FIXME deep dive on new “Red Rose Rescue” run by PAAU -

Cons, from a strategic POV:

Quote in article: “Their bodies, then, become not merely flags to attract attention for the argument but the site and substance of the argument itself.”

(Maria's opinion) “This actually summarizes my main strategic disagreement with rescue:

in the case of the civil rights movement, direct action helped the public to see the victims (the black people themselves who entered the spaces, and were often brutally beaten)

in the environmental example, people can recogize the visible nature in the area as the “victim” of exploitation, and the direct action protesters draw attention to that

but the pre-born child remains invisible, hidden inside her mother's body; direct action, for pro-lifers, does not confront the culture with the actual victims of abortion (the pre-born). In fact, I think it might re-inforce the cultural view that the woman is the victim in this scenario. (“Look how the anti-choicers are harassing these vulnerable women!”) That's why I think strategies like those of CCBR (show the victims to the culture) are more effective in actually changing public opinion on abortion. 1)

A friend: “The other issue I have is that it’s not an effective use of resources – if team members are arrested after getting involved in a rescue, that leaves them unavailable for other things – and maybe even for their families – for months. And how does the public perceive rescues? They don’t see the actual person who rescuers are trying to save. They see the bigger and more visible people who look like they are being harassed and endangered. No good fruit would come from an image like that.”

Pushback to that is that some social agitation