The Tea Party of Anti-Abortion Groups Forms

You may recall a huge blowup in Georgia a few months ago when Georgia Right to Life was thrown out of the National Right to Life Committee organization for refusing to support a bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks. The state group refused to support it because it included exceptions for rape and incest. Now that group has formed a new national coalition to rival the NRLC:

Georgia Right to Life (GRTL) President Daniel Becker today announced the formation of a new national pro-life organization, the National Personhood Alliance (NPA), a confederation of faith-based, pro-life organizations and leaders who believe pursuing Personhood is essential to protecting all innocent human beings in the 21st century.

“The focus of NPA will differ from most national pro-life groups,” Becker said. “The general consensus of many in the movement is that it’s time for a fresh strategy for ending the disregard for innocent human life. We intend to be ‘standard-bearers’ as opposed to ‘king-makers’. This will require the application, politically and legislatively, of a higher standard than is currently embraced by most national pro-life groups today.”

Becker said, “There has been an overwhelming call from many within the movement to form a new national pro-life group which will represent us on Capitol Hill.”

The new organization will be officially formed at a convention to be held in Atlanta, GA on October 10th and 11th. Representatives of existing pro-life organizations and leaders from across the country are invited. Attendees who affirm the founding charter will begin the process of electing a national board of directors representing each state.

“The pro-life movement is more than 40 years old,” Becker said. “From its inception in the late 1960’s, the focus has primarily been on ending abortion. Our concern must be expanded to encompass the dignity and value of each human being at any developmental stage through natural death.

“To achieve that goal, we must ensure that our strategies are consistent with our policies and objectives. Compromise is not possible. This is not like roads or highways or agricultural subsidies; when we compromise – someone dies.”

I approve of this schism completely. Like the Tea Party, the new group views any compromise at all as betrayal and that always limits how effective they can be politically. The more extreme they are, the better it will be for those who support reproductive rights.

Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Mr Ed

    Change abortion to Romans and you have half the script for Life of Brian.

  • ambassadorfromverdammt

    “ Our concern must be expanded to encompass the dignity and value of each human being at any developmental stage through natural death. . . .”

    . . . unless she’s a woman.”

    They skipped that bit.

  • matty1

    What have abortions ever done for..

    No wait not that bit

  • Reginald Selkirk

    Mr Ed #1: Change abortion to Romans and you have half the script for Life of Brian.

    I don’t get it.

    “We think there should be an exception for Romans in cases of rape or incest.”

  • scienceavenger

    “Our concern must be expanded to encompass the dignity and value of each human being at any developmental stage through natural death birth.

    FTFY.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    I was wondering how long it would take the Christian Right to form some sort of anti-abortion group. You know, besides all the other ones.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    … protecting all innocent human beings in the 21st century.

    I eagerly await this strengthening of the anti-intervention, anti-armed drone, anti-war grassroots movement and lobby.

    What?

  • sinned34

    Pierce, you forgot anti-death penalty and anti-gun.

  • throwaway

    Yeah, the adjective of ‘innocent’ always seems to weasel it’s way in front of ‘human’ whenever they talk about what is or is not OK to kill. Wish I was surprised by that.

  • lofgren

    Some commenter to one of Ed’s recent posts about racists pointed out that this level of extremism can be taken as a sign that these groups sense that they are losing the culture war. In fits and starts, and not without setbacks, these people are being pushed back into their corners. The recent rash of antichoice laws may be a last gasp, destined to pass (relatively) quickly, albeit not without ruining many lives in the meantime.

    The group that feels it will prevail inevitably always wants to portray itself as thoughtful and moderate. The group that feels it is cornered and threatened wants to portray itself as passionate and dauntless.

  • Childermass

    “The more extreme they are, the better it will be for those who support reproductive rights.”

    Unless they start shooting those who support reproductive rights.

  • pocketnerd

    “Personhood” legislation: Because a zygote has rights, but an adult woman does not.

  • sceptinurse

    I love the other end of this, that natural death part. These are the same people who insist on every intervention for someone who is dying, whether the person in question wants the intervention or not.

  • D. C. Sessions

    Yeah, the adjective of ‘innocent’ always seems to weasel it’s way in front of ‘human’ whenever they talk about what is or is not OK to kill. Wish I was surprised by that.

    They’re pretty adamant about the zygote not being responsible for the sins of its father — that’s why they refuse rape and incest exceptions.

    Of course, once it’s born it IS responsible for the sins of its mother, the slut.

  • lofgren

    They’re pretty adamant about the zygote not being responsible for the sins of its father — that’s why they refuse rape and incest exceptions.

    Which is weird because have they even read Genesis?

  • busterggi

    “They’re pretty adamant about the zygote not being responsible for the sins of its father”

    On the contrary, Chrisitanity is based on children being responsible for the sins of their father, hence ‘original’ sin and the need for a Jesus.

  • magistramarla

    Sceptinurse,

    I found that “natural death” part alarming. They probably want to take away the rights that people have to request no interventions at the end of life. I would certainly not want that right taken away from me.

    I dealt with a doctor who didn’t want to honor my mother’s paperwork that required no interventions. Unfortunately, the nursing home had sent her to a Catholic hospital. The doc in charge kept calling me and trying to harass and guilt me into authorizing interventions. Luckily, I lived in another state.

    He didn’t realize that the guilt trips didn’t work on me, since she had been a very abusive mother to me, so there were no heartstrings to pull.

    I stuck to what her directive said and refused to override it.

    I definitely would not have wanted some pro-life group to have the right to make those decisions for me.