Pictures from D.C.'s Pro-Life Protest on the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
Pro-Life activists gather every year at the Supreme Court. Here are some of the images from this year’s rally.
By Kay Steiger
January 22, 2009
Today is the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the decision that legalized abortion in the United States. Since then, pro-life activists have rallied every year in front of the Supreme Court. This year’s crowd seemed small, especially since the city had seen about 2 million people gather in the city for President Barack Obama’s inauguration. Here are some of the images from this year’s pro-life rally.
One man holds up a sign that says “Personhood Now” and wears an “Abortion is Mean” sweatshirt. The personhood movement is one that seeks a legal definition of life beginning at conception; such an initiative was on the ballot last November in Colorado but was defeated by a margin of 73 to 27 percent. The man is also wearing a “Democrats for Life” sticker.
This is the crowd of pro-life activists in front of the Supreme Court just after 1 p.m. today. Much of the protest was broadcasting Christian music, prayers, and scripture readings.
One man bends his head down in prayer with a sticker on his back that reads “Babies are Wonderful.”
Some activists are holding signs that say “Choose Life Not Death” and wait near the barricade set up by the police.
One man bends in silent prayer and bends over the barricade erected by the police.
Pro-choice activists set up a counter-protest with signs that read slogans like “Keep abortion legal,” the National Organization for Women’s standard slogan, and more creative slogans like “If your fetus is gay will you still fight for his rights?” and “Life sucks anyway.”
One speaker addressed the crowd, telling the story of the Israelite army fighting the “uncircumcised Philistines” asking who they are that would “stand against the army of the Lord.” He makes a parallel to today’s government leaders. “Who are these legislators that would stand against the army of the Lord? Who are these Supreme Court justices that would stand against the army of the Lord?”
Social Bookmarking
--------
Comments
!
in the last caption i think you mean Israelite.. that’s the ancient hebrews.. not Israeli army, the IDF. lol.
— Sarah - Jan 26, 11:21 AM - #How I wish that the progressive pro-choice rhetoric would not include questioning the value or validity of the personhood of non-straight people. It is a terrible reification that anyone has the right to question the humanity of anyone else. It breaks my heart that gay people are singled out in a way that would be reprehensible were it any other presently or formerly ‘undesirable’ class in society.
— S Shaw - Jan 29, 04:01 PM - #I was actually there and the crowd was definitely bigger and most of the crowd didn’t get to the supreme court until 3-4 p.m. Also, I didn’t hear anything about Israel although you are right in that there were a lot of Christian music and prayers. There were roses on the barricades by around 3 p.m. so at 1 p.m. a lot of people were still marching.
— Lin - Jan 29, 04:18 PM - #Abortion is a red herring . It is used as a wedge issue to divide women. Let’s stop it.
— Prof.Helen McCaffrey - Jan 29, 06:54 PM - #By the way 250,000 (estimate of Park Service) is not a small number. Clean your lens.
I’m shocked!! Progressives undercounting pro-lifers – who knew? [sarc off]
The BEST advertisement I’ve seen in a LONG time was shown on TV last night. (They said it was shown during inaugural coverage but I didn;t see it then.) It is by Catholicvote.org – - NOT shrill but is very salient (no…..that’s not “saline”). It can be seen on youtube; it discusses less than ideal circumstances for raising a child (dad leaves, hard-working single mom, etc. ) and what great potential that child has….if given a CHANCE!
— mighty aphrodite - Jan 29, 07:19 PM - #Any attempt to control abortion by law is indeed a red herring. Such laws are an attempt by men who are not the fathers to gain control over women once they are pregnant.
Pregnant women scare men, so they scare women with laws, with appeals not to “kill babies,” and with talk of “holocausts.”
A men who impregnates a woman and who does not wish the woman to end the pregnancy should persuade her with love, not law.
Men who are not the ones who impregnated the pregnant women in question need to take their legal noses out of women’s vaginas.
— hterrya - Jan 30, 11:56 PM - #Doesn’t the baby belong to the father also? But where is his choice to choose? The abortion debate is not entirely a woman’s choice.
— joe - Feb 19, 12:03 AM - #