no wi se
the poi nt. The reveal i ng of fai th i s the poi nt.”l z
Jo/zn Chyr o~tor n (347-407). “The essence of the Gospel i s not
concern for the poor but i t certai nl y provokes that concern. I n
fact wi thout that concern, the essence of the Gospel surel y has
not been grasped.”l s
Anbrose of Mikm (339-397). “Fai th i s the begetter of a good
wi l l and of good acti ons to the l east of these.” I *
Ji m Hus (1369-1415). “Doubt must be cast on fi -ui tl ess l i ves.
Professi on must be fol l owed by deeds of chari ty, otherwi se that
professi on i s fi 31se.”15
Mar/ in Luther (1483-1546). “Where there are no good works,
there i s no fai th. I f works and l ove do not bl ossom forth, i t i s not
genui ne fai th, the Gospel has not yet gai ned a foothol d, and
Chri st i s not yet ri ghtl y known.”l G
The Augsburg Confession (1530). “I t i s necessary to do good
works; not that we may trust that we deserve grace by them, but
because i t i s the wi l l of God that we shoul d do them.”17
Appendix B: Pro-Life Activism 327
The BeZg> Con~e.ssi m (1561). “I t i s i mpossi bl e that the hol y
fai th can be unfrui tful i n man.”l s
The Heidleberg Catec/ zism (1563). “I t i s i mpossi bl e that those
who are unpl anted i nto Chri st by true fai th, shoul d not bri ng
forth frui ts of mercy and graci ousness.”l g
The Wi trni mkr C@e.rsi m (1646). “Good works, done i n obe-
di ence to God’s commandments, are the frui ts and evi dences of
a true and l i vel y fai th: and by them bel i evers mani fest thei r
thankful ness, strengthen thei r assurance, edi fy thei r brethren,
adorn the professi on of the Gospel , stop the mouths of the adver-
sari es, and gl ori fy God whose workmanshi p the y are, created i n
Chri st Jesus thereunto; that, havi ng thei r frui t unto hol i ness,
they may have the end, eternal l i fe.”zo
A4att/zew Heruy (1662-1714). “Man may as soon take pl easure
i n a dead body, voi d of soul , or sense, or acti on, as God takes
pl easure i n a dead fai th, where there are not works.’zl
~onathun Edwards (1 703-1758). “That rel i gi on whi ch God re-
qui res, and wi l l accept, does not consi st i n weak, dul l , l i fel ess
wi shes, rai si ng us but a l i ttl e above a state of i ndi fference. God,
i n Hi s Word, greatl y i nsi sts upon i t, that we be i n good earnest,
fervent i n spi ri t, and our hearts vi gorousl y engaged i n merci es.’zz
On and on the testi mony of fai th through the ages afl i rrns a
Gospel evi denced by soci al concerns but condemni ng a Social Gosp-
el dependent upon those concerns.
Thi s i s i ndeed the Gospel of l i ght and l i fe.
A P P E N D I X C
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHIC
RESOURCES
hagi a sophia~
Ah, a book. Nothing tifiner with which to convg truth, to expo.iefalsehoo~ or to
while away the hours. Z
Hilaire Belloc
Pl anned Parenthood Overvi ew
Human Li fe I nternati onal , Banned Parenthood, Planned Barrenhood
(Gai thersburg, MD: Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1988).
Davi d M. Kennedy, Birth Control in America: The Career of Margaret Sanger
(New York: Yal e Uni versi ty Press, 1970).
* Robert Marshal l and Charl es Donovan, BlessedAre th Barren: The Social
Policy @Planwd Parenthood (San Fr anci sco: I gnati us Press, 1991).
* Paul Marx, Confessions of a Pro-LtJ e Misswna~ (Gai thersburg, MD:
Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1978).
Mi ke Perry, Tlu History of Planned Parenthood (Stafford, VA: Ameri can
Li fe League, 1990).
Robert H. Ruff, Aborting Pkznned Parenthood (Houston, TX: New
Vi si on Press, 1988).
* Dougl as R. Scott, Bad Choices: A Look I n_sio2 Planned Parenthood (Frank-
l i n, TN: Legacy Communi cati ons, 1992).
Margaret Sanger
El l en Chesl er, Wmn of Vd.kn-: Margaret Sanger and thz Birth Control Move-
ment (New York: Si mon and Schuster, 1992).
329
330 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
* El asah Drogi n, Margaret Sanger: Father of Modem Son”e~ (New Hope,
KY: CUL Publ i shers, 1980, 1986).
Peter Fr yer , The Birth Controllers (New York: Stei n and Day, 1965).
* Madel i ne Gray, Margaret Sanger: A Biography of tb Chumpion of Birth
Control (New York: Ri chard Marek, 1979).
Davi d M. Kennedy, Birth Control in America: The Career of Margaret Sanger
(New York: Yal e Uni versi ty Press, 1970).
Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger: An Autobiografihy (New York: Dover
Publ i shers, 1971).
Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Civihkation (New York: Brentano’s Pub-
l i shers, 1922).
Margaret Sanger, Wbman and tlu New Rae (New York: Brentano’s
Publ i shers, 1920).
Morti mer Brewster Smi th, Evangels of Rt$orm (New York: Round
Tabl e Press, 1934).
Li fe Facts
John Ankerberg and John Wel don, Whn Does L+ Begin? And 39 Other
T~h Q~tions about Abortion (Brentwood, TN: Wogemuth & Hyatt,
1989).
Cl i fford E. Bajema, Abortwn and tlwMeaning cfPersonhood (Grand Rapi ds,
MI : Baker Book House, 1974).
Ji m Brooks, ti q”m @L@ (Bel l evi l l e, MI : Li on Publ i shi ng Corporati on,
1985).
Col i n Cl ark, Popzdation Growth: Tlu Advantages (Santa Ana, CA: Li fe
Q.ml i ty, 1975).
Er ma Cl ardy Craven, Abortion, Povertt and Bhck Genocide (New Yor k:
Archdi ocese Communi ty Rel ati ons, 1972).
John Jefferson Davi s, Abortion and the Christian: What Every Christian
Should Know (Phi l l i psburg, NJ: Presbyteri an and Reformed, 1984).
Paul deParri e and Mary Pri de, Unh+ Sam#ices of the New Age (West-
chester, I L: Crossway Books, 1988).
Select Bibliographic Resources 331
Dr. Peter Doherty, Abortion: I s Thir Your Choice? (London: Fai th Pamp-
hl ets, 1982).
* Randy Engel A March of Dimes Primer: The A to Z of Eugenic Killing
(Stafford, VA: Ameri can Li fe League, 1991).
* Car ol Everett, Blood Money: Making Monty OflA Wmank Right to Choose
(Portl and, OR: Mul tnomah, 1992).
* John M. Frame, Medical Ethics: Princ@les, Penon.s, and Problems (Phi l -
l i psburg, NJ: Presbyteri an and Reformed, 1988).
John Garvey and Frank Morri s, Catholic Perspectives: Abortion (Chi cago,
I L: The Thomas More Press, 1979).
Kenneth L. Gentry, l %e Christian Case Against Abortion (Greenvi l l e, SC:
Gentry PCA, 1982).
Wal ter D. Gl anze, The Signet/ Mosby Medical Encyclopedia (New Yor k:
Si gnet, 1987).
Susan Schaeffer Macaul ey, Something Beaut#iul from God (Westchester ,
I L: Crossway Books, 1980).
* Marl i n Maddoux, Free Speech or Propaganda? How tlw Media Distorts the
Troth (Nashvi l l e, TN: Thomas Nel son, 1990).
Marl i n Maddoux, W4at Worries Parents Most: Survival Strategies in a
Chaotic Wwld (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992).
Judi th A. Rei sman and Edward W. Ei chel , Kinsg, Sex, and Fraud
(Lafayette, LA: Hunti ngton House, 1990).
Rousas John Rushdoony, The Myth @ Over-Population (Tyl er, TX:
Thoburn Press, 1969).
Robert L. Sassone, Handbook on Population, 4th edi ti on (Santa Ana,
CA: Sassone Press, 1978).
* Franci s Sehaeffer and C. Everett Koop, Wh@ver Happened to th Human
Race (Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1980).
* Frank Schaeffer, A Timz for Anger: T/ w Myth of AkutraliQ (Westchester,
I L: Crossway Books, 1982).
Landrum Shettl es and Davi d Rorvi k, Rites of L#e: The Scientj$c Evidence
for Life B$ore Birth (Grand Rapi ds, MI : Zondervan, 1983).
Jul i an Si mon and Herman Kahr, cd., The Resourcefid Earth: A Response
to Global 2000 (Oxford, UK: Basi l Bl ackwel l , 1984).
332 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
F. LaGard Smi th, W%erz Choi ce Becomes God (Eugene, OR: Harvest
House, 1990).
* Joseph Sobran, T& Averted Gaze: Liberalism and Fetal Pain (New Yor k:
The Human Li fe Foundati on, 1984).
* Joseph Sobran, Single I ssua: Essays on tb Cructil Social @estions (New
York: The Human Li fe Press, 1983).
Ben J. Wattenberg, Th Birth Dearth: What Happens When People in Free
Countnies Donl Have Enough Babtis (New York: Pharos Books, 1987).
* Dr. and Mrs. J. C. Wi l l ke, Abortion: Qwstions &Answers (Ci nci nnati ,
OH: Hayes, 1985).
Dr. and Mrs. J. C. Wi .l l ke, Handbook on Abotiion (Ci nci nnati , OH:
Hayes, 1979).
J. C. Wi l l ke, Abortion and Skway: HtitoV Repeats (Ci nci nati , OH:
Hayes, 1984).
El l en Wi l son, An Even Dozen (New York: Human Li fe Press, 1981).
* Curt Young, The Least of l%xe (Chi cago, I L: Moody Press, 1984).
Aborti on I ndustry
Wi l l i am Aramony, Th United Wg: ~Next Hundred Y~rs (New Yor k:
Donal d I . Fi ne, 1987).
The Boston Women’s Heal th Col l ecti ve Thz N2w Our Bodies, Our Selves:
A Book By and For W- (New York: Si mon and Schuster, 1984).
Wti i am Brennan, Medical Holocausts: Exterminative Medicine in Nazi
Germany and Contemporary Ameriia (New York: Nordl and, 1980).
Di ana Burgwyn, Marriage Without Children (New York: Harper& Row,
1981).
Cl ai re Chambers, Th Sims Circie: A Humanist Revolution (Bel mont,
MA: Western I sl ands, 1977).
Al l an Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Soaai Costs of the New S&r@c
Rac&n (New York: Al fked A. Knopf, 1975).
Li ndsay R. Curti s, Gl ade B. Curti s and Mary K. Beard, My Body–
My Decision (New York: Si gnet, 1987).
Select Bibliographic Resources 333
Zi l l ah Ei senstei n, The Radical Future of Liberal Feminism (New Yor k:
Longrnan Co., 1981).
* Carol Everett, Blood Money: Making Money OJ A Wman5 Right to Choose
(Portl and, OR: Mul tnomah, 1992).
Mari an Faux, Roe v. Wd: The Untold StoV of the Landmark Supreme Court
Decision Tht Ma& Abortion Legal (New York: Macmi l l an, 1988).
Li nda Bi rd Franke, The Ambiualme ~Abotiion (New York: Del l , 1982).
Li nda Gordon, Wmn?s Body, W~n3 Right: Birth Control in Amm”ca
.
(New York: Pengui n Books, 1976).
Stephen Jay Goul d, The Mismeasure ofMan (New York: Norton, 1981).
George Grant, Ttil and Error: The Amri>an Civil Liberties Union and I ts
I mpact on 13ur Family (Brentwood, TN, Wol gemuth & Hyatt, 1989).
George Grant, Third Time Around: The Htitoy of the Pro-Lfe Movemmt
j%wn the First Century to the Present (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth &
Hyatt, 1991).
George Grant, Th Quick and the Deaa!: RU-486 and the New Chanical
Wa#are Against I ’bur Fami~ (Wheaton, I L: Crossway Books, 1991).
Germai ne Greer, Sex &f Destiny: Th Politics of Human Fertilip (New
York: Harper & Row, 1985).
Bryan F. Gri ffi n, Panic Among the Philistine (Chi cago, I L: Regnery
Gateway, 1983).
Phyl l i s Grosskurth, Havelock Ellis: A Biography (New York: Al fred A.
Knopf, 1980).
John Gui l l ebaud, The Pill (Oxford, UK: Oxford Uni versi ty, 1991).
Al an F. Guttmacher, Pregnan~, Bin!h, and Fami~ Planning, Revi sed and
Updated by I rwi n H. Kai ser, M.D. (New York: Si gnet, 1987).
John James Hel m, Holm3 Race Assimilation (Atl anta, GA: J. L. Ni chol s
& co., 1910).
Frederi ck S. Jane, Barbara L. Li ndhei m and Phi l i p R. Lee, Abortion
Politics: Private Morali@and Public Poli~ (Los Angel es: McGraw-Hi l l ,
1981).
D. Gareth Jones, Brave New People: Ethical I ssues at the Comnwncmt of
L#e (Downer’s Grove, I L: I VP, 1984).
334 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
* Jacquel i ne Kasun, The WmAgainst Popubtion: Th Economics and I deology
of Population Control (San Franci sco, CA: I gnati us Press, 1988).
Kathy Keeton, Wmn of Tmmow (New York: St. Marti n’s Press,
1985).
Dani el J. Kevl es, I n th Ni zrru #Eugenics (London: Vi ki ng Books, 1986).
Al fred C. Ki nsey, Warden C. Pomeroy and Cl yde E. Marti n, Sexual
Behavior in the Human Male (New York: W. B. Saunders, 1948).
Kri sti n Luker, Abortion and the Politics of MotheAood (Los Angel es, CA:
Uni versi ty of Cal i forni a Press, 1984).
Andrew H. Merton, Enemies of Choice: The Right-to-L#eMovernd and I ts
I %eat to Abortion (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1981).
Jasnes C. Mohr, Abortion in Anwrka (New York: Oxford Uni versi ty
Press, 1978).
Bernard N. Nathanson, Aborting Arrwrica (Garden Ci ty, NY: Doubl e-
day, 1979).
Bernard N. Nathanson, Tlu Abotiion Papers: I nside tb Abortion Mentality
(New York: Frederi ck Fel l , 1983).
Leonard J. Nel son, The Death Decision (Ann Arbor, MI : Servant
Books, 1984).
Lesl ey Jane Nonki n, 1 Wish My Parents Uno%rstood (New York: Pengui n
Books, 1986).
Marvi n Ol asky, Abotiion Ritis: A Soctil History of Abortion in America
(Wheaton, I L: Crossway Books, 1992).
