Bowed, but Unbroken? : Activism: The killing of Dr. David Gunn, on top of legal setbacks and political reversals, has flattened the anti-abortion movement. Many ask what course the cause will take.

Born-again Christians Allen and Karen Meadows say they have always believed life begins at conception. Last fall, they decided to become activists and formed their own Operation Rescue affiliate in Tustin, distributing handmade “wanted” posters and organizing pickets at the homes of abortion clinic doctors and staff. “We knew the pro-life movement really needed help,” Karen Meadows, 22, said.

Most anti-abortion activists concede that their momentum has ground to a crawl. The killing of Pensacola, Fla., abortionist Dr. David Gunn and subsequent pro-choice fund-raising ads (“They shot him in the back because he stood up for our right to choose”) are just the most recent setbacks. A combination of court decisions and Clinton Administration reversals had already driven the movement to its knees.

“The political/judicial sector (of the movement) has been very badly hurt. That sector is reeling,” said Marvin Olasky, an abortion foe and historian and journalism professor at the University of Texas, Austin. “People are very frustrated,” he said. “There’s not a whole lot people can do.”

As Sue Finn, spokeswoman for Operation Rescue in Southern California, sees it: “You have a country saying, ‘Shut up and go back in your churches. We don’t want to hear from you.’ ”

But anti-abortion activists say they will do neither. Full of passionate beliefs, Olasky said they are reinvigorated by adversity and are regrouping in two camps: performing one-on-one social work in crisis pregnancy centers and protesting against and picketing abortion providers in the hopes that they’ll quit.

“I like the whole idea of exposing (the providers) to the community,” said Allen Meadows, 23. “The more effort we put into it, the more medical schools won’t teach and other doctors won’t want to get involved in that work.”

Even so, the question remains whether abortion foes can be effective. As the climate heats up and pressure builds, some fear that more violence will erupt or warn that the two camps will turn on each other, damaging the cause even further.

Two years ago, abortion foes were more optimistic. They were sure the Supreme Court would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision guaranteeing abortion rights. Said Gary Thomas, a spokesman for the Christian Action Council: “Every pro-life organization I know was talking about post-Roe America. The concern was that people would stop becoming involved once Roe was overturned.”

But last year, the Supreme Court upheld basic abortion rights in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. And Bill Clinton’s election, said Thomas, “was the final nail in the coffin.”

Already, Clinton has reversed the gag rule that forbade counselors to mention abortion at federally funded clinics; the Mexico City Policy, which denied funds to overseas birth-control programs that offered abortion; the ban on fetal tissue research, and the ban on abortion at military hospitals overseas. He has asked the Food and Drug Administration to consider the legal import of the morning-after pill, RU 486, for personal use. Atty. Gen. Janet Reno has asked her staff to investigate whether existing federal laws can be used to protect clinic access.

Two bills are pending in Congress: the Freedom of Choice Act, which would codify abortion rights from Roe vs. Wade, and the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which would criminalize blockades of abortion clinics.

And now, with the planned retirement of Justice Byron R. White, Clinton, who is pro-choice, will be able to make at least one appointment to the Supreme Court.

For abortion foes, the battle looks very different.

Changing political winds altered the course of the Christian Action Council. The anti-abortion organization began in 1975 as a political lobbying group, but this January it shut down its program of boycotting corporate sponsors of Planned Parenthood to instead concentrate its efforts on what leaders call “the most effective care network ever known in the pro-life movement to women facing unplanned pregnancies.”

“For 20 years, pro-life said what it’s against,” said spokesman Thomas. “We want to say what we’re for: caring for women, for unborn children. . . . We think through improving our alternatives, we can save a lot of women from abortion regardless of what the law is.”

The council runs 450 of the nation’s 3,300 “crisis pregnancy centers,” whose sole purpose is to persuade women not to have abortions. Thomas wonders how anyone could criticize this new program, which he says clearly states its agenda and offers emotional, practical and financial help throughout a woman’s pregnancy and after the child is born. He said the program also offers post-abortion counseling.

“If anybody opposes it, it shows they have a definite pro-abortion agenda,” he said. “We’re providing a choice.”

Since Clinton’s election, such centers have seen more volunteers wanting to help.

Susan Sheridan, 40, a Santa Clarita ultrasound technician, said: “Clinton lifting all the bans frightened me. Where are we going to go from there? That pushed me into doing something.” Sheridan, a Catholic, said she wanted to educate women about fetal development. She decided to volunteer on a Right to Life League pregnancy hot line, listed in the Yellow Pages under “abortion alternatives.”

