In my last blog, I wrote about my relationship with Mr. Guy Condon, an anti-abortion activist who ran a number of crisis pregnancy centers across the country. I noted that we had been brought together by an organization called “Common Ground,” which has since closed its doors.
The folks at Common Ground had a very ambitious and, yes, “sexy” agenda. Their goal was to bring together parties on both sides of controversial issues in an effort to find areas of possible agreement. So, for example, with the abortion issue, they tried to craft an agreement on how to reduce the number of abortions. I don’t think they ever succeeded in that particular quest but for a while, this group was much in vogue, they got tons of publicity and lots of money from certain foundations. Ultimately, however, they were forced to shut their doors. Honestly, I don’t know what happened and I don’t have the energy to try to research the rise and fall of Common Ground. Suffice it to say that they are gone.
What many people never realized, however, was that every day there were similar efforts taking place on a smaller scale at the abortion clinics. No, anti-abortion and pro-choice folks were not sitting down and hashing out peace agreements or crafting joint legislation. But activists on both sides of the abortion issue were talking and have been talking for years.
The dynamic at an abortion clinic is fascinating. Generally speaking, the clinic staff people will arrive at the same time and they always know when their local protestors will be out there. Saturday is usually the biggest day as more women are able to get away from work to have an abortion. Normally, you would think that the staffers would just walk in and exchange harsh glances or even harsh words with the protestors. And, yes, in some cases the two sides just didn’t talk and, indeed, there was great animosity. But there were so many other instances where the clinic staff developed some kind of relationship with their protestors.
Over the years, clinic staffers would tell me how they would bring coffee out to their protestors on cold, winter days or ice tea in the middle of the summer. Others would actually invite their protestors into the clinic for a tour of the facility. Several clinic administrators told me that on occasion they would have lunch with the lead protestor in an effort to develop a mutual understanding of their work. Some clinic staff told me that they would have conversations with the director of the local anti-abortion crisis pregnancy center and even refer women to them if they felt it would be helpful. It was as if there was a general truce at these clinics and even a curiosity about that person on the other side of the fence.
I’ve already talked about how my relationship with Paul Hill might have saved the lives of a number of abortion providers in Pensacola in 1994. Of course, no one can prove that talking to the other side might prevented some kind of tragedy but many of the clinic administrators (or doctors) who regularly engaged with “the enemy” told me that the conversations resulted in a less tense environment outside the clinic. They said that after the protestors got to understand a little more about what motivated the clinic workers and the mindset of the women, the protestors were inclined to be less “angry.”
The fact is that activists on this controversial issue, and that includes abortion clinic staff, are usually pretty myopic when it comes to listening to arguments from the other side. They usually just listen to their leaders of their own movements, cite their studies, and regurgitate their talking points. They think that the other side could not possibly have anything meaningful to say, that they are all just out to lunch. So, both sides stick their heads in the sand, become intractable and, as a consequence, the tensions increase.
But because of the bravery of some people on both sides of the issue, peace broke out years ago at some of the clinics that slowed abortion providers and protestors to continue their work in a less-than-hostile environment.
In that regard, I think “Common Ground” worked.

June 16, 2010 at 7:15 am
Pat:
Like you, I’ve spent decades talking to anti-abortion folks, some of whom I’ve liked personally. Most recently, I spoke to Ryan Bomberger, the brain behind the anti-abortion billboards in Georgia. We had a nice, congenial conversation… But that’s besides the point. I’m sure many republican conservatives are personally amiable, even kind. It’ not their personalities, it’s their politics,that matter and as such, even when we can be collegial, their imposition of ideas about how we should live and what we should do, rankle. I certainly don’t oppose common ground if it can be found, but I object to money being spent on this when it can and should be spent protecting clinicians and patients, and paying for abortions in states where Medicaid doesn’t fund them.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 7:26 am
Am I mistaken, Pat, or were all the bridges built from the “pro-choice” side, there for the so-called “pro-lifers” to try if they wanted?
You’ll notice it wasn’t Guy Condon coming to you that initiated the communication; you were the one who reached out.
This is another indication of the fear that compels the so-called “pro-lifer.” A person who is confident in himself, has a well-grounded belief in the fairness of life, the existence of a caring God (or other philosophical concept to explain an enjoyable world) and the general goodness of his fellow humans will not hesitate to deal with an adversary on matters of opinion. Look how Ted Kennedy co-operated with George Bush on No Child Left Behind.
For so-called “pro-lifers” to reach out to clinic staff would mean that they might have to consider stopping their demonstrations. This would be very threatening to their attempts at self-therapy through anti-abortionism.
If you ever come across an instance where they started serving non-poisoned coffee to clinic workers, let me know.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 8:29 am
Good post and comment by Eleanor Bader. I visit two “clinics,” one, The Allentown Women’s Center, where the atmosphere is confrontational and noisy, and the other, Planned Parenthood in Reading, where it is quiet. We have no “pro-choice” adversaries in Reading. As I have said before on this blog, and though I am not certain, I think the confrontational atmosphere is better for us pro-lifers. I’m still observing closely, and I’ll keep you informed.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 10:26 am
Eleanor, thanks for chiming in and I hope you will continue to give us your perspective. And I agree that we should not be spending money on common ground. Indeed, i always thought that was not a good word for the effort because it implied that they had to find areas of mutual agreement. That’s a tough one. I always like “mutual understanding” or something like that. I think that if we understand more about our “opponents” the less likely we are to react “violently.”