* Mar vi n Ol asky, Pattans of Corporate Phikmthropy: Public AJ airs Giving and
the Forbes 100 (Washi ngton, DC: Capi tol Research Center, 1987).
* Marvi n Ol asky. The Press and Abortion, 1/ ?38-1988 (Hi l l sdal e, NJ:
Lawrence Erl baum Associ ates, 1988).
Hyman Rodman, Susan H. Lewi s and Saral yn B. Gri ffi th, The Sexual
R@ts of Adolescents: Competence, Vuhwrabilip and Parental Control (New
York: Col umbi a Uni versi ty, 1984).
Barbara Katz Rothman, The Tmtatiue Pre~an~: Prenatal Diugnosti and
the Future of Motherhood (New York: Vi ki ng Pengui n, 1986).
Rousas John Rushdoony, The Myth of Over-Population (Tyl er, TX:
Thobum Press, 1969).
Select Bibliographic Resources 335
Wdl i am Sanger, Th HistoV of Prostitution (New York, NY: Eugeni cs
Publ i shi ng, 1939).
Robert L. Sassone, Handbook on Population, 4th edi ti on (Santa Ana,
CA: Sassone Press, 1978).
Moni ca Sjoo and Barbara Mor, The Great Cosmic Mother: Rediscovering
the Reli@on of the Earth (San Franci sco, CA: Harper & Row, 1987).
Lothrop Stodard, The Rising Tiok of Color Against White Worid-Supremucy
(New York: Charl es Scri bners, 1920).
Abraham Stone and Norman E. Hi mes, Planned Parenthood: A Pm&al
Handbook of Birth Control Methods (New York: Col l i er Books, 1965).
Hannah and Abraham Stone, A Marriage Manual (New York: Si mon
and Schuster, 1968).
Pr o-Li fe Movement
Randy C. Al corn, I s Rescuing Right? Breaking the Law to Save the Unborn
(Downers Grove, I L: I VP, 1990).
Randy C. Al corn, Pro-L$e Answers to Pro-Choice Objections (Portl and,
OR: Mul tnomah, 1992).
Joan Andrews wi th John Cavanaugh-O’Keefe, 1 Will Never Forget Yw:
The History of tb Rescue Movenwnt in the Lfe ofJ oan Andrews (San Fran-
ci sco: I gnati us Press, 1989).
Joan Andrews, Ym Reject Them, lbu Reject Me: Th Prhon Letters ofJ ban
Andrews (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth & Hyatt, 1988.)
Dave Andrusko, To Rescue tlw Future: The Pro-Lfe Moverrwnt in the 1980s
(Harri son, NY: Li fe Cycl e Books, 1983).
Dave Andrusko, Window on tb Future: Zh.e Pro-Lfe Ymr in Review –1986
(Washi ngton, DC: The Nati onal Ri ght-to-Li fe Commi ttee, 1987).
Mark Bel tz, Sujl r the Little Children: Christians, Abortion and Civil Disobe-
dience (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1989).
Dr . Car ol i ne Ber r y, l % Rites of LiJ e: Christians and Bio-Medical Decision
Making (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1987).
Lynn Buzzard and Paul a Campbel l , Ho@ Dbobedience: Wlen Christtirzs
Must Resist the State (~n Arbor, MI : Servant, 1984).
336 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Steve Carr and Frankl i n Meyer, Celebrate L@e: Hopefor a Culture Preoccu-
pied with Death (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth & Hyatt, 1990).
Cathol i c Medi a Offi ce and I ncorporated Cathol i c Truth Soci ety, Abortwn
and the Right to Live: A J oint Statement of the Catholic Archbishops of Great
Britain (London: The Ludo Press Ltd., 1986).
Cathol i c Truth Soci ety, Let Me Live: Declaration by the Sa-red Congregation
of Faith on Procured Abortion (London: Bur l ei gh Press, 1983).
Jane Chastai n, ~d Speak Out On the I ssw.s I f I on.~ Knew What to Say
(Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1987).
S. Ri ckl y Chri sti an, The Wmdland Hills Tragedy (Westchester, I L:
Crossway Books, 1985).
Commi ttee on Popul ati on and the Economy, Getting Population into
Perspective (London: The SPUC Educati onal Research Trust, 1987).
Dr . Ron Lee Davi s wi th James D. Denney, A Time for Compassion: A
Call to Cherish and Protect L@ (Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1986).
* Ri chard Exl ey, Abortion: Pro-L#e by Convictwn, Pro-Choice by D~ault
(Ti dsa, OK: Honor Books, 1989).
* Joseph Lapsl ey Foreman, Shutterz”ng the Darknem: 27u Crisfi of the Cross in
the Church Ttiy (Montreat, NC: The Cool i ng Spri ng Press, 1992).
* Paul B. Fowl er , Abotiion: Toward an Evangelical Conwmsws (Portl and,
OR: Mul tnomah Press, 1987).
* George Grant, Third Time Around: Th l?tito~ of the Pro-Lfe Movement
ji-om the First Century to the Present (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth &
Hyatt, 1991).
George Grant, Th Quick and the Dead RU-486 and the New Chemtial
W@are Against tiur Fami@ (Wheaton, I L: Crossway Books, 1991).
Mel ody Green, Childrm: Things We 17hrow Away (Li ndal e, TX: Last
Days Mi ni stri es, 1983).
Stanl ey S. Harakas, Contempora~ Mend I ssues Fim”ng thz Orthodox Chr&
tian (Mi nneapol i s, MN: Li ght and Li fe, 1982).
Jeff Lane Hensl ey, The Zero People: Essays on Life (Ann Arbor, MI :
Servant Books, 1983).
Ri ck and Jan Hess, A Full Quiver: Fami~ Planning and the LoroM@ of
Chfit (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth & Hyatt, 1990).
Select Bibliographic Resources 337
Thomas W. Hi l gers, Denni s J. Horan and Davi d Mal l , New Perspec-
tives on Human Abotiion (Frederi ck, MD: Al ethi a Books, 1981).
Er i c Hohnber g, Pro-Lfe Rescues and Thir Relationship to Spiritual Revival
(Gai nesvi l l e, FL: Reel to Real Mi ni stri es, 1988).
El i sabeth Hor r nan, A#er the Adoption (Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1987).
John Kowal czyk, An Orthodox View of Abortion (Mi nneapol i s, MN:
Li ght and Li fe, 1987).
Peter Kreeft, The Unaborted Socrates (Downer’s Grove, I L: I VP, 1983).
Phi l i p F. Lawl er , Operation Rescue: A Challenge to the Nation% Conscience
(Hunti ngton, I N: Our Sunday Vi si tor, 1992).
Dr. Paul D. Li ndstrom, 4 Days in May: Storming the Gata of Hell (Arl i ng-
ton, I L: Chri sti an Li berty Press, 1988).
Robert G. Marshal l , Bayonets and Roses: Comprehensive Pro-Lfe Political
Action Guide (Washi ngton, DC: Foundati ons for Li fe, 1976).
* Conni e Mar shner , Decent Exposure: How to Tuh %ur Children About Sex
(Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth & Hyatt, 1988.
Wi l l i am H. Mar shner , The Right to Live (Lynchburg, VA: Moral
Majori ty, 1981).
Paul Mar x, Conf~sions of a Pro-Lfe MissionaV (Gai thersburg, MD:
Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1978).
Cotton Mather, To Do Good: An Essay Upon the Good that I s to be Devised
and Designed by Those Who Desire to Answer the Crest End of Lt~e and to
Do Good WhiZe TM Live (Boston, MA: Sabbath School Soci ety,
1845).
John Warwi ck Montgomery, Slaughter oft~ I nnocents (Westchester, I L:
Crossway Books, 1981).
Gary North, Trespassing for Dear Lfe: What I s Operation Rescue Up To?
(Fort Worth, TX: Domi ni on Press, 1989).
Gary North, When J urtice I s Aborted: Biblical Stundards for Non-Violent
Resistance (Fort Worth, TX: Domi ni on Press, 1989).
Gary North, Victimt Rights: A Biblical View of Civil J ustice (Tyl er, TX:
I nsti tute for Chri sti an Economi cs, 1990).
338 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
* Marvi n and Susan Ol asky, More Thn. Kindness: A Compassiona& Approach
to Crisis Childbearing (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1990).
Ronal d Reagan, Abortion and the Conscience ofa M.tion (Nashvi l l e, TN:
Thomas Nel son, 1984).
Davi d C. Reardon, Aborted W-: Silent No More (Westchester, I L:
Crossway Books, 1987).
Franci s A. Schaeffer , A Christian Man@esto (Westchester, I L: Crossway
Books, 1981).
Franci s A. Schaeffer, C. Everett Koop, Ji m Buchfuehrer, and Franky
Schaefi er V, Plan for Action: An Action Ahrnativefor Whatever Happerwd
b tk Human Ruce (Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1980).
Fr anci s Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, W%atever Happened to the Human
Race (Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1980).
Franky Schaeffer, A Time for Anger: The Myth of Neutralip (Westchester,
I L: Crossway Books, 1982).
Franky Schaeffer and Harol d Fi ckett, A Modest Proposal: For Peace,
prospen”~ and Happiness (Nashvi l l e, TN: Thomas Nel son, 1984).
Joseph M. Schei dl er, Closed: 99 Wgs to Stop Abortion (Westchester, I L:
Crossway Books, 1985).
Phyl l i s Schkdl y, ed., ChildAbuse in the Classroom (Westchester, I L: Cross-
way Books, 1986).
R. C. Sproul , L&euiews (Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1986).
Susan M. Stanford, Will I Cy Twrrow? Healing Post-Abortwn Trawrw
(Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1986).
Charl es R. Swi ndol l , Sancti@ of L$e: Tb I nescapable I ssue (Dal l as, TX:
Word, 1990).
Joni Ear eckson Tada, All Go&s Children: Ministry to the Disabled (Grand
Rapi ds, MI : Zondervan, 1987).
Randal l Terry, H&ha Laws (Bi nghamton, NY: Project Li fe, 1988).
Randal l A. Terry, Operation Rescue (Spri ngdal e, CA: Whi taker House,
1988).
* Randal l A. Terry, Access~ to Muro% (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth &
Hyatt, 1990).
Select Bibliographic Resources 339
Mother Theresa, Franci s A. Schaeffer , et al ., Wi o I s For Lfe? (West-
chester, I L: Crossway, 1984).
John W. Whi tehead, Arresting Abortwn: Practical W~s to Save Unborn
Children (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1985).
Dr. and Mrs. J. C. Wi l l ke, Abortion: Qwstions &Answers (Ci nci nnati ,
OH: Hayes, 1985).
Dr. and Mrs. J. C. Wi l l ke, Handbook on Abortion (Ci nci nnati , OH:
Hayes, 1979).
J.
J
C. Wi l l ke, Abortion and Slavqv: H&ogv Repeats (Ci nci nnati , OH:
Hayes, 1984).
El l en Wi l son, An Even Dozen (New York: Human Li fe Press, 1981).
* Curt Young, The Least@ These (Chi cago, I L: Moody Press, 1984).
Sex Educati on
* Randy Engel , Sex Education: The Final P@ue (Gai thersburg, MD:
Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1989).
Ri chard D. Gl asow, School-Based Clinics, The Abortion Connection (Wash-
i ngton, DC: Nati onal Ri ght to Li fe, 1988).
Li nda Gordon, W~n3 Body, Wmnk Right: Birth Control in America
(New York: Pengui n Books, 1976).
Al fred C. Ki nsey, Warden C. Pomeroy and Cl yde E. Marti n, Sawud
Behauim in the Hurnun Male (New York: W. B. Saunders Co., 1948).
* Marl i n Maddoux, W%at W&s Parents Most: Survival Strate~”es in a C’huotic
Wmld (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992).
Kathy McCoy, The Tmage BociJ Book: A Guide to Sexuali@ (New York:
Si mon & Schuster, 1983).
Josh McDowel l , How to Help Ymr Child to Say ‘No” to Sexual Pressure
(Waco, TX: Word, 1987).
Josh McDowel l and Di ck Day, Why Wtit? Whut Ybu Need to Know About
the T- Sexuulio Crisis (San Bernadi ne, CA: Here’s Li fe, 1987).
* Barrett L. Mosbacker, School-Based Clinics and Oth Critical I ssues in
Public Education (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1987).
340 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Pl anned Parenthood, How to Tdk with Your Child about Sexualip (Garden
Ci ty, NY: Doubl eday, 1986).
Warden Pomeroy, BVS and Sex (New York: Del l , 1981).
Warden Pomeroy, Gi r l s and Sex (New York: Del l , 1981).
* Judi th A. Rei sman and Edward W. Ei chel , Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud
(Lafayette, LA: Hunti ngton House, 1990).
.John Vertefeui l l e, Sexual Chaos: Th Personal and So&l Conseqwmces of the
Sexual Revolution (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1988).
Ben J. Wattenber g, The Birth Dearth: What Happens W%en People in Free
Countries Don-i Have Enough Babies (New York: Pharos Books, 1987).
Roberta Wei ner, Tm Pregnuncy: I mpmt on the Schools (Al exandri a, VA:
Capi tol Publ i shi ng, 1987).
Mercedes Arzu Wi l son, Love and %tilip (Dunki rk, MD: Fami l y of the
Ameri cas, 1989).
Kay Zi bol sy, Healing Hid&n Hurts (Wi l son, NC: Star Books, 1989).
Bi o-Medi cal Ethi cs
Ni gel M. de S. Camemn, i ’7wNm Mt&im: L#e and Death A&r Hi@oa-&
(Wheaton, I L: Crossway Books, 1991).
Eri c K. Dr exl er , Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnola~
(New York: Anchor Press/Doubl eday, 1987).
T. C. EsDi nosa. Bitih Control: Wtv Are Tb Lvin~ to W-? (Washi mzton.
DC: Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1980).
Debra Evans, Without Moral Limits: W-, Reproduction and the New
Medical T~hnologv (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1989).
Li nda Gordon, Wmni Be@, Wmni R&ht: Birth Control in Amtm2a
(New York: Pengui n Books, 1976).
Hugh Gr egor y Gal l agher , By Tmt Betrayed: Patients, Physicians, and the
License to Kill in thz Third Reich (New York: Henry HoI t, 1990).
* George Grant, Th Quick and the Dead: RU-486 and the New Chemical
WarJ are Against tiur Family (Wheaton, I L: Crossway Books, 1991).
Ted Howard and Jeremy Ri tl ci n, Who Should Play God? (New York,
NY: Del l , 1977).
