The Historical Shift from Pro-Life to Pro-Choice Feminism

Everyone with interest in the issues of feminism and abortion should go read Serrin M. Foster’s three page article, “The Feminist Case Against Abortion.” While the article does not serve as a clinching argument against abortion, the article is very helpful in explaining feminism’s adoption of a rigid pro-choice stance regarding abortion.

“The Feminist Case Against Abortion” begins by detailing how the initial feminist movement did not support abortion. Mary Wollstonecraft, author of the historic “A Vindication of the Rights of Women” more than two hundred years ago, denounced the sexual exploitation of women, which in her mind included anyone who would “either destroy the embryo in the womb, or cast it off when born.” This feminist work contributed to the outlawing of abortion in Great Britain.

This pro-life stance continued from the 18th into the 19th century as well. As Foster writes:

“The now revered feminists of the 19th century were also strongly opposed to abortion because of their belief in the worth of all humans. Like many women in developing countries today, they opposed abortion even though they were acutely aware of the damage done to women throughout constant child-bearing. They opposed abortion despite knowing that half of all children born died before the age of five. They knew that women had virtually no rights within the family or the political sphere. But they did not believe abortion was the answer.”

Foster goes on to illustrate how the anti-abortion laws of the 19th century which feminists fought valiantly for were, ironically, repealed by their heirs, the 20th century feminists. What was the cause of this shift in the feminist movement?

The answer comes through another irony. Foster points to the influence of pro-abortion men as key to influencing the feminist movement. Specifically, two men, Larry Lader and Bernard Nathanson, were key in influencing the feminists.

Illustrating this, Foster notes:

“Lader suggested to the NOW (National Organization for Women) leadership that all feminist demands (equal education, jobs, pay, etc.) hinged on a woman’s ability to control her own body and procreation. After all, employers did not want to pay for maternity benefits or lose productivity when a mother took time off to care for a newborn or sick child. Lader convinced the NOW leadership that legalized abortion was the key to the workplace. Dr. Nathanson, who later became a pro-life activist, states in his book, Aborting America, that the two were able to convince [NOW leadership] that abortion was a civil rights issue. Later he admitted that they simply made up the numbers of women dying from illegal abortions, which had been a major point in their argument.”

In short, pro-choice men were incredibly significant in shifting feminism from a movement which fought valiantly for the life of unborn children to a movement which saw defending abortion rights as the key to winning the workplace.

What is the significance of all this? First, I hope this article may be of use to us as we debate with the pro-choice feminism which runs rampant in our culture. Most feminists are probably ignorant that feminists from previous centuries were key in establishing anti-abortion laws. While I am no fan of feminism, perhaps if they know their history they will reconsider their position on this particular issue.

Second, I think this serves as an object lesson for the Church. It is important that we know and understand our historic tradition. When we know our history, we can see when important theological or cultural shifts have taken place in the church. And as we read the Word of God, we can evaluate the rightness or wrongness of these shifts and take appropriate measures, offering appropriate course correctives when necessary.