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 10:29 am
CG, I didn’t approach Guy. It was the folks from Common Ground who put us together and we took it from there. And it’s impossible to say in every instance who approached who. I do know that when I was at the National Coalition of Abortion Providers and the word got out that I was talking to the antis, other antis contacted me and initiated conversations. Now, if I were a cynic, I would guess that they wanted to talk to me in the hopes of “converting” me like Flip Benham converted Norma MCcorvey. Or maybe they were looking for me to “slip” and say something that they could use in their next newsletter.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 10:30 am
John, I am fascinated about your visit to Allentown Women’s Center! How did you go about getting invited? And what do you mean when you say it was “confrontational?”
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 10:46 am
Norma McCovey is the sort of person whom a semi-skilled rhetorician could convert to anything in a week.
John, why is a confrontational atmosphere better for so-called “pro-lifers”?
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 11:47 am
My pro-life buddy, Joe, invited me, after I had been dis-invited by another pro-lifer, but that was three years ago. The whole story occupies more than nineteen pages of text that any “gluttons-for-punishment” are welcome to read if they want.
Confrontation often occurs whenever we who want to make abortion illegal again and you who want to keep it legal meet. Just look here. And both sides go to the Allentown Women’s Center. The worst thing that can happen for us is that the horror takes place calmly and peacefully. I want to make hell sound like Hell.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 12:18 pm
John,
Do you really think of your position on abortion as something that god would want you to do?
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 2:50 pm
kathy, a position is not something you do, it is something you are in, and yes, that’s where God wants me to be.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 4:49 pm
John you still haven’t explained why confrontation is better for your side.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 4:50 pm
send along the story to me, John. I’ve always been pro-punishment.
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 9:54 pm
Dear John,
Before posting any comments in this blog, make yourself a favor, make sure to change the e-mail you usually use so you are not going to sound so fool like now!!!! The comment # 9 and 10 were posted by the same person using the same e-mail…
WOW – Fascinating to find out how smart is a person who wants to sound on the top of his game!!!
You have the rights my dear to try to pretend being somebody else to argue and maybe win… but unfortunately there are people out “here” who pay attention to DETAILS…
Abortion is not something that will never end… confrontation is aggression, no respect for other people opinion and even worse, no respect for what you and your blinded pro-life people pray so much… Not to kill a fetus but to kill a doctor… to go to the front of clinics that not always are only abortion clinics and do the circus… maybe what you guys want at the end is only attention… and the money that is donated to your cause!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, there is a side of abortion that I don’t agree, but that is not up to me or you or anybody to accuse, but to GOD when you are in His presence and have to account all your acts, and John, when you get there be very careful because I think you will have a lot of trouble explaining yourself…
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 9:56 pm
Honestly you sound more like a Hitler ridiculous follower than a God believer…
LikeLike
June 16, 2010 at 10:12 pm
Sonia, so-called “pro-lifers” want to confrontation because they NEED to be heroes– google aborticentrism for the back story.
So-called “pro-life” confrontation is an exceedingly safe way to appear to be heroic, once you have sold society on the notion that abortion is evil.
Put yourself in their place: You’re on a sidewalk, encountering people who are generally smaller than you (if you’re a man), weaker, undefended, quite likely in emotional turmoil to some degree, weaponless, accustomed to settling differences by discussing rather than yelling, and wishing to be left alone long enough to make it through a door.
So it is perfectly safe for you to get in their face, invent or recite lofty verses designed to instill guilt, to radiate superiority, condescension, pity or beatific holiness according to your whim, and rejoice in the glory of rejection that only a Christian can savor, spurned by an atheistic feminist liberal babykiller whore!
You know if they touch you, they’ll be arrested; you know they aren’t armed, and you if you succeed in shaming them, you’ll be even more of a hero!
How can it get any better than that?
LikeLike
June 17, 2010 at 4:53 am
Sonia, paragraphs 1 to 3: #10 is my comment, #9 is not. Check details further. The rest is fluff.
LikeLike
June 17, 2010 at 4:55 am
There’s some truth in what Charles says in #15, but how can he be so sure that none of us is armed?
LikeLike
June 17, 2010 at 6:41 am
Remember my telling you recently about what I witnessed at Paul Hill’s execution? That kind of argument, that God speaks to us through nature, is tricky. My Protestant friends use it more often, but we Catholics do too.
Well, here’s the beginning of Gail Collins’ New York Times Opinion column of 6/17: “On Monday night in Ohio, a 62-foot-tall statue of Jesus got hit by lightning and burned to the ground. (The adult bookstore across the street was unscathed.)”
LikeLike
June 17, 2010 at 7:14 am
John you don’t need to be a genius in web to know that #9 and 10 has the same image on the right side… you recent posts 16 and 17 do to…. and the 18 you probably changed the e-mail… easy association….
Watch….
LikeLike
June 17, 2010 at 7:15 am
You can clearly see that all my comments comes up with the same image…. but if i change my e-mail…..
Ta dah!!!!!
LikeLike