This piece by Terry O’Neill highlights the pro-life scene and a speech Preston Manning gave recently to Signal Hill, a B.C.-based pro-life group:
…in a speech on May 11 to more than 600 Signal Hill supporters, Manning repeatedly stressed that pro-life advocates had to be “wise like serpents, gracious as doves.” And he drew a direct parallel between the struggle to end abortion and the fight to end slavery in the British Empire.
That latter engagement lasted more than half a century, he pointed out. At first, it was led by Quakers, who advanced well-meaning, high-minded and morally indignant arguments against slavery. They got nowhere. And it was only when a new group, led by the likes of William Wilberforce, adopted a new strategy of drawing attention to the suffering associated with slavery that progress was eventually made.
The lessons are clear, Manning said. Put service before sermons. Broaden one’s base. Ensure that your tactics are wise and gracious. And do not let zeal for the cause override your long-term plan.
I suppose the problem here is that one man’s zeal is another man’s moderation…
I do tend to think that all the intellectual reasoning is already present in the pro-life movement. The enthusiasm is present. Good people are present. So what will win the cultural war is good communications of those strengths and the appropriate channelling of that enthusiasm.
Again, I say, time to rent Amazing Grace (again). Love that movie.
by 
“Again, I say, time to rent Amazing Grace (again). Love that movie.”
Rent? Again? You may as well purchase it! 🙂
I don’t usually comment on these things but I thought I would put my two cents in… or is it a penny for my thoughts? either way…
“I suppose the problem here is that one man’s zeal is another man’s moderation…”
I think this is a dangerous sentiment. One mans zeal could result (and has) in violent attacks though he is acting in his own perception of moderation. Is he off the hook for his actions because, to him, he is acting in moderation? The problem isn’t categorizing zeal vs moderation, the problem is that the prolife movement is largely unproductive and, because of the zealots among us and their extremist actions, we have all been painted and radical, uncaring and uneducated.
We wont change the zealots minds, actions or methods. But we can, as a majority, stand together and stand behind an organization that is doing it well. You and I as prolife people do not seem to be the target Signal Hill is aiming for. Extreme abortions advocates dont seem to be their target either. They are trying to reach the rest of the population and they are doing it in a way that the prolife movement has not done. Just look at their website. Its rational, educational, unemotional and honest. If I was undecided on the issue of abortion, I would find this site more compelling then any of the prolife sites I have seen.
“I do tend to think that all the intellectual reasoning is already present in the pro-life movement. The enthusiasm is present. Good people are present. So what will win the cultural war is good communications of those strengths and the appropriate channeling of that enthusiasm.”
This is exactly what Signal Hill appears to be targeting. Channeling the good intentions to be more productive. Lets face it, all the good intentions the prolife movement have had have not gotten us very far. If we’re honest, we can reflect that yes, some good work has been done but, on the whole, our goals have not been achieved. Not even close. Just mention the word prolife and people scatter. I think Signal Hill is doing a fantastic job at communicating their rational message to the masses. Its time for a new methodology, a new approach and I think Signal Hill has done it right.
I read the entire article in the national and thought it was fantastic. If we could all adopt this approach rather then splitting our resources and efforts, I feel like we could move mountains.
Actually this is where I think that Ezra Levant had excellent advice in his interview with PWPL. Focus on things like late term abortions, sex selective abortions, viability – chip away at the extremes and get people to accept some restrictions. That gets people thinking. That rallies majority support. I am of the opinion (and it seems to be a general trend) that when people see two extremes, they gravitate toward the middle. This is why you need to move the goal posts. If you can move the goal posts from unrestricted abortion to only 1st and 2nd trimester, then 2nd trimester now becomes the “new middle” and the gravitation may very easily continue (like a reverse slippery slope). Just some thoughts.
I’m a big tenter too when it comes to the pro-live movement: we need to work with people who have different strengths.
However, if the priority of our pro-life organizations is to be liked or to get an appealing face in the public, we may succeed in being popular – but we won’t be saving babies.
Whatever we do, how appealing we may be, we have to accept the fact that when we tell people that they are killing their own children, they won’t like us. Look up Martin Luther King Jr. or Ghandi or even Jesus to see what society does to people who love people enough to tell them the truth.
It doesn’t mean we have to be intentionally obnoxious. It just means we value the lives of the unborn more than our reputation as a movement.