What the story of “Jane Roe” should teach us
For a couple of decades, it was a little-known fact that “Jane Roe” (real name Norma McCorvey), the “Roe” in the infamous Roe v Wade case of 1973 that legalized abortion across the United States, had changed her views, become a Christian, and was now pro-life. As will be revealed in a documentary to be released today, shortly before her death she claimed that her pro-life advocacy was not the story it seemed to be. In the film, she says she was paid to become a pro-life advocate. Among other things, she is quoted as saying, “It was all an act. I did it well, too. I am a good actress.” Some outlets have characterized it as being paid to “switch sides.”
If the revelations are what they appear to be, it’s saddening. The claims have been affirmed by one of the people involved in paying her, Rev. Rob Schenck. But others have cast doubt on the story as presented. Many leaders of the pro-life movement who knew her well said they were unaware of such payments, beyond the typical payments public figures receive for speaking at conventions and her salary for the pro-life advocacy group Operation Rescue. Close friends of hers have also maintained steadfastly that she was sincere.
I’m not sure how much media attention this will get. This could be a story that passes through the news cycle in a day or two, or it could spark a flurry of new debate on abortion. Ultimately, we’ll probably never know the whole story. But in light of surprising revelations about yet another Christian public figure making the news cycle, here are some things we can know:
#1. Christians must take care not to be swept up in the power of celebrity. The spiritual journeys and apparent conversions of major public figures like Justin Bieber and Kanye West receive substantial media attention. In modern America where we tend to idolize celebrities and give them considerable sway over the direction of our culture, it’s easy for Christians to jump on that bandwagon and take pride in public figures who get to share their life transformations in the mainstream press. But time and again, we see how that works in reverse as well. The “deconversion story” is becoming an even more popular draw in mainstream media, even with figures who previously were little-known outside Christian circles. The former anti-dating evangelical Josh Harris is one recent example. The same goes for people who advocate for other causes popular in the most politically active segments of the church and then renounce their beliefs.
To be fair, McCorvey hasn’t been one of those figures lately. A lot of younger pro-life Christians have probably never even heard of McCorvey. But we must always be cautious about upholding celebrities as figureheads and influencers for Christianity itself or for faith-driven causes. In our culture where public figures are idolized and their powerful stories get attention, the temptation is strong.
#2. The first shocking headline rarely tells the full story; it takes time for that to become apparent. Many people will read the stories provided by the major media outlets today and never read about it again. But there is more to the story. To claim that a person’s public advocacy was completely fraudulent is a strong claim and requires convincing evidence–more than a couple of snippet quotations. As one of her close friends, Fr. Frank Pavone, points out in a tweet, we don’t have much context for the quotations provided by the major news outlets. We would need to see the footage surrounding the key one-liners, and be aware of the conversations surrounding that footage. Again, though, other than those who knew her personally, it’s unlikely we will ever have enough of the story to know the full truth for sure. And it’s not helpful to overanalyze it all, because of the following point.
#3. We must not confuse the character of those who advocate for a cause with the validity of the cause itself. No one should be pro-life just because someone they respect and admire is pro-life, and no one should be pro-choice just because someone they respect and admire is pro-choice. If someone’s pro-life convictions are rattled by McCorvey’s account, then I would suggest their convictions did not rest on a proper foundation. While McCorvey’s story may say something about the character of those who used her, it does not say anything about the practice of abortion itself. It doesn’t carry any implications for whether abortion is morally right or wrong, or whether it should be legally permissible or not. Nor does Planned Parenthood’s dishonesty about its abortion services function as a pro-life argument. That’s not how scientific or moral truth works.
Norma McCorvey’s story is a story about Norma McCorvey and the people who played a big part in her life. It is not part of a larger narrative about the moral validity of pro-life advocacy. If abortion is truly the unnecessary killing of an innocent human being, an act which not only takes a baby’s life but does irreparable damage to a mother—which I think it almost always is—I don’t see how to avoid the conclusion that it should be illegal except in cases where it’s absolutely necessary. The behavior of some pro-life activists doesn’t change that. We should not make more of this story than it actually is.