Select Bibliographic Resources 341
Derek Humphrey, ktA4eDi e B@ore I WA: HemlocFs Book ofSel f-Del i verance
fi r the Dying (New York: Heml ock/Grove, 1984).
Jean Johnson, Ni ztural Fami~ Planning (London: Cathol i c Troth Soci ety,
1981).
Everett C. Koop, To Live or Die? Fhcing De&ions at tb End of L$e (Ann
Arbor, MI : Servant Books, 1987).
Geral d A. Larue, Euthanasia and Reli#”on (Los Angel es, CA: Heml ock
Soci ety, 1985).
Lane P. Lester wi th James C. Hefl ey, Cloning: Miracle or Menace
(Wheaton, I L: Tjmdal e House, 1980).
Robert J. Li fton, Th Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the P~chology of
Genocide (New York: Basi c Books, 1986).
Samuel A. Owen, Letti ng God Plun Ywr Fmi& (Westchester, I L: Cross-
way Books, 1990).
Ron Paul , Abortion and Liberty (Lake Jackson, TX: The Foundati on for
Rati onal Economi cs and Educati on, 1983).
Frankl i n E. Payne, Jr., Biblical/ Medical Ethics (Mi l ford, MI : Mott
Medi a, 1985).
Frankl i n E. Payne, Making Biblical Detiwm (Escondi do, CA: Hosanna
House, 1989).
Charl es D. Provan, The Bible and Birth Control (Monongahel a, PA:
Zi mmer, 1989).
Suzanne M. Ri ni , Bgond Abortion: A Chronicle of Fetal Exp~”mentatwn
(Avon-by-the-Sea, NJ: Magni fi cat Press, 1988).
Barbara Seaman, l %e Doctork Case Against the Pill (Garden Ci ty, NY:
Doubl eday, 1980).
Thomas A. Shannon and Jo Ann Manfra, Law and Bioethics: T~s with
CommentaV on Mqor U. S. Court Deciswns (Ramsey, NJ: Paul i st Press,
1982).
Howard I . Shapi ro, The Birth Control Book (New York: Avon, 1977).
Beth Spri ng and Ed Larson, Euthanasia (Portl and, OR: Mul tnomah,
1988).
342 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
Joni Eareckson Tada, W#en I s It Right to Die: Suicide, Euthanasia, Su@ring,
Mer~ (Grand Rapi ds, MI : Zondervan, 1992).
* Mercedes Arzu Wi l son, Love and F&ility (Dunki rk, MD: Fami l y of the
Ameri cas, 1989).
Hi stor y
Phi l i ppe Ai r ?x and Georges Duby, eds., A i%sto~ of Priuate Lfe, 5 vol s.
(Cambri dge, MA: The Bel knap Press, 1989).
Jean-Marc Anoul i h, Moruieur Vincent (Pari s: Del ar ge Press, 1928).
Athanasi us, On tb I rwarnation (Crestwood, NY: St. Vl adi mi r’s Semi nary
Press, 1944).
Donal d Attwater, Ddwnq of the Saints updated and revi sed by Catheri ne
Ra ch el J oh n (L on don : Pen gu i n Books,1983).
Franci s Bacon, The Essays (New York: Pengui n Books, 1985).
J. A. and Ol i ve Banks, Fbninimn and Fami& Pthnning in Victorian Englund:
Studies in the L+ of Wmen (New York: Schocken Books, 1964).
Al fred J. Bannan and Achi l l es Edel enyi , Documenta~ Histo~ of Eastern
Europe (New York: Twayne Publ i shers, 1970).
James H. Bi l l i ngton, Fire in the Minds of Men: orip”ns of the Revolutionary
Faith (New York: Basi c Books, 1980).
Karl Bi ndi ng, The Release of th Destrudion cfLfeDevoid of V&ue (Santa
Ana, CA: Li fe Qual i ty, 1975).
Tj Bosgra, Abortion, the Bible, and the Church (Honol ul u, HI : Hawai i
Ri ght-Tb-Li fe Educati onal Foundati on, 1980).
John Boswel l , The Kindness q+ Strangem: T/ w Abandonnwnt ~Children in
W&tern Europe@om Late Antiqui~ to the Renaissance (New York: Pan-
theon Books, 1988).
Peter Brown, Soci e~ and the Ho@ in Late Antiqui~ (London: Faber and
Faber, 1982).
John Cal vi n, transl ated by Charl es Bi ngham, Caluint Comn-wntatis
(Grand Rapi ds, MI : Baker Book House, 1981).
F. F. Cartwri ght, A Social Histoy of Medicine (London: Longr nan
House, 1977).
Select Bibliographic Resources 343
Roger Car ti er , Passions of the Remuksance Vol . 3 of A Histo~ of Private LiJ e
(Cambri dge, MA: Bel knap Press, 1989).
J. Chadwi ck and W. N. Mann, eds., H@pocratic Wti ti ngs (London:
Pengui n Books, 1950).
Owen Chadwi ck, The Reformation (London: Pengui n Books, 1964).
Robert M. Crunden, Ministers of R~orm: Th Progressives’ Achievmt in
Amen”can Civilization, M89-1920 (New York: Basi c Books, 1982).
James S. Denni s, C’hn&ian Mtisions and Social Progress Vol umes I and I I
(Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel l , 1909).
Georges Duby, Revehztiom of the Medieval Wmld Vol . 2 of A Histmy of
private Lye (Cambri dge, MA: Bel knap Press, 1988).
Rev. Henry Oti s Dwi ght, Rev. H. Al l en Tupper and Rev. Edwi n
Munsel l Bl i ss, ‘i %e Enq@opedia of Missions (New York: Funk and
Wagnal l s, 1904).
El i sabeth El l i ot, A Chance to Die: lle L#e and Legacy of Amy Carmichael
(Ol d Tappan, NJ: Revel ], 1987).
Wi l l i am El l i s, J ournal of William Ellis (Tokyo: Tuttl e, 1827).
Mari an Faux, Roe v. WA: Th Untold Stoy of the Landmark Su@nu Court
Decfiion T4at Ma& Abortion Legal (New York: Macmi l l an, 1988).
Robi n Lane Fox, Pagau and Christhs (New York: Al fred A. Knopf,
1987).
Li nda Gordon, W-ni Body, Wmn3 Right: Birth Control in Am-ca
(New York: Pengui n Books, 1976).
Mi chael J. German, Abortion and the Ear@ Church (DowneFs Grove, I L:
I VP, 1982).
* George Grant, Third Tirw Around: Th History of tlw Pro-LiJ e Movement
from th First Centu~ to the Present (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth &
Hyatt, 1991).
I saac Tayl or Headl and, Sorm By-Products of Misswns (New York: Jenni ngs
and Graham, 1912).
* Paul Johnson, I ntellectuals (New York: Harper & Row, 1988).
Paul Johnson, Moo%rn Tirna: The Wmldfiom tb Twtia to the Nineties
(New York: HarperCol l i ns, 1983, 1991).
344 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
* John P. Koster, Tb At&t Syndrome (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth &
Hyatt, 1989).
Kenneth Scott Latourette, A HtitoT of Christiani~ (New York: Harper
Brothers, 1953).
J. B. Li ghtfoot and J. R. Harrner, eds., The Apostolic Fadws (Grand
Rapi ds, MI : Baker Book House, 1989).
Davi d Li vi ngston, Missionary Trauelr and Researches in Southern Afica
(New York: Engl and and Wi l son Publ i shers, 1952).
Abraham J. Mal herbe, Moral Exhortatwn: A Greco-Roman Sourcebook Vol .
4 of LibraT of Ear~ Christiuni~ (Phi l adel phi a, PA: The Westmi nster
Press, 1986).
Wi l l i am H. McNei l , Pk.gues and Peoples (London: Pengui n Books,
1985).
Wayne A. Meeks, ed., LibraT of llar~ Christian@, 8 vol s. (Phi l adel phi a,
PA: Westmi nster Press, 1987).
Wayne A. Meeks, The Moral Wmti of the First Christians Vol . 6 of Libra~
of Ea+ Chri.rtkni~ (Phi l adel phi a, PA: The Westmi nster Press, 1986).
Mi l ton Mel tzer, Rescue: The StoV of How Gentiles Saved J ews in the
Holocaust (New York: Harper & Row, 1988).
James C. Mohr, Abotiion in America (New York: Oxford Uni versi ty
Press, 1978).
Bernard N. Nathanson, Aborting Arneri2a (Garden Ci ty, NY: Doubl e-
day, 1979).
Phi l i p Schaff, ed., A Select Libra~ of the Nicene and Post-Ntime Fdhezs of
the Christian Church, 14 VOI S. (Grand Rapi ds, MI : Wm. B. Eerd-
mans, 1983).
Phi l i p Schaff and Henry Wace, eds., A Select LibraT of the Nicene and
Post-Nicene FhthEYs of th Christtin Church: Second Series, 13 vol s. (Grand
Rapi ds, MI : Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983).
Herbert SChl ossberg, I dols for Destruction (Nashvi l l e, TN: Thomas
Nel son, 1983).
END NOTES
Acknowl edgments
1. “Through di ffi cul ti es to honors.”
2. Hi l ai re Bel l oc, The Path to Ronu (New York: Pengui n Books, 1958), p. 91.
Preface to the Second Edi ti on — Grand Evasi ons
1. “Here the devi l shows hi msel f.”
2. Hi l ai re Bel l oc, Notes of a Curmudgeon (London: Al bri ght’s Ltd., 1956), p. 11.
3. Robert Coul anai re, TheM@sp andMys.@of I nterpersonal Relationships: A Sociology
(London: Hartwel l & Sons, 1977), p. 34.
4. I bid., p. 35.
5. I nsi der, May 1988.
6. I bid.
7. I bid.
8. Undated correspondence i n the author’s fi l es.
9. Tri stan Gyl berd, Collected Urse (Humbl e, TX: Chri sti an Worl dvi ew, 1984), p. 45.
I ntroducti on – Ad Vi tum
1. “A defense of l i fe.’
2. Hi l ai re Bel l oc, The Path to Rome (New York: Pengui n Books, 1958), p. 66.
3. Al though books l i ke Davi d Kennedy’s Birth Control in America: The Career of
Margaret Sanger (New York: Yal e Uni versi ty Press, 1?70), Li nda Gordon’s
Wmi Body, Wren’s Right: A So&l History of Birth Control in Ameriia (New
York: Pengui n Books, 1974), and El asaA Drogi n’s Margaret Sanger: Father of
Modem Socieiy (New Hope, KY: CUL Publ i cati ons, 1979, 1986) have done a
good deaJ of prel i mi nary or speci al i zed anal ysi s, but each fai l s to deal wi th
Pl anned Parenthood comprehensi vel y. Si nce the publ i cati on of the fi rst edi ti on
of thi s book, Dougl as R. Scott?s Bad Choices: A Look I nside Planned Parenthood
(Franti l n, TN: Legacy Communi cati ons, 1992), Robert Marshal l and Charl es
Donovan’s Blessed Are the Barren: The Social Policy of Planned Parenthood {San Fran-
ci sco: I gnati us Press, 1991), and James Sedl ak’s Parent Power: How Parents Can
Gain Control of the School Systems that Edusa.k Th-4r Children (Poughkeepsi e, NY:
STOPP, 1992) have al l appeared, focusi ng on one aspect or another of Pl anned
Parenthood’s broad agenda. Thi s book has onl y mi ni mal overl ap wi th these ex-
cel l ent resources.
4. See Faye Wattl eton, How to Tdk to YmT Child About Sexuality (Garden Ci ty, NJ:
Doubl eday and Company, 1986), p. i v.
345
346 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
5. See Abraham Stone and Norman E. Hi mes, Planned Parmthood: A Pradical Guidz
to Birth Control Methods (New York: Col l i er Books, 1951, 1965).
6. Throughout thi s book when I speak of Pl anned Parenthood, I am speaki ng i n
general terms – of the movement – and not of every si ngl e i ndi vi dual affi l i ate,
cl i ni c, or chapter. I n order to determi ne whi ch pol i ci es, practi ces, pri nci pl es,
and procedures are normati ve for the movement, I l ooked for publ i shed i nfor-
mati on that the nati onal organi zati on had rel eased to al l the affdi ates, or for
trends common to several affi l i ates.
7. Al though there can be no guarantees i n thi s very l i ti gi ous soci ety, every effort
has been made to ensure that no i ndi vi dual s have been i sol ated, ri di cul ed,
sl andered, l i bel ed, or deni grated i n any way, shape, or form i n thi s book. Addi -
ti onal l y, several researchers and l egal counsel ors have poured over the text and
the documentati on to ensure both the i ntegri ty of the work and the authenti ci ty
of i ts cl ai ms. The purpose of Grand I h.riom i s very si mpl y to survey the known
data from the Pl anned Parenthood movement and then to appl y Bi bl i cal pri nci -
pl es to the i nterpretati on of that data. I t i s not an attempt to i nfl uence the fl ow
of i nterstate commerce or the devel opment of any parti cul ar judi ci al or
l e@sl ati ve acti on.
8. Many of the most damni ng documents we were compel l ed – for l egal reasons–
to el i mi nate from our study.
9. G. K. Chesterton, What’s Wrong With the Wmld (New York: Dodd, Mead, and
Company, 1910), p. 1.
10. Al eksandr I . Sol zheni tsyn, A Wmld Split Apart (New York: Harper and Row,
1978), pp. 47-49.
11. Franci s A. Schaeffer, A Chriktian Manijesto (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books,
1981), p. 24.
12. See Joseph Fl etcher, Situution Ethia: The New Morali~ (Phi l adel phi a: The West-
mi nster Press, 1966).
Chapter 1 – I n the Heat of the Fi ght
1. Quoted i n, George J. Marl i n, et al ., edi tors, The @otabk Chesterton (Garden
Ci ty, NY: I mage Books, 1987), p. 34.
2. “A cause for war.”
3. Bel l oc, p. 58.
4. Li ke al l the other stori es, i l l ustrati ons, and vi gnettes i n thi s book, thi s one i s en-
ti rel y factual . Certai n personal , geographi cal , and archi tectural al terati ons
have been symbol i cal l y al tered i n order to protect i nnocent parti es from l egal
l i abi l i ty and/or harassment. But otherwi se, the events and conversati ons are
absol utel y accurate.
5. The cl i ni c was cl earl y a part of the generi c Pl anned Parenthood movement. I ts
medi a center was named for Pl anned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger,
i ts l obby was stocked wi th Pl anned Parenthood l i terature, and i ts board parti ci -
pated in a number of l egal , professi onal , and associ ati onal Pl anned Parenthood
umbrel l a groups.