Public polls show Americans have split attitudes about abortion--wanting it to continue but at the same time believing it is wrong. Members of the National Right to Life Committee believe this means that despite the dismal national outlook for the cause, they can still find small windows of opportunity in state legislatures for abortion-restricting bills such as informed consent (when an abortion would not be performed until a woman hears facts about fetal development), parental consent, waiting periods and health and safety laws that apply to other surgeries.

Some abortion foes also believe they can continue to lobby successfully against proposed federal legislation. Helen Alvare, of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, said her group organized a letter-writing campaign against the Freedom of Choice Act that generated an unprecedented 3 million letters to Congress. “They fill two warehouses floor to ceiling,” she said.

As a result of the group’s efforts, plus the reported opposition of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Organization for Women, which are unhappy with compromise wording of the bill, Alvare estimates that the chances of passage for the act have dropped from 80% to 50%.

Interest in Operation Rescue is also increasing. The grass-roots organization brought abortion to the national agenda through blockades of clinic entrances and the rallying cry stating that if people believe abortion is murder, they should act like it. Rather than risking jail terms for blockades, many activists now picket the homes of doctors and staff under a “No Place to Hide” campaign. Already in California this year, Finn said, nearly 90 people, contrasted with last year’s 40, showed up for meetings to train leaders for Rescue affiliates.

Randall Terry, Operation Rescue’s founder, says the anti-abortion movement has failed. He blames the approach of more secular--and less radical--groups such as the National Right to Life Committee, which, he said, backed compromise political candidates.

In the past, he said, leaders from different factions have been gracious to one another. “Those days are over. We’re taking the gloves off. We are not going to tolerate cowardice and compromise in our camp. . . . We want to change the face and (most important) principles of the pro-life movement--God is, and he has spoken.”

Also, he said he may run for Congress in Upstate New York’s 25th District.

Brian Johnston, western director for the Right to Life Committee, said: “Randall Terry has always done what he has felt he wants to do. I think he will find our approach is, in the final analysis, the most accurate.” If the movement is to prevail, Johnston said, activists must show that they are not simply forcing their beliefs against the beliefs of others. Instead, they must focus, he said, on observable facts about life in the womb. “It’s not religion that is the topic here--it is human life.”

Johnston said that by working within the law, with less sensational arguments, the Right to Life Committee has been able to reach a broader spectrum of people.

Meanwhile, some activists such as Terry’s former national field director, Joseph Foreman, are pushing Operation Rescue’s early civil-disobedience strategy to the wall. Through his Milwaukee-based organization, Missionaries to the Pre-born, Foreman funds two dozen full-time “rescuers” whose lives are devoted to illegal protest and jail terms.

Unlike most of his colleagues, Foreman refused to condemn Michael Griffin, who is charged with murdering Gunn in the midst of a Rescue protest outside an abortion clinic. Although Foreman didn’t condone the killing, he said Gunn “was a mass murderer. He was preparing to kill five to 10 babies. I’m genuinely happy these lives are spared.”

He does not condemn the killing. As his authority, he quoted the Bible as saying, “He who does not provide or care for his family is worse than a nonbeliever.”

Foreman insists he is committed to nonviolence, but his attitude troubles some in both the radical and moderate anti-abortion camps concerned about the increasingly volatile climate surrounding abortion.

Two years ago, a report in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology noted an increase in anti-abortion violence in the United States, citing more than 100 incidents of attempted or completed bombings or arson of clinics since 1977. In 1985, 47% of abortion providers had experienced some form of harassment including picketing or vandalism. Last year saw a dramatic rise in vandalism, notably chemical attacks on clinics and picketing. This year, the National Abortion Federation reports an additional 30 incidents in a new category--”stalking,” meaning persistent following or harassing of abortion providers, staff or patients away from the clinic.

Foreman said he doubts whether killing of doctors will become commonplace. But he warns that harsh laws that restrict his type of protest will bring “a whole different person out on the street.”

“In all honesty, I’m afraid with Clinton, the other side will muster the sheer political muscle to intimidate legitimate historical social dissent. And if they do, the Michael Griffins are going to come out of the woodwork.”

Olasky said that although the climate is undeniably more hostile, he is unsure whether the killing of Gunn is “a blip on the screen” or a pattern is emerging.

He said, “I suspect we’re going to have a cold war in relation to the abortion debate for many decades. I hope it doesn’t become a hot war.”