The Pre-Roe Pro-Life Movement in Minnesota and New York
The Pre-Roe Pro-Life Movement in Minnesota and New York
The Pre-Roe Pro-Life Movement in Minnesota and New York
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>in</strong>clusion, <strong>and</strong> success through broad based tactics <strong>and</strong> medical <strong>and</strong> non-religious rhetoric<br />
<strong>in</strong> ACCL, <strong>and</strong> eventually led to the appo<strong>in</strong>tment of a pro-life activist turned government<br />
<strong>in</strong>sider. Mecklenburg had little or no adm<strong>in</strong>istrative <strong>and</strong> government experience when<br />
she was appo<strong>in</strong>ted to her DHHS post. She cont<strong>in</strong>ued her aggressive pro-life tactics <strong>and</strong><br />
skills that had developed over the previous decades; Mecklenburg perhaps did not know<br />
any other way to run an organization. She never pressed a religious doctr<strong>in</strong>e or agenda,<br />
as she had asserted back <strong>in</strong> 1974, “I don’t feel it’s a religious issue.” 128 By push<strong>in</strong>g back<br />
on the Catholic Church <strong>and</strong> religious reasons for the abortion cause, she did not alienate<br />
herself or become too religiously outspoken to be considered for a government post. Yet<br />
perhaps largely due to her <strong>in</strong>experience <strong>in</strong> government, she could not effectively<br />
communicate <strong>and</strong> also stay with<strong>in</strong> the bounds of her position <strong>in</strong> the 1980s. Mecklenburg<br />
was accustomed to sett<strong>in</strong>g a boundless agenda; this is certa<strong>in</strong>ly a strength of grassroots<br />
organizations. However, she found that government could not work as private grassroots<br />
organizations did.<br />
<strong>The</strong> tactics MCCL drafted, spread to other states, <strong>and</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ued <strong>in</strong> ACCL were<br />
successful on the state <strong>and</strong> national level <strong>in</strong> the public abortion debate, but not <strong>in</strong><br />
government. As much as the abortion debate dom<strong>in</strong>ated political conversation, there was<br />
very little to show for it by the mid-80s; the <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g case of abortion as campaign issue<br />
went h<strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong> h<strong>and</strong> with an <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>ability to achieve legislative victories.<br />
Mecklenburg shows one small example of this general trend. <strong>The</strong> tactics Mecklenburg<br />
employed <strong>in</strong> her post were simply ill-suited <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>effective <strong>in</strong> address<strong>in</strong>g the new<br />
128 David Kuhn, “Antiabortion lobby seeks new image,” M<strong>in</strong>neapolis Tribune, 5B, 22 February<br />
1974, ACCL Records, Box 35, Folder: ACCL Adm<strong>in</strong> File: M. Mecklenburg 1973-76 (1), Gerald R. Ford<br />
Library. Additionally, no compell<strong>in</strong>g evidence exists that Mecklenburg’s denial of abortion as a religious<br />
issue ever changed significantly.<br />
105