6. Proverbs 8:35-36; Matthew 16:25.
7. Davi d Funderburg, “We Must Cry Out for the Young” (Houston: March
Houston for Li fe, 1986).
8. Psal m 73:1-28.
9. Matt Scudder i s a fi cti onal detecti ve i n Lawrence Bl ock’s seri es of books pub-
l i shed by Arbor House i n hardback and by Pocket Books i n paperback.
End Notes 347
10. Eccl esi astes 11:6.
11. Though i t was fai rl y l ate, I was abl e to get at l east a cursory understandi ng of
the ci ty’s di sposal si tuati on by contacti ng several twenty-four hour operati ons.
I t was not a comprehensi ve survey, but i t was qui te enl i ghteni ng.
12. Genesi s 3:24; Exodus 14:26-35.
13. Genesi s 4:9-16.
14. Hebrews 4:1-11.
15. Psal m 61:1-4.
16. Psal m 11:3.
17. Remans 8:19-22.
18. Romarss 3:9-24.
19. 1 Cori nthi ans 12:4-7.
20. Hebrews 10:24-25.
21. John 3:20.
22. Psal m 38:20.
23. Psal m 109:4.
24. Proverbs 24:11-12.
25. Ezeki el 3:17-19.
26. 2 Cori nthi ans 5:20.
27. Dani el 5:25.
28. I sai ah 6:5.
29. I sai ah 6:8.
30. Remans 3:13; Revel ati on 9:21.
31. Proverbs 8:35-36.
32. Revel ati on 6:10.
33. Psal m 10:2.
34. Agai n, the onl y operati ons I was abl e to contact were al l -ni ght l abs and dk.posal
waste compani es, but wi th the scant i nformati on I was abl e to cul l from them, I
was abl e to accuratel y extrapol ate the facts.
35. 2 Chroni cl es 28:3; I sai ah 30:33; Jeremi ah 7:30-33.
36. Mark 5:1-5.
37. Psal m 17:9-12.
Chapter 2 — Al l That Gl i tters
1. “Behol d the si gn; exami ne the evi dence.”
2. Hi l ai re Bel l oc, The Servile State (London: T.N. Foul i s, 1913), p.148.
3. Curt Young, The Least of These (Chi cago: Moody Press, 1984), p. 30.
4. LeBeth Myers, Wwn Around the Globe: I nternational Status Report (London:
Guyon Soci al Resource Center, 1986), p. 137.
5. Debbi e Tayl or, et al ., Wmez: A Wwbi Repoti (New Yor k: Oxfor d Uni ver si ty
Press, 1985), p. 10; and Paul B. Fowl er, A bortion: Toward an Evangelical Conseruus
(Portl and: Mul tnomah Press, 1987), p. 11.
6. Frederi ck S. Jatfe, Barbara L. Li ndhei m, and Phi l i p R. Lee, Abortion Politics:
Private Morali~ and Public Poliiy (New York: McGraw-Hi l l , 1981), p. 7.
7. Numbers 13:33.
8. ‘Cel ebrati ng Seventy Years of Servi ce,”
1986 Annual Report, Pl anned Parent-
hood Federati on of Ameri ca, pp. 23, 32.
9. “Seventy Years of Fami l y Pl anni ng i n Ameri ca: A Chronol ogy of Major
Events,” Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of Ameri ca, pp. 3, 8.
348 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
10. The myth persi sts that Margaret Sanger, Pl anned Parenthood’s founder, was a
trai ned “publ i c heal th nurse” (as the 1986 Pl anned Parenthood Annual Report
puts i t), but that i s patentl y untrue. See Madel i ne Gray, Margaret Sanger: A
Biography of the Chumpion of Birth Control (New York: Ri chard Marek Publ i shers,
1979), p. 326.
11. “Cel ebrati ng,’ p. 14.
12. “Servi ng Human Needs, Preservi ng Human Ri ghts,” 1983 Annual Report,
Pl anned Parenthood Foundati on of Ameri ca, p. i i .
13. Cel ebrati ng,” p. 32,
14. I bid.
15. Pl anned Parenthood Affi l i ates, Chapters, and State Publ i c Affai rs Offi ces
Di rectory, 1984.
16. I bid.
17. “Cel ebrati ng,” pp. 22-23.
18. I bid., pp. 9, 12.
19. I bid. , pp. 9-11.
20. I bid. , pp. 18-19, 25-27.
21. I bid., pp. 9-10.
22. ‘Servi ng,” p. 4.
23. “Cel ebrati ng,” p. 22.
24. I bid., pp. 10, 21, 27.
25. I bid., p. 24.
26. “Servi ng: pp. 14-16.
27. I bid., pp. 5-6.
28. Wel ebrati ng~ pp. 3, 23.
29. I bid. , p. 13.
30. I bid., pp. 8-9.
31. I bid. , pp. 16, 23.
32. I bid., p, 9.
33. “Serving,” p. 13.
34. A ful l -page adverti sement pl aced i n the New Ymk Times and several other news-
papers around the country duri ng 1984 by Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of
Ameri ca stated, “We . . . have spent the better part of thi s century supporti ng
and fi ghti ng for everyone’s freedom to make thei r own deci si ons about havi ng
chi l dren. Wi thout government i nterference.” See al so Pkmned Parenthood Rsview
2:4 (Wi nter 1982).
35. Throughout thi s chapter and then beyond i nto the remai nder of thi s book, the
term illusion i s used both i n a practi cal and a theol ogi cal sense: contrary to the
facts of the Bi bl e and contrary to the created order.
36. I n 1969 Pl anned Parenthood Presi dent Al an Guttmacher asserted that “eventu-
al l y coerci on may become necessary.” I t was shortl y thereafter that hi s head of
research, Frederi ck Ja&e, i ssued a now i nfi u-nous memo enti tl ed, “Exampl es of
Proposed Measures to Reduce U.S. Ferti l i ty.” See Ri chard D. Gl asow% anal y-
si s i n “I deol ogy Compel s Fervi d PPFA Aborti on Advocacy,” National Right to
L@e News (March 28, 1985), p. 5.
37. I bid.
38. I bid.
39. I bid.
40. See Fr eder i ck S. JafFe, “Acti vi ti es Rel evant to the Study of Popul ati on Pol i cy
for the U.S. ~ Memorandum to Bernard Berel son, March 11, 1969, quoted i n
Fami b Pkmning Perspectives speci al suppl ement no. 1129, 10-70/30, p. i x.
End Notes 349
41. See Stephen Jay Goul d, The Mi.wnasure of Man (New York: W.W. Norton and
Company, 1981), especi sdl y pages 335-336; and Char l es Val enza, W%.S
Margaret Sanger a Raci st?” Fami~ Planning Perspectives 17:1 (January/Febsuary
1985), pp. 44-45.
42. “I PPF:40~ I nternati oard Pl anned Parenthood Federati on, London, Annual
Report 1991, pp. 4-6.
43. I n Guttmacher’s 1969 remarks, he suggested that coerci ve measures woul d
l i kel y be necessary fi rst i n “I ndi a and Chi na.” Agai n, see Gl asow’s anal ysi s i n
“I deol ogy Compel s Fervi d PPFA Aborti on Advocacy.’ Al though di rect i nsti -
tuti onal causal i ty may be di ffi cul t to prove, di rect generi c causal i ty i s i ndi sputabl e.
44. See Stephen Mosher’s i mportant studi es on the Chi nese bi rth control atroci ti es,
Broken Earth (New York: Free Press, 1983), and J ourng I nto the Forbid&n China
(New York: Free Press, 1985). Al so see Mi chael Wei sskopf’s arti cl es that fi rst
appeared i n the Wmhington Post and then were wi del y repri nted: “Aborti on
Pol i cy Tears at Chi na’s Soci ety” (January 7, 1985), and “Chi na’s Bi rth Pol i cy
Dri ves Some to Ki l l Baby Gi rl s” (January 14, 1985).
45. Remarks made at the Pl anned Pammthood-sponsored “Hori zons i n Reproducti ve
Heal th Conference” at the l uxuri ous Hotel del Coronado resort i n San Di ego i n
1985. See Paul L. Bai l ’s anal ysi s i n “Pl anned Parenthood Speakers Support Red
Chi nese Forced Aborti on,” Ameri can Li fe Lobby I ssues, June 1985.
%. Dougl as Johnson, “New Battl e Looms Over U.S. Ai d for U.N. Agency Sup-
pmti ng Coer ced Aborti on; National Right to Lye News (May 1, 1986), p. 1; and
Planned Parentwood Review 5:1 (Wi nter 1984/85).
47. Report to donors, I nternati onal Pl anned Parenthood Federati on, October 1983.
48. See, for exampl e, Newsweek Magazirds extensi ve coverage: March 29, 1982;
Jul y 12, 1982; Apri l 30,1984.
49. See Wi l l i am M. ORei l l y, The Deadly Neo-Coloniialim (Washi ngton, DC:
Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1986); Planned Parenthood Review 2:4 (Wi nter 1982),
p. 16; “The Facts About I PPF~ (The Human Li fe Center, Uni versi ty of
Steubenvi l l e, Steubenvi l l e, Ohi o); and “ Ser vi ng: Per for mance of Pr ojects
Funded by Fami l y Pl anni ng I nternati onal Assi stance i n 1985,” Pl anned Parent-
hood Federati on of Ameri ca. Agai n, the i ssue of di rect causal i ty can be re-
sol ved onl y on the generi c l evel .
50. Repori of the Wwking Group on the promotion of Fami~ Pl anni ng as a Basic Human
Right, I nternati onal Pl anned Parenthood Federati on, London, 1984, pp. 21-23;
and Donal d P. Warwi ck, Bitter Pills: Population Polinis and Their Zmpkmentution in
Eight Developing Countries (London: Cambri dge Uni versi ty Press, 1982), espe-
ci al l y p. 64.
51. I n Pkzruwd Parersthood of Central Missouri” v. Danfotth (1976), the U.S. Supreme
Court rul ed that parental consent was unconsti tuti onal .
52. I n the sasne deci si on, the Supreme Court uphel d Pl anned Parenthood’s conten-
ti on that to requi re the consent of a husband before hi s wi fe coul d undergo an
aborti on was a vi ol ati on of the mythi cal “ri ght to pri vacy.”
53. I n 1986, Pl anned Parenthood affi l i ates i n several states i ncl udi ng Ohi o, Wash-
i ngton, and New Jersey won i njuncti ons and restrai ni ng orders that “sharpl y
restri cted” the acti vi ti es of pro-l i fe protectors and i n several i nstances barred
thei r dksent al together. See “Cel ebrati ng: pp. 19-21.
54. I n Pkwmd Parenthood v. Kempiners (1981), a federal di stri ct court struck down an
I l l i noi s l aw that provi ded funds to agenci es that offer assi stance to pregnant
women but that do not refer or counsel for aborti on. I n other cases across the
country, i n Fort Worth, San Franci sco, Fargo, and Los Angel es, Pl anned
Parenthood has hounded and harassed i nsti tuti ons and servi ces that remai n
recal ci trant on the dogmas of bi rth control , aborti on, and fami l y l i mi tati on. See
the arti cl es by Marl ene J. Perri n i n USA Today, Jul y 23, 1986.
350 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
Bart Li gon, Legal Restraints: Professional Equity and the Con.wrvatiue Conscience in the
1980s (New Orl eans: St. Augusti ne Revi ew Press, 1986), pp. 19-23.
I n the Ci ~ of Akron v. Akron (%ctmfor Reproductive Health (1983), Pl anned Parent-
hood ti l ed an ami cus bri ef argui ng successfi dl y that ci ty ordi nances, state restri c-
ti ons, and other ofi ci al regul ati ons of the aborti on trade were unconsti tuti onal .
Atlanta J oumal-Constitutwn, November 1, 1992.
Obvi ousl y, Pl anned Parenthood has one of the most comprehensi ve l egal and
judi ci al programs in the country. See “Cel ebrati ng,’ p. 27, and “Serving,” p. 13.
Davi d C. Reardon, Aborted Wm: Siiact No More (Westchester, I L: Crossway
Books, 1987), p. 28.
I bid. , p. 19.
I bid.
I bid.
I bid.
I bid.
I bid.
I bid.
“Servi ng Human Need,” Piunned Parmthood Review 3:4 (Wi nter 1983/84), pp. 2,
13-14. “I t Makes Sense,” Pl anned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas,
p. 4.
See Li nda Gordon, Wiwnunk Body, Winnan’s Right: A Social HistoV of Birth Control
in Ametiia (New York: Pengui n Books, 1974); and El asah Drogi n, Margaret
Sarzger: Father of Modem Society (New Hope, KY: CUL Publ i cati ons, 1986).
See, for i nstance, Margaret Sangeti s arti cl es i n The Birth Control Review, May
1919; May 1923; October 1926; and Apri l 1932.
Margaret Sanger, “Pl an for Peace; Birth Control Review 16:4 (Apri l 1932).
Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Ci vi l i zatwn (New York: Brentano’s, I nc., 1922),
pp. 105-123.
I bid., p. 108.
I bid., p. 114.
I bid., p. 115.
I bid.; pp. 116-117.
See Gor don, pp. 329-355; Drogi n, pp. 17-29; “Ethni c Group and Wel fare
Statutes of Women Steri l i zed i n Federal l y Funded Fami l y Pl anni ng Programs,’
Fami~Ptknning Perspectives 6:4 (Fal l 1974); and Low I ;omeTmk Fo7ce Report,
‘Pl anned Parenthood: Objecti ve 2000,” Pl anned Parenthood of Houston and
Southeast Texas, January 5, 1987.
Margaret Sanger, “Bi rth Control ,’ The Birth Contro[ Review, May 1919.
See Erma C. Craven’s eye-openi ng essay, “Aborti on, Poverty, and Bl ack
Genoci de,” i n Thomas Hi l ger and Denni s J. Horan, Abortion and Socihl J ustice
(New York: Al thea Books, 1981).
See Ti m Zentl er, for Pl anned Parenthood of Humbol dt County, quoted i n The
Union, June 14, 1983; Martha Burt, Public Costs for Tmmsge Childbeara”ng, Center
for Popul ati on Opti ons, Washi ngton, DC, 1986; and “Servi ng Human Need,’
Pcknned Parenthood Review 3:4 (Wi nter 1983).
See the l etter from Pl anned Parenthood of Northeastern I ndi ana board mem-
ber Len Gol dstei n to the Fort W~neJ oumal-Gzzette, November 5, 1987.
Pivot of Civilization, p. 96.
JafTe, p. i x.
I bid.
“Pl anned Parenthood” brochure from Pl auned Parenthood of Houston and
Southeast Texas, 1986, p. 2.
End Notes 351
85. “Cel ebrati ng,” p. 32. Thi s i s one of the reasons why accumul ati ng accurate data
and stati sti cs on Pl anned Parenthood i s so di ffi cul t, and why comprehensi ve i n-
formati on about i ts acti vi ti es and fundi ng sources i s so easy to conceal .
86. What el se can you cal l the worl d’s number one di spenser of aborti on and bi rth
control devi ces than a “fami l y banni ng” organi zati on? See Franky Schaeffer,
A TimeforAng~: The Myth ofNeutrali~ (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1982),
p. 99.
87. See Chapter 7. Al though most of the Pl anned Parenthood agenci es meet the
l egal I RS standards for non-profi t status – putti ng them on a par wi th, for i n-
stance, a l ocal church — they accrue to themsel ves vast, vast sums of money.
Legal desi gnati ons asi de, by any other standard, Pl anned Parenthood’s abor-
ti on and contracepti ve i ndustry i s phenomenal l y profi tabl e. “Non-profi t” i s thus
very much i n questi on as wel l .
88. Robert Ruff, Aborting Planned Parenthood (Houston: New Vi si on Books, 1988).
The book i s avai l abl e from Li fe Advocates, 4848 Gui ton, Sui te 209, Houston,
TX 77027 or from New Vi si on Books, P.O. Box 920970 -A16, Houston, TX
77018.
89. I bid.
90. Let me note as a matter of cl ari ty that Pl anned Parenthood i s onl y one of nearl y
fi ve thousand cl i ni cs, hospi tal s, and other heal th servi ce provi ders that recei ve
Tkl e X fundi ng. But as i n the Ti tl e V, Ti tl e XX, Ti tl e XI X, and al l the other
federal appropri ati ons bi l l s menti oned i n thi s chapter, Pl anned Parenthood i s
the si ngl e l argest reci pi ent i n any and al l of i ts sundty i ncarnati ons. Addi ti ontdl y,
we shoul d note that i n onl y fourteen states i n the Uni ted States, and about
seventy-si x forei gn countri es, i t i s actual l y l egal for Pl anned Parenthood to
spend i ts tax bequest on aborti ons or aborti on-rel ated acti vi ti es. On thi s poi nt,
Franky Schaeffer’s comments from hi s book A Time for Anger me i nstructi ve:
‘Pl anned Parenthood’s most consi stent cl ai m i s that i t does not use federal
money to fund aborti on. Thi s i s probabl y techni cal l y true. But the fami l y pl an-
ni ng centers of Pl anned Parenthood operate i n conjuncti on wi th medi cal
cl i ni cs, which do perform aborti ons. Pl anned Parenthood’s propaganda hel ps to
convi nce women to have aborti ons, so thei r cl ai m i s rather l i ke a pi mp sayi ng
he has nothi ng to do wi th prosti tuti on” (p. 99).
91. Howard Phi l l i ps, The Next Four Yars: A Vision of l’ictoty (Frankl i n, TN: Adroi t
Press, 1992), pp. 24, 55-67.
92. I bsii.
93. I bid.
94. Robert G. Marshal l , School Birth Control: New Promi se or Old Problzm (Stafford,
VA: Ameri can Li fe League, 1986), p. 1.
95. Tal on Gartrel l , Abortion and the Stutes: A Case Agaimt the T~hnical Elimination of
Federal J urisdiction and Roe vs. W& (Manassas, VA: Li fe Work Publ i cati ons,
1987), p. 3.
96. Al an Guttmacher I nsti tute, Zssua i n Bt+f 4:1 (March 1984).
97. I bid.
98. I bid.
99. I bid.
100. I bid.
101. I bid.
102. Gartrel l , p. 12.
103. I bid., p. 12.
104. I bid., p. 2.
105. “Cel ebrati ng; pp. 14-16; Gartrel l , pp. 2-4; and Wi l l i am M. ORei l l ey, The
Dead~ Neo-Coloniidism (Washi ngton, DC: Human Li fe I nternati onal , 1986).
352 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123,
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
“Cel ebrati ng: pp. 2-3.
See Ruff, pp. 9-34; and Stan Weed, “Curbi ng Bi rths, Not Pregnanci es,” Wd/
Street J ournal, October 14, 1986.
J. C. Wi l ke, Abortion: @edwns and Answers (Ci nci nnati : Hayes Publ i shi ng Co.,
1985), pp. 90-131.
Sara E. Ri x ed., The Atian Wmn 1987-88: A Report in Depth (New Yor k :
W. W. Norton and Co., 1987), p. 251.
Loui s Harri s and Associ ates, Ameri~an T- Speak: Sex, Myths, TV and Birth Con-
trol (New York: Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of Ameri ca, 1986), p. 19.
Ri x, p. 254.
Davi d Chi l ton, Powsr in the Blood: A Chrsktian Response to AI DS (Brentwood, TN:
Wol gemuth & Hyatt Publ i shers, 1987), p. 50.
See Deborah Mai ne, “Does Aborti on AKect Later Pregnanci es?” Fmi~P[an-
m“ng Perspectives 11:2 (March/Apri I 1979), pp. 98-101; Kevi n Hume, M. D., Cancer
ond the Pill: Five Studtis and a Review of Literature (Stafford, VA: Anastasi a
Books, 1985); Robert G. Marshal l , “A Scandal of Col l usi on,” A. L. L. Aboui
I ssues, Apri l , 1986, pp. 6-7; and El l en Grant, M. D., The Bitter Pill: How &afe is
.& Pq%ct Contraaptive? (London: El m Tree Books, 1985).
See Gray, pp. 405, 443; and Gordon, pp. 249-300.
Mark D. Hayward and Juni chi Yagi , “Contracepti ve Fai l ure i n the Uni ted
States: Esti mates from the 1982 Nati onal Survey of Fami l y Growth,’ Farni @
Runni ng Perspectives 18:5 (September/October 1986), tabl e 5; and Mel vi n Zel ni k,
Mi chael A. Koeni g, and Ki m. J. Young, “Sources of Prescri pti on Contracep-
ti ves and Subsequent Pregnancy Among Young Women,” Fam”~ Phnning
Perspective 16:1 (January/February 1984), pp. 6-13; and Ruff, pp. 66ff.
I btd.
I bid.
I bid.
I bid.
These rates were deri ved by Robert Ruff usi ng the bi nomi al probabi l i ty for-
mul a to extrapol ate Pl anned Parenthood’s publ i shed l i rst-year fai l ure rates over
extended i nterval s. See Ruff, pp. 66ff.
I bid.
I bid.
I bid.
Wel ebrati ng~ pp. 9-10, 22-23, 2426; and Wattl eton, pp. 87-90, 182-87.
See Pl anned Parenthood publ i cati ons for youth such as The Great Orgasm Robbq
and Wi o Changed the Combinatwn? (Denver: Rocky Mountai n Pl anned Parent-
hood, 1977, 1979).
Ruff, p. 88.
I bid., p. 89.
Chi l ton, p. 51.
Hayward and Yagi , tabl e fi ve.
Robert A. Hatcher, M. D., ed., Contraceptive T~hnology 1986-1987, 13th Revi sed
Edki on (New York: I rvi ngton Publ i shers, 1986), pp. 139ff.
Ruff, p. 89.
“Cel ebrati ng,” pp. 8-13.
Onl y thi rty-two percent of teens who have had no sex educati on are sexual l y
acti ve, compared to forty-si x percent of those who have had “comprehensi ve”
sex educati on courses. See Harri s, p. 6; al so see Ruff, p. 15.
Harri s, p. 7; al so see Wi l l i am Mar;i gl i o and Frank L. ‘Mott, “The I mpact of
Sex Educati on on Sexual Acti vi ty, Contracepti ve Use and Premari tal Pregnancy
Among Ameri can Teenagers,
=
Fami~Planning Perspectives 18:4 (Jul y/August
1986); and Ruff, p. 16.
End Notes 353
135. “The Effects of Sex Educati on on Adol escent Behavi or,” Fami~Planning Perspec-
tives 18:4 (Jul y/August 1986), pp. 162-169.
136. See Jacquel i ne R. Kasun, “Teenage Pregnancy: Medi a Effects Versus Facts,’
Ameri can Li fe League, 1986; Fred Gl ahe and Joseph Peden, The Anwrican Fam-
i~ and tb State (San Franci sco: Paci fi c I nsti tute for Publ i c Pol i cy Research,
1986); “El even Mi l l i on Teenagers: What Can Be Done About the Epi demi c of
Adol escent Pregnancy i n the Uni ted States?: Pl anned Parenthood Federati on
of Ameri ca, 1976; and Wattl eton, pp. 3-4, 60, 86.
137. See, for exampl e, the tremendous recepti on that al ternati ve programs for the
publ i c school s have recei ved: l i ke Sex Respect (Respect, I nc., P.O. Box 349,
Bradl ey, I L 60915) and Why Wit? (Josh McDowel l Mi ni stry, P.O. Box 1000,
Dal l as, TX 75221); al so note the success of al ternati ve books l i ke Conni e
Marshner’s Decent Exposure (Brentwood, TN: Wol gemuth & Hyatt Publ i shers,
1988) and Josh McDowel l ’s How to Help Your Child Say aNoz to Sexusd Pressure
(Waco, TX: Word Book s , 1986).
138. Roberta Wei ner, ed., Teen Pregnamy: I mpast on the schools (Al exandri a, VA
Capi tol Publ i cati ons, 1987), p. 17.
139. I bid., pp. 17, 24.
140. Wendy Bal dwi n, Adolsrcent Pregnancy and Childbearing Rates, Trends, and Research
Findings from the CPR-NI CHD (Bethesda, MD: Demographi c and Behavi oral
Sci ence Branch, NI CHD, 1985), p. 5.
141. Wei ner, p. 10.
142, Harri s, pp. 8, 18, 60; Ruff, p. 48; and Marsi gl i o and Mott, p. 141.
143. Marshner, p. 42.
144. “Cel ebrati ng,” pp. 3, 18-21; al so see Al an F. Guttmacher, Pregnaruy, Birth, and
Fami@Planning (New York: Si gnet, 1973), pp. 163-75; and Al an F. Guttmacher
and I rwi n H. Kai ser, Pregnarcq Birth, and Fami~Planning (New York: Si gnet,
1986), pp. 203-20; 463-64.
145. See the testi mony of severaf veterans of both the back al l ey and Pl anned
Parenthood i n John T. Wi l son’s Abortion and Repentance (Los Angel es: Advocates
for Li fe Press, 1979), pp. 19-23, 36-39, 44-46.
146. See Ruff, pp. 36-42.
147. The VPT Consent Form for Pl anned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast
Texas speaks of the “i nherent ri sks” i n aborti on procedures. The Minor Consent to
Abortion Form i nforms the appl i cant that “compl i cati ons coul d devel op that
mi ght requi re hospi tal i zati on” and speaks of “major compl i cati ons” and “severe
consequences” of aborti on.
148. Not al l aborti ons are l egal , of course. I n fact, accordi ng to a number of studi es,
cri mi nal and sel f-i nfl i cted aborti ons di d not decrease fol l owi ng l i beral i zati on of
aborti on statutes. See L. Hul dl , “Outcome of Pregnancy When Legal Aborti on
i s Readi l y Avai l abl e,” Lancet, March 2, 1968, pp. 467-468; and Thomas W.
Hi l gers and Denni s Horan, Abortion and Social J ostice (New York: Sheed and
Ward, 1972).
149. See Thomas W. Hi l gers, Denni s Horan, and Davi d Mal l , ed., New Perspectives
on Human Abortion (Frederi ck, MD: Afethei a Books, 1981), pp. 69-150; Jeff Lane
Hendey, The Zero People (Ann Arbor, MI : Servant Books, 1983), pp. 97-105;
and Susan M. Stanford and Davi d Hazard, Will I Cry Twrrow? (Ol d Tappan,
NJ: Fl emi ng H. Revel l Co., 1986); al so see George Grant, The Dispossessed:
Hopelessness in Anwrica (Westchester, I L: Crossway Books, 1986), pp. 74-75; and
Wl l ke, pp. 90-131.
150. Th New American, January 20, 1986.
354 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
151. G. T. Burkman, et al ., “Cul ture and Treatment Resul ts i n Endometri ti s Fol -
l owi ng El ecti ve Aborti on,’ A~ian ]ourncd of Obstetrics and Gynecology 128:5
(1977) pp. 556-599.
152. C. Gassner and C. Bal l ard, ‘Emergency Medi ci ne After Aborti on Abscess,”
Amerkan J ournal of Obstetrics and Gynecol o~, 128:4 (1977), p. 716.
153. I bid. , p. 183.
154. I bid.
155. D. Tnchopoul os, et al., “I nduced Aborti on and Secondary I nferti l i ty; Bri ti sh
J ournal OB/ GYN 83 (August 1976) pp. 645-650.
156. K. A. Stafl worthy, et al ., “Legal Aborti on: A Cri ti cal Assessment of i ts Ri sks,”
Zl e Lancet, December 4, 1971.
157. Ameri can Associ ati on of Bl ood Banks and The Ameri can Red Cross, “Ci rcul ar
I nformati on,” 1984, p. 6.
158. W. Cates, et al ., ‘Thromboembol i sm and Aborti on,” AnwriianJ ournal of Obstetrics
and G%ecolo~ 132:4 p. 169, quoted i n R. L. Turner, Complications and Conse-
quences of Abortion (Los Angel es: Advocates for Li fe Press, 1983), p. 4.
159. L. Duenhoel ter and B. Grant, “Compl i cati ons Fol l owi ng Prostagl andi n F-2A
I nduced Mi dtri mester Aborti on,” Amen”can J ournal of Obstetrks and Gyneso[ogy,
vol . 146, quoted i n Turner, p. 5.
160. Di rect causal i ty i s di ffi cul t to prove, but no other si ngl e factor has affected the
heal th ca~ worl d to separate men and women other than aborti on. Even the
changi ng shape of the workforce to i ncl ude more women has been neutral i zed
as a factor i n costs by group heal th i nsurance stabi l i zati on.
161. Jul i a Wi ttl eson, The Feminization of Poverty (Boston: Hol y Cross Press, 1983),
p. 81.
162. “Factsheet: Pl anned Parenthood,” Nati onal Ri ght to Li fe, 1986; see al so Bri ef
for Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of Ameri ca, “Arni cus Curi ae,” Thombwgh v.
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecol ogy, Docket number 84-495, U.S.
Supreme Court, August 31, 1985; and ‘Pl anned Parenthood Takes a Fi ghti ng
Stand,” New Ymk Tinws, February 3, 1978.
163. Omni Magazine, October 1991.
164. New Ywk Obsmoer, May 16, 1991.
165. I bid.
166. Lawrence Lader, RU-486: The Pill that Could End the Abortion WWS and Why
Ameriian Wmn Don’t Have I t (New York: Addi son Wesl ey, 1991), p. 188.
167. I bid.
168. From an undated fund-rai si ng l etter.
169. Wmhington Post, May 14, 1991.
170. Lader, p. 19.
171. I bid., p. 20.
172. The Ameriian Spectator, October 1989.
173. American Druggist, August 1991.
174. I bid.
175. RU-486: A Divmsion Attempt From the Health Minister, I nternati onal I nqui ry
Commi ssi on on RU-486, 1990.
176. I bzk!
177. I bid.
178. I bid.
~ 79. Le Figaro, May 17, 1991.
180. I bid.
181. I bid.
182. Le Figaro, Jube 2, 1991.
End Notes 355
183. I bid.
184, See Jani ce Raymond, Renate Kl ei n, and Lynette Dumbl e, R U-486: Misconcep-
tions, Myths, and Morals (Cambri dge, MA: I nsti tute on Women and Technol ogy,
1991); and George Grant, The Quick and the Dead: R U-486 and the New Chemical
W@are Against Ybur Fami l y (Wheaton, I L: Crossway Books, 1991), pp. 19-34,
49-58.
185. The Atnerkan Sp.m%tor, October , 198?.
186. I bid.
187. “I PPF:40; p. 11.
188. I bid.
189. I bid.
190. James L. Gunn, J ournalism and Activism (New York: The Dawl i ng Press, 1977),
p. 183.
191, One of the fi ve general goal s of Pl anned Parenthood i s “to combat the worl d
popul ati on cri si s by hel pi ng to bri ng about a popul ati on of stabl e si ze i n an op-
ti mum envi ronment i n the Uni ted States,” Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of
.kneri ca, Feahation Declaration of Princ+les, 1980, p. 12; al so see Jul i an L. Si mon,
i % Ultimati Resource (Pri nceton, NJ: Pri nceton Uni versi ty Press, 1981), pp.
326-331.
192. See Jul i an L. Si mon and Herman Kahr, ed., The Resourcqtid Earth: A Response to
Global 2000 (Oxford: Basi l Bl ackwel l , 1984); Rousas J. Rushdoony, The Myth of
Ouer-Population (Tyl er, TX: Thoburn Press, 1969); Frances Moore Lappe and
Joseph Col l i ns, Wwid Hungm: Tmlve Myths (New York: Grove Press, 1986);
Wi l l i am Byron, ed., The Causes of WwldHunger (New York: Paul i st Press, 1982);
and Cl ai re Chambers, The Siecus Circle: A Humanist Revolution (Boston: Western
I sl ands, 1977); al so see Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp. 450-465; Hensl ey, pp.
33-41; and Si mod, pp. 159-288.
193. See Guttmacher, pp. 112, 302, 305-6; Guttmacher and Kai ser, pp. 465-66; and
Mary S. Cal derone and Eri c W. Johnson, The Fami~Book About Sexuali@ (New
York: Bantarn Books, 1983), pp. 86-7, 114-16, 183.
194. See Ben J. Wattenberg, The Birth Dearth (New York: Pharos Books, 1987); and
My T. Vu, ed., Wirrld Population Projections (New York: Worl d Bank Pol i cy and
Research Di vi si on, Popul ati on, Heal th, and Nutri ti on Department, 1986).
195. Charl es Westoff, “Ferti l i ty i n the Uni ted States,” Sci ence Magazirw, October 1986;
al so see Rushdoony, p. 39.
196. Wattenberg, p. 172.
197. I bid., p. 15.
198. I bid., p. 16.
199. I bid. , p. 16.
200. I bid., p. 11.
201. Anthony Wol fe, “ Popul ati on I mpl osi on,” Satur&y Reviiw, June 26, 1976;
Donal d Bogue and Amy Tsui , ‘Decl i ni ng Worl d Ferti l i ty: Trends, Causes, and
I mpl i cati ons,” Population Budetin Thir@Three, October, 1978; and Donal d Bogue
and Amy Tsui , ‘Zero Worl d Popul ati on Growth: The Public I nterest, Spr i ng
1979.
202. Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , p. 452.
203. I bid., p. 454.
204. Si mon, pp. 309-326.
205. I bid. , pp. 326-331.
206. Si mon and Kahn, pp. 7, 12-13, 50-66.
356 G R A N D I L L U S I ON S
207.
208.
209.
210.
211.
212.
213.
Pl anned Parenthood as a generi c movement i s i n theol ogi cal opposi ti on to Bi b-
l i cal Truth as defi ned by hi stori cal orthodoxy (see Chapter 10). Thi s then, i s the
root of the confl i ct. And thi s i s the background for the theol ogi cal use of the
term lie i n rel ati on to the Pl anned Parenthood movement.
J. I . Packer, “Foreword” i n Mi chael Scott Horton, Mission Accomplished (Nash-
vi l l e: Thomas Nel son, 1986), p. 11. Here he uses the term i n a popul ar, not a
schol arl y sense, where theol ogi cal truth and error are at i ssue.
See Pl ato, Great Dialogues of Pkzto (New York: Mentor, 1956); smd Thuci di des,
I -I istoy of the Peloponesian Ww, W. H. D. Rouse, Trans. (New York: Ti mes
Books, 1946).
See Pl utarch, Makers of Ronu, trans. Lou Scott-Ki l vert (New York: Pengui n,
1965); and Augusti ne, The Ci~ of God, trans. Robert A. B. Lawton (New York:
Epoch Publ i cati ons, 1957).
See Sergi os Kasi l ov, I cons .fHistory, Vl adi mi r Ll oesl av, trans. (Pari s: YMCA
Press, 1962); and Basi l Argyros, Myth and Man, Cornel i us Dol abel l a, trans.
(New Yor k: Cal adea Press, 1961).
See Ni ccol o Machi avel l i , The prime, Dani el Donno, trans. (New York: Bantam
Books; 1966); and Thomas More, Utopia, Peter K. Marshal l , trans. (New
York: Washi ngton Square Press, 1965).
See Al eksandr Sol zheni tsvn. One Dav in the Lifi of I van Denisovich. Max Havward
and Ronal d Hi ngl ey, tr~ns. (Ne~ York: fi ~tam Books, 19’63); and ‘Col i n
Thubron, Where Nighti Are Longest (New York: Random House, 1983).
Chapter 3 — Bad Seed: The Hi stori cal Legacy
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (New York: Dodd, Mead, and Company, 1908),
p. 30.
‘A woman was the l eader i n the deed; cherchez l a femme.”
Hi l ai re Bel l oc, Notes o~a Curmudgeon (London: Al bri ght’s Ltd., 1956), p. 126.
Quoted i n Harol d Tri bbl e Col e, The Com”ng Tmor: Lye BeJ ow the Great Wm (New
York: Langui ne Bros., Publ i shers, 1936), p. 23.
Based on fi gures from Paul B. Fowl er, Abortion: Toward an Evangelical Comensus
(Portl and: Mul tnomah Press, 1987), p. 59; and Debfai e Tayl or, et al., W-n:
A Wwld Repent (London: Oxford Uni versi ty Press, 1985), p. 10.
Sobornosti c Col l ecti vi sm was a school of thought devel oped al ong Machi avel -
l i an l i nes by Leni n’s fol l owers around the worl d duri ng the first hal f of the twen-
ti eth century.
Eugeni c Raci sm was a pseudo-sci enti fi c phi l osophy of geneti c mani pul ati on de-
vel oped i n the ni nteenth century.
Agathi sti c Di stri buti sm was a theory of economi c nati onal i sm propounded by
fasci st thi nkers i n Spai n, France, and I tal y duri ng the l ate ni nteenth century.
Abraham Stone, M. D., The Margaret Sanger Stoty and the Fight for Birth Control
(Westport, CT: Greenwood Press Publ i shers, 1975).
Faye Wattl eton, presi dent PPFA, speech, February 5, 1979.
Di ana Shaman, “Margaret Sanger: The Mother of Bi rth Control ,” Coronet
Mzgozine, March 1966.
Lawrence Lader and Mi l ton Mel tzer, Margaret Sanger: The Mother of Birth Control
(New York: Thomas Crowel l Company, 1969), p. 163.
Madel i ne Gray, Margaret Sanger A Biography of the Champion of Birth Control (New
York: Ri chard Marek Publ i shers, 1979).
Funeral eul ogy quoted i n El asah Drogi n, Margaret Sanger: The Father of Mo&rn
Soci@ (New Hope, KY: CUL Publ i cati ons, 1986), p. 95.
End Notes 357
15. I bid.
16. Lader and Mel tzer, p. 163.
17. Rev. Marti n Luther Ki ng, Jr., “Fami l y Pl anni ng: A Speci al and Urgent Con-
cern,” Pl anned Parenthood-Worl d Popul ati on (PPFA, 1973).
18. Donal d Ben-Fei nberg, Sangenzing the Negroes and J ews (New York: Shal om
Books, 1949), p. 29.
19. Jordan H. Thompson, The Politics o~ Birth Control (New York: Bol astrade
Publ i cati ons Co., 1968), p. 131.
20. Ben-Fei nberg, p. 32.
21. Thompson, pp. 63-64.
22. Gray, p. 423.
23. Shannon, p. 7.
24. Gray, pp. 64-81.
25. Sanger was compul si ve about conceal i ng her true age. I n her autobi ographi es
and on vari ous passports she never gave the same bi rth date twi ce. She even
al tered her record i n the Hi ggi ns fami l y Bi bl e. The September 14, 1879, date
was arri ved at by hi stori ans onl y after a careful exami nati on of several pal i mp-
sests i n her personal documents. See Gray, pp. 9, 13, 37.
26. Exodus 34:6-7.
27. 1 Ti mothy 5:8.
28. Gray, p. 16.
29. Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography (New York: W. W. Norton and Company,
1938), p. 22.
30. I t i s at l east worth noti ng that each of the other major vi l l ai ns of the twenti eth
century had si mi l ar spi ri tual experi ences. I n hi s youth, Stal i n studi ed for the
Orthodox pri esthood. Mussol i ni di spl ayed extreme pi ety as a youngster. Hi tl er
was obsessed wi th the study of Lutheran theol ogy. But each of them apos-
taci zed, l ater stoki ng red hot fi res of bi tterness and rage agai nst the church.
31. Gray, p. 23.
32. I n her autobi ography, Sanger often touted her credenti al s as a trai ned nurse.
She even i nfl ated her work experi ence, sayi ng that she had practi ced nursi ng i n
both Whi te Pl ai ns and New York Ci ty. The fact i s, she never advanced beyond
the status of a nurse-probati oner– the equi val ent of an orderl y today. See
Sanger, pp. 46-57, 86-92; and Gray, pp. 26-32, 326.
33. See Robert A. Rosenstone, Romantic Revolutionary: A Biography ofJ ohn Reed (New
York: Vi ntage Books, 1975).
34. Arthur S. Li nk and Ri chard L. McCormi ck, Pro~essiuism (Arl i ngton Hei ghts,
I L: Harl an Davi dson, I nc., 1983), pp. 41-42.
35. Li nda Gordon, Wmni Bod~ Wmnk Right: Birth Control in America (New York:
Pengui n Books, 1974), p. 208.
36. Li nk and McCormi ck, p. 41.
37. Emma Gol dman, Living My L~e (New York: Al fred A. Knopf, 1931).
38. Quoted i n Davi d Gol dstei n, Sui ci de Bent: Sangctizing Am2a (St. Paul : Radi o
Repl i es Press, 1945), p. 72.
39. Gray, p. 58.
4Q. Arthur B. Logan and Thomas de Tdati , Moralip and the Village Eliti (New York:
St. Regi s Press, 1949), pp. 61-72.
41. I bid., and Joseph Fi nder, Red Carpet (Fort Worth: Ameri can Bureau of Eco-
nomi c Research, 1983), pp. 17-19.
42. Gray, pp. 58-59.
43. Gray, p. 59,
44. Al bert Gri nger, The Sanger Corpux A St&y in Militancy, unpubl i shed masters
thesi s, Lsl cel and Chri sti an Col l ege, 1974, Appendi x i v, pp. 473-502.
358 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
45. I bid.
46. I bid.
47. I bid.
48. Wi l l i am H. Bradenton, The Comstock Era: T7ze R~onnation of Rejorm (New York:
Laddel Press, 1958), p. 126.
49. Gray, p. 280.
50. Ci ted i n Al l an Chase, The Legaq of Malthu.s: Tb Socik.1 Costs of the New Scientj$c
Razism (New York: Al fred Knopf, 1977), p. 6.
51. Paul Johnson, A HtitoT of tlw Engltih People (New Yor k: Har per and Row
Publ i shers, 1985), p. 276.
52. I bid.
53. I bid.
54. I bid., p. 270.
55. For a descri pti on and defi ni ti on of each of these Mal thusi an offshoots, see
Stephen Jay Goul d, The Mismasure of Man (New York: W. W. Norton and
Company, 1981).
56. For more on each of these perversi ons, see Phyl l i s Grosskurth, Havelock Elk A
Biography (New York: Al fred A. Knopf, 1980).
57. Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Ciuilizatwn (New York: Brentano’s, 1922), p. 264.
58. Gray, pp. 61, 71, 163, 224, 227, 487.
59. Proverbs 7:6-23.
60. Gray, p. 199.
61. I bid., p. 201.
62. Gordon, pp. 257-272, 341.
63. Gray, pp. 284-288.
64. Gordon, pp. 396-397.
65. I bid. , pp. 264-66, 261, 320-21, 326-29.
66. I bid., pp. 329-34.
67. Margaret actual l y resi sted changi ng the name at fi rst. She fel t that birth control
was her own propri etary l abel . But she soon accepted the fund-rai si ng real i ty
that her reputati on needed a whi tewashi ng.
68. Gray, p. 406.
69. I bid., pp. 306, 389.
70. I bid., pp. 408, 429-30.
71. I bid., p. 442.
72. Quoted i n Morgan Scott LaTmbe, T/ w Path of Destruction (Cl evel and: The Ohi o
Li fe Al l i ance Fund, 1974), p. 4.
73. Faye Wattl eton, “Humani st of the Year Acceptance Speech,” Tb Humanist,
Jul y-August 1986.
74. New Ywk Times, May 4, 1992.
75. Margaret Ssmger, W-men and the New Race (New York: Brentano’s, 1920. Repri nt.
Gee. W. Hal ter, 1928), p. 67.
76. PPFA servi ce reports 1982-1986. Al so see Nati onal Ri ght to Li fe’s speci al
tabl oi d, ‘Ti l Vi ctory i s Won: Pl anned Parenthood’s Aborti on Crusade,= 1982.
77. I bid.
78. I bid.
79. Gray, pp. 227-8.
80. See such PPFA recommended l i terature as Warden B. Pomeroy, Boys and Sex
(New York: Del l Publ i shi ng, 1968, 1981), pp. 43-57.
81. See PPFA’s medi cal di rector’s books re: Mary S. Cal derone and Eri c W.
Johnson, The Fami~Book About Sexualip (New York: Bantam Books, 1983), pp.
120-123.
End Notes 359
82. I bid., pp. 123-130; Pomeroy, pp. 58-79; and Faye Wattl eton and the Pl anned
Parenthood Staff, How to Talk to Your Child About Sexualip (New York: Doubl e-
day smd Co., 1986), pp. 90-93.
83. See Warden B. Pomeroy, Gi n!s and Sex (New York: Del l Publ i shi ng Co., 1969,
1981), pp. 44-81.
84. See Wattl eton, pp. 74-106; Cal derone and Johnson, pp. 11-14,118-134, 182-186.
85. Cl ai re Chambers, The SI ECUS Circle: A Humanist Revolution (Boston: Western
I sl ands, 1977), pp. 323-335.
86. Wall Street J ournal, December 19, 1984.
87, Leon Trotsky, My Li je (New York: Scri bners, 1931), p. 274.
88. I bid.; also see Robert Wi stri ck, Trotsky: Fate of a Revolution (New York: Stei n
and Day Publ i shers, 1979).
89. I bid.; also see Fi nder, pp. 13-14, and Robert A. Rosenstone, Romantic Revol u-
ti on: A Biography of J ohn Reed (New York: Vi ntage Books, 1975).
80. I bid.; also see Theodor e Dr aper , Anwrizan Communism and Soviet Rwsia (New
York: Vi ki ng Pengui n, 1960).
91. 1 Ti mothy 3:3; Ti tus 1:7; 1 Peter 5:2.
92. Robert G. Marshal l , “The Real Costs of Federal Bi rth Control Programs
Reauthor i zi ng Ti tl e X, US PHSA: Congr essi onal Opti ons,” Fami~ Poli~
I nsi ghts 4:6 (September 1985); see Gordon, p. 320.
93. Gol dstei n, p. 103.
94. See Mary Dunn, “Appl e Pi e and the Ameri can Fl ag,” Cathol i c Twi n Ci rcl e,
November 8, 1981.
95. See Drogi n, pp. 54-55.
96. See Sandy McKasson, The Mysteries of I niqui~: A Critical Look at Modem Sexual
Morality (Dal l as: Li fePress, 1988).
97. See Robert Ruff, Aborting Planned Parenthood (Houston: New Vi si on Books,
1988).
98. Gray, pp. 37, 44, 76, 80, 325-26.
99. I bid., pp. 26-31, 48, 326.
100. I bid., pp. 76, 80.
101. I bid., pp. 10, 405, 408, 416-18, 427, 434, 436, 439.
102. I bid., pp. 37, 44, 76, 80, 325-26.
103. I bid., p. 37.
104. See Ruff, pp. 31-34.
105. Robert G. Marshal l , School Birth Control (Stafford, VA Ameri can Li fe League,
1986).
106. J. C. Wi l l ke, Abortion: Qw-stions and Answers (Ci nci nnati : Hayes Publ i shi ng Co.,
1985).
107. Pl anned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas, Annual Report, 1985.
Chapter 4 – Back-Al l ey Butchers: The Medi cal Legacy
1. ‘The cure i s worse than the di sease.”
2. Hi l ai re Bel l oc, The Cruise of the Nona (London: Constabl e & Co., Ltd., 1925),
pp. 196-197.
3. “Cel ebrati ng Seventy Years of Servi ce,” 1986 Annual Report, Pl anned Parent-
hood Federati on of Ameri ca, pp. 3, 18, 22-23.
4. Pl anned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas, VPT Cement Li abi l i ty
Rel ease Form.
360 G R A N D I L L U S I ON S
5. Pl anned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas Minor Consent to Abortion
Form.
6. See Davi d C. Reardon, Aborted W-: Silent No More (Westchester, I L: Cross-
way Books, 1988); Deborah Mai ne, “Does Aborti on Affect Later Pregnanci es?”
Farni~ Planning Pe@sectives 11:2 (March/Apri l 1979), pp. 98-101; and Thomas
Hi l gers, Denni s J. Horan, and Davi d Mal l , New Pe@ectives on Human Abortion
(Frederi ck, MD: Uni versi ty Publ i cati ons of Ameri ca, 1981), pp. 45-181.
7. Author i ntervi ew conducted i n Los Angel es, Jul y 1987.
8. Based on Cal i forni a obstetri cal /gynecol ogi cal tabul ated responses to a fi ve-year
stati sti cal survey.
9. Lesl i e I ffy, M. D., “Aborti on Stati sti cs i n Hungary; 0bstitrc2s and GyrwcoloD
45:115, 1975; Al ras Kl i nger, “Demographi c Consequences of the Legal i zati on of
I nduced Aborti on i n Eastern Europe,” I ntemaiional J oumd of Gynecology and
Obstetrics, 8:680, 1970; A. Arvay, M. Gorgey, and L. Kapn, “La Rel ati on Entre
Les Avortements et Les Accouchements Premature,” La Review de La Francais
Gynecolog et Obstetticie 62:81, 1967; and O. Pohonka and I . Torok, ‘A Gestati os
Esemenyekj Al akul asa es a Koraszul es-Kerdes Osszefuggese Hazankban 1934
es 1970 Kozott,” Orviatte Hetiliuk a Hungary 117: 965, 1976; al l ci ted i n Luc
Segond, La Vie Etuit La Lumiere (Bruxel l es: Soci ete Bi bl i que de Bel gi que, 1979),
pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp. 69-127; as wel l as Reardon,
pp. 103-105.
10. K. G. B. Edstrom, “Earl y Compl i cati ons and Late Sequel ae of I nduced Abor-
ti on: A Revi ew of the Li terature ,“ Bulletin of the Wwld Health Organization
52:3332, 1975; and Y. Mori yama and O. Hi rokawa, “The Rel ati onshi p Be-
ween Arti fi ci al Termi nati on of Pregnancy and Aborti on on Premature Bi rth,’
Harmsl Effects of I nducedAbotiion (Tokyo: Fami l y Pl anni ng Federati on of Japan,
1966); al l ci ted i n Luc Segond, La Vie Etait La Lumisre (Bruxel l es: Soci ete Bi bl i -
que de Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp.
69-127; as wel l as Reardon, pp. 103-105.
11. S. N. Pautekaki s, G. C. Papadi mi tri ou, and S. A. Di xi adi s, “The I nfl uence of
I nduced and Spontaneous Aborti ons on the Outcome of Subsequent Pregnan-
ci es,’ Anwri2an J ournal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 116: 799, 1973; and G.
Papaevangel ou, et al ., “The Effect of Spontaneous and I nduced Aborti on on
Prematuri ty and Bi rthwei ght~ TheJ ournal of Obstetrics and Gynecolo~ in the British
Commonwealth 80:418 1973; all ci ted i n Luc Segond, La View Ed”t La Lumiere
(Bruxel l es: Soci ete Bi bl i que de Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers,
Horan, and Mal l , pp. 69-127; as wel l as Reardon, pp. 103-105.
12. J. A. Ri chardson and G. Di xon, “The Effects of Legal Termi nati on on Subse-
quent Pregnancy; The British Medical journal 1:1303, 1976; C. S. W. Wri ght, S.
Campbel l , and J. Beazl ey, “Second Tri mester Aborti on After Vagi nal Termi na-
ti on of Pregnancy,” Lancet 1:127.8, 1972; and Lel a Lampe, ‘Az El so Terhesseg,”
Ovriitte Hetilizak a Hungay 119:1331, 1978; all ci ted i n Luc Segond, La Vie Etait
La Lwniere (Bruxel l es: Soci ete Bi bl i que de Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see
Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp. 69-127; as wel l as Reardon, pp. 103-105.
13. S. Harl ap and A. M. Davi es, “Late Sequel ae of I nduced Aborti on: Compl i ca-
ti ons and Outcome of Pregnancy and Labor,” Amwkan J oumd of Epidemiolo~
102:217, 1975; and WHO Task Force on the Sequel ae of Aborti on, “ The Out-
come i n the Subsequent Pregnancy,” WoTkshop on Riskr, Benejts, and Controvtmies
in FertiliQ Control (Arl i ngton, VA: Program of Appl i ed Research on Ferti l i ty
Regul ati on, 1977); al l ci ted i n Luc Segond, La Vie Etait La Lumiere (Bruxel l es:
Soci ete Bi bl i que de Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers, Horan, and
Mal l , pp. 69-127; as wel l as Reardon, pp. 102-105.
End Notes 361
14. J. W. Van der Sl i kke and P. E. Treffers, “The I nfl uence of I nduced Aborti on on
Gestati onal Durati on i n Subsequent Pregnanci es,” The British Medical J ournal
1:270, 1978; all ci ted i n Luc Segond, La Vie Etait La Lumiere (Bruxel l es: Soci ete
Bi bl i que de Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l ,
pp. 69-127; as wel l as Reardon, pp. 103-105.
15. D. Kel l er and S. N. Ei khom, “ Late Sequel ae of I nduced Abor ti on i n
Pri mi gravi dae,’ Actu Obstetrics and GjncwcologJ J in Scandi navi a 56: 311, 1977; al l
ci ted i n Luc Segond, La Vie Etait La Lumia-e (Bruxel l es: Soci ete Bi bl i que de
Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp. 69-127; as
wel l as Reardon, pp. 103-105.
16. Harl ap and Davi es, p. 217.
17. C. J, H ogu e , “ Low Bi r th Wei ght Subsequent to I nduced Abor ti on: A
Hktori cal Prospecti ve Study of 948 Women i n Skopje, Yugosl avi a,” American
J ournal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 123:675, 1975; also see Lesl i e I ffy, Gary Fri sol i ,
and Antol Jakobovi tts, “Peri natal Stati sti cs: The Effect I nternati onal l y of
Li beral i zed Aborti on,” ci ted i n Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , p. 116.
18. J. R, Dal i ng and I . Emanuel , “I nduced Aborti on and Subsequent Outcome of
Pregnancy: New EngksndJ oum.al of Medicine 297:1241, 1977; also see I ffy, Fri sol i ,
and Jakobocvi tts, p. 116; al l ci ted i n Luc Segond, La Vie Etait La Lumiere (Brux-
el l es: Soci ete Bi bl i que de Bel gi que, 1979), pp. 131-132; al so see Hi l gers, Horan,
and Mal l , pp. 69-127; as wel l as Reardon, pp. 103-105.
19. G. L. Burkman, et al ., “Cul ture and Treatment Resul ts i n Endometri ti s Fol -
l owi ng El ecti ve Aborti on; Amsrican J ournal of ObstArics and Gynecology, 128:5,
1977, pp. 556-559.
20. K. L. Barret, et al ,, ‘I nduced Aborti on: A Ri sk Factor for Pl acenta Previ a,’
Amm”can J ournal of Obstetrics and Gynuology, December 1981, pp. 769-772.
21. Fel i x Heal t, “Adol escent Pregnancy and Prenatal Care,
s
FamiJ y Practice News,
December 15, 1975.
22. See Hi l gers, Mi ul enburg, and O’Hare i n Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp. 1-5,
69-91, 164-181, 199-204, and 217-235.
23. J. Queena, “Rh Sensi ti zati on, Aborti on, and Later Pregnanci es,” Medical Wwld
News, Apri l 30, 1971, p. 36.
24. S. Funderburk, et al ., “Subopti mal Pregnancy Outcome wi th Pri or Aborti ons
and Premature Bi rths,” Anw-rican J ournal of Obstitn”cs and Gynecology, September 1,
1976, pp. 55-60.
25. L. Tal bert, ‘DI C More Common Threat wi th Use of Sal i ne Aborti on,” Fami~
Practice News 5:19 (October 1975).
26. See WHO Task Force; and Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , pp. 92-163
27. Howard W. Ory, “Mortal i ty Associ ated wi th Ferti l i ty and Ferti l i ty Control ,’
Family Planning Perspectives, MarchfApt-d 1983, p. 60; and Faye Wattl eton, How
to Tdk With YouT Child About Sexuality (New York: Doubl eday and Co., 1986),
p. 180.
28. I bid.
29. Matthew J. H. Bul fi n, “Compl i cati ons of Legal Aborti on: A Perspecti ve from
Pri vate Practi ce,” i n Hi l gers, Horan, and Mal l , p. 145.
30. Personal i ntervi ew conducted i n Los Angel es, Jul y 1987.
31. “Cel ebrati ng,” p. 72; and see “A Ri sky Busi ness: Reproducti ve ~eal th Care i n
Li ti gati on: Pl anned Parenthood Federati on of Ameri ca brochure.
32. K. Wdson Pi ke-Lasti n, “Pl anned Parenthood Offi ci al s Di scuss Ri sk Preventi on,’
New J ersty Lye News-Forecast, 1987, New Jersey Ci ti zens for Li fe, 1987, pp. 4-6.
33. Roe v. WA was si mpl y the fi rst i n a l ong stri ng of l egal maneuvers whi ch have
served to l i mi t Pl anned Parenthood’s juri di cal exposure.
362 G R A N D I L L U S I ON S
34. Exodus 20:13.
35. See “A Ri sky Busi ness.”
36. J. D. Barkl ay, A. Forsythe, and T. L. Parker, ‘Aborti on Methodol ogi es: Fre-
quency and Ri sk,” T& Medical L$e-Lim, March 1986, pp. 12-19; J. C. Wi l l ke,
Abortion: Quations and AmweTs (Ci nci nnati : Hayes Publ i shi ng Co., 1985), pp.
83-131; The Boston Women’s Heal th Col l ecti ve, The New Our Bedim, Ourselves
(New York: Si mon and Schuster, 1984), pp. 291-316; “Aborti on: Some Medi cal
Facts: Nati onal Ri ght to Li fe Trust Fund 1986; and “Questi ons and Answers
About Aborti on,” Pl anned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, 1986.
37. I bid.
38. I bid.; and S. K. Henshaw and K. O’Rei l l y, “Characteri sti cs of Aborti on
Pati ents i n the U.S.,’ Fami~Plunning Perspectives, 15:1 (January/Febxuary
1985), p. 5.
39. I bid.
40. I bid.; and U.S. Senate Report of the Commi ttee on the Judi ci ary, Human L#e
Fedendisrn Arnsndment, Senate Joi nt Resol uti ons, 98th Congress, June 6, 1983,
p. 6.
41. I bid.
42. I bid.
43. I bid.
44. Sallie Ti sdal e, “We Do Aborti ons Here: A Nurse’s Stor y,” Harper? Magazine,
October 1987, pp. 66-70.
45. I bid.
46. B. Duenhoel ter and E. Grant, “Compl i cati ons Fol l owi ng Prostagl andi n F-2 A
I nduced Mi d-Tri mester Aborti on,” Anwrican J ournal of Obstdrks and Gynecology,
46:3 (September 1975), pp. 247-250.
47. “Pl an Your Chi l dren For Heal th and Happi ness,” Pl anned Parenthood Federa-
ti on of Ameri ca, 1963.
48. Apparentl y the Houston affi l i ate was transferri ng i ts records from “hard” copy
to ei ther computer or mi crofi che.
49. The resul ts of thi s study have been fi dl y documented i n Robert Ruff, Aborting
%nned Parenthood (Houston: New Vi si on Books, 1988). The book i s avai l abl e
fmm Li fe Advocates, 4848 Gui ton, Sui te 209, Houston, TX 77027 or from
New Vi si on Books, P.O. Box 920970-A16, Houston, TX 77018.
50. I bid., p. 96.
51. I bid.
52. I bid.
53. I bid.
54. I bid.
55. I bid., p. 92.
56. I bid., p. 96.
57. Exodus 20:13.
.58. The New Our Bodies, Ourselves, p. 221.
59. I bid.
60. I bid., p. 220; and Li nda Gordon, Wwnh Bo~, Wmnk Right: A Social Htitory of
Birth Control in America (New York: Pengui n Books, 1976), pp. 249-300,341-390.
61. The New Our Bodsis, Ourselves, pp. 220-221.
62. Barbara Seaman, The Doctor% Case Against the Pill (New York: Del l Publ i shi ng
co. , 1979).
63. For an overvi ew of the vast amount of l i terature, see: Kevi n Hume, Cancer and
.& Pill: Five Studies and a Review of Literature (Stafford, VA: Anastasi a Books,
1985); El l en Grant, The Bit&r Pill: How Safe h the Pe&ect Contraceptive? (London:
End Notes 363
El m Tree Books, 1985); Becky OMal l ey, ‘W/ho Says Oral Contracepti ves are
Safe?” The Nation, February 14, 1981; Robert Hatcher, et al ., Contracefitive T~h-
nology, l l th rev. ed. (New York: I rvi ngton Publ i shers, 1982); Kri sti n Luker, Td-
ing Chances: Abortion and the Decision Not to Contracept (Berkel ey, CA: Uni versi ty of
Cal i forni a Press, 1975); Andrea Borgoff Eagen, “The Contracepti ve Sponge:
Easy– But i s i t Safe?” Ms. Magazine 12:7, 1984, pp. 94-5; S. Shapi ro, et. al .,
“Bi rth Defects i n Rel ati on to Vagi nal Spermi ci des,”Journal of the Arms-n”can A4edi-
cal Association 247:17, 1982, pp. 2381-84; Judy Norsi gi an, “Redi recti ng Contra-
cepti ve Research,” Science for the People, January/February 1979, pp. 27-30; and
Katheri ne Roberts, “The I ntrauteri ne Devi ce as a Heal th Ri sk,” W-- and
Health, pp. 27-30.
64. Seaman, p. 11.
65. Madel i ne Gray, Margaret Sangm: A Biography of the Champion of Birth Control (New
York: Ri chard Marek Publ i shers, 1979), p. 432.
66. I bid., p. 318.
67. I bid. , pp. 413-14, 432.
68. Th New Our Bodies, Ourselves, p. 237.
69. I bid., p. 238.
70. Garri son Law ford, Drugstore Guidebook (New York: Cherry Ri dge Publ i cati ons,
1986), p. 411.
71. The New Our Bodies, Ourselves, p. 237.
72. I bid.
73. I bid., pp. 242-44.
74. For exampl e, see: Worl d Heal th Organi zati on, Oral Contrccteptives: Technical and
safe~ Aspects (New York: Uni ted Nati ons Book Shop), p. 20; Boston Col -
l aborati ve Drug Survei l l ance Program, “Oral Contracepti ves and Venous
Thrombo-Embol i c Di sease, Surgi cal l y Confi rmed Gal l Bl adder Di sease, and
Breast Tumors: L.aruet, January 1973, pp. 1399-1404; O. P. Hei nonen, et al .,
“Cardi ovascul ar Bi rth Defects and Antenatal Exposure to Femal e Sex Hor-
mones,” New England J ournal of Medicine 296:2 (January 1977), pp. 67-70.
75. The New Our Bodies, Ourselves, pp. 241-244.
76. That rate appl i es to teens. Ol der women tend to have l ower i n-use fai l ures. See
Wi l l i am R. Grady, Mark Hayward, and Juni chi Yagi , “Contracepti ve Fai l ure
i n the Uni ted States: Esti mates from the 1982 Nati onal Survey of Fami l y
Growth,” Farni~ Pl anni ng Perspectives 18:5, (November/December 1986).
77. Ruff, p. 89.
78. The New Our Bodies, Ourselves, p. 249.
79. I bid.
80. Mari a Berta and Gordon Myron, “Common Compl i cati ons from I UDS,’ Resi-
okmt and Stafl Physician, June 1976.
81. Mark Dowi e, and Tracy Johnson, “A Case of Corporate Mal practi ce,’ Sei zi ng
Our Bodr&: The Politics of Wmnd Health (New York: Random House, 1977).
82. W. Cates, et al ., “The I ntrauteri ne Devi ce and Deaths from Spontaneous
Aborti on: New EnglandJ ournal of Medtiine, 295, 1976, p. 1155.
83. The New Our Bodies, Ourselves, p. 249.
84. Gray, pp 200-201.
85. Al an Guttmacher I nsti tute, “Cri si s i n Product Li abi l i ty I nsurance I mpacti ng
Current, Future Contracepti ve Methods,” Wmhington Memo, May 28, 1986,
pp. 1-2.
86. See Eagan, pp. 94-95; and Shapi ro, pp. 2381-84.
87. Howard J. Tatum and El i zabeth B. Connel l -Tatum, “Barri er Contracepti on: A
Comprehensi ve Revi ew: Fatili~ and Sterility 36:1 (Jul y 1981), pp. 1-12.
364 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
105.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
Mi chael Woods, “The Nati onal I nsti tutes of Heal th,” T/ w World and Z, Septem-
ber 1987, p. 280.
I bid. , pp. 280-81.
Deuter onomy 28:58-66.
James C. Morh, Abortion in Arneriia: The Origins and Evolution of National Policy
(New York: Oxford Uni versi ty Press, 1978).
Deuter onomy 28:1-14
See Davi d Chi l ton, Power in the Blood: A Christian Response to AI DS (Brentwood,
TN: Wol gemuth and Hyatt Publ i shers, 1987).
See Lan Ti Kwo, The New Frontim: Medicine at the Crossroad (Boston: Medi cal
Txhnol ogy Press, 1982).
I bid.
Joe Levi ne, “Hel p from the Unborn,’ Tires, Januaxy 12, 1987.
El i zabeth Mehren, “Surrogate Mothers: Let’s Stop Thi s,” Los Angeles Tirnar,
September 1, 1987.
Franci s A. Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, What-ever Happewd to the Human Race
(Ol d Tappan, NJ: Fl emi ng Revel ], 1979), pp. 89-118.
Wi l l i am Wi nsl ade and Judi th Wi l son Ross, “Hi gh-Tech Babi es: A Growth
I ndustry,” Galveston Gazette, June 17, 1983.
Schaeffer and Koop, pp. 55-87.
W. H. Hi bbard, “The Real Necromancer,” La&Breaking NessI s, August 14,1986.
Ted Howard and Jeremy Ri i l i n, Who Should Play God? (New York: Del l Pub-
l i shi ng Co., 1977).
Gol da Lamarti a and Thomas Gi bson, Time Enough for Sorrow: The Deinstitutwn-
alization of Arnasiai Mental~ I ll (Los Angel es: Kardi a Publ i cati ons, 1984).
Jeremy Ri fki n, Algeny (New York: Vi ki ng Press, 1983).
To] Abel ard and Rus Contol a, Wm: The Next Phase, Tlw Next CentuT (London:
Shambrdah Bookworks, 1981).
Mi chael J. Wi l son, John F. X. Uhel u, and Robert L. Quay, Da&zforcation:
Erpm’menti and Procedures (London: The Research Counci l of the I nsti tutes of
I mmunol ogy, 1979).
Marvi n Morrow, Big Buzinsss: The Co@orattiation of Health Care (Dal l as: Whi te
Paper Reports, 1982).
Ji m Lester, “Bi ocl eati cs: How Safe are the Hi gh-Tech Procedures?” W&hCourt
Review of T~hnical Literature 2:4, pp. 16-43.
Lucas Berry and Davi s Lowery, “Human Experi mentati on i n Berkel ey Draws
Fi re; Local Ti%tes, February 8, 1978.
Roger Howard and Shannon Lee-Bai l ey, ‘Neurocl atol ogy: Defi ni ng the Para-
meters,’ Pathology Tats 16:4, 1984.
Dani el J. Kevl es, I n the Nams of Eugenics (New York: Pengui n Books, 1985).
Garson L. B. Trang, “Renatal i zati on of Cel l Li fe and Syntheti c Steroi ds,’
Harper Stunakrd, Jul y 1977.
Stephen J. Goul d, The Mismsasure of Man (New York: W. W. Norton and Co.,
1981).
Robert J. Li fton, The Nazi Doctors (New York: Basi c Books, 1986).
Al though thi s geneal ogy may have a few generati onal gaps, i ts veraci ty i s
hi ghl y l i kel y. See Barbara De Jong, Tm.cing the J ewish Diaspora (Amsterdam:
The Engl i sh Press, 1967); Ronal d L. Numbers and Darrel l W. Amundsen,
eds., Cari ng and Cun”ng: Health and Medicihe in t~W~tern Religious Tmdi ti onr (Lon-
don: Col l i er Macmi l l an Publ i shers, 1986); F. F. Cartwri ght, A Socrid History of
Medicine (New York: Longrnan, 1977); and Lati mer Wri ght, Music in My Ears:
J ew~ and Greeks, Barbarians and Gentiles (New York: ti e Al bert Kroc House, 1967).
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
End Notes 365
See Numbers and Amundsen; and Chi l ton, pp. 177-182.
Demetri os J. Constantel os, Byzanti ne Phikmthr+y and Social Weljare (Pari s:
Orthodox Cl assi cs, 1968).
Ti mothy S. Mi l l er, The Birth of tb Hospital in the Byzantine Empire (Pari s: Ortho-
dox Cl assi cs, 1985).
John Scarborough, cd., Byzantine Medicine (Pari s: Orthodox Cl assi cs, 1984).
See Numbers and Amundse~, pp. 65-107.
Rupert Masson, “Rai son D’Etr e~ LAutre, January 1962.
See Numbers and Amundsen, pp. 47-52.
Leo Kuper , Genocide: I ts Political Use in the Tmtieth Cent~(New Haven, CT:
Yal e Uni versi ty Press, 1981).
The wor d absolute here i s of utmost i mportance.
Reardon, p. 232.
I bid., p. 233.
I bid., pp. 233-34.
Communi qw’, October 30, 1992.
See Geouze Grant, The Qui ck and the Dend: R U-486 and thz New Chemical Wtiare
Against ~~r Fami~ (Whe~ton, I L: Crossway Books, 1991).
Chapter 5 —A Race of Thoroughbreds: The Raci al Legacy
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
“Man’s i nhumani ty agai nst man.”
Hi l ai re Bel l oc, Notes ofa Curmudgeon (London: Al bri ght’s Ltd., 1956), pp. 42-43.
Dani el J. Kevl es, I n the Nanw of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Hunwn H~edi~
(New York: Pengui n Books, 1985), p. 110.
I bid.
Dana Atwel l and I rene Pai ge, Eugenic SteAAdion (New York: Case Memori al
Foundati on, 1958), pp. 43-44.
Buck u. Bell, 274 U. S., 201-3, (1927).
Stephen Jay Goul d, The Misnwasure ofk.tan (New York: W. W. Norton, 1981),
p. 336.
Atwel l and Pai ge, p. 45.
Goul d, p. 336.
Kevl es, ‘p. 111.
Madel i ne Gray, Margaret Sanger: A Biography of the Champion of Birth Control (New
York: Ri chard Marek Publ i shers, 1979), pp. 240-41; Li nda Gordon, Woman’s
Body, Wren’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America (New Yor k:
Pengui n, 1974), pp. 229-340, 353-359; El asah Drogi n, Margaret Sanger: Father of
Modem Socie~ (New Hope, KY: CUL Publ i cati ons, 1986), pp. 11-38; John W.
Whhehead, The End of Man (Westchester , I L: Cr ossway Books, 1986),
pp. 161-200.
See Al l an Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientijc Racism
(New York: Al fred A. Knopf, 1977).
See Whi tehead, pp. 161-165.
See Kevl es, pp. 57-69.
I bid.
I bid.
See Germai ne Greer, Sex and Destiny: The Politics of Human Fertili~ (New York:
Harper and Row, 1984).
See Whhehead, pp. 166-167.
I bid.
366 GRAND ILLUSI ONS
20. I bid.
21. Greer, p. 309.
22. Whi tehead, p. 167; and Kevl es, p. 111.
23. I bid., p. 168; Drogi n, p. 12; and Kevl es, p. 200.
24. Greer, p. 377; Kevl es, pp. 56, 199, 200, 210.
25. Kevl es, pp. 63-64.
26. G. K. Chesterton, Eugeni cs and Other Evils (London: Cassel l , 1922), p. 7.
27. I bid., p. 54.
28. “C. K. C. Revi ew: The Speaker, February 2, 1901, p. 488.
29. Chesterton, p. 151; al so see Dani el Grasman, The Scimt$c Mgin.s of National
Skidism (London: MacDonal d and Co., 1971).
30, Remans 3:10-18.
31. Greer, p. 308.
32. See Kevl es, pp. 57, 91-92; Joseph Fi nder, Red Carpet (Fort Worth: Ameri can
Bureau of Economi c Research, 1983), pp. 15-39; and Eugene Lyons, The Red
Decade (New Rochel l e, NY: Arl i ngton House, 1941, 1970), pp. 127, 247.
33. See Robert Jay Li fton, l l e Nari Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of
Genoci& (New York: Basi c Books, 1986), pp. 27-29; and Drogi n, pp. 23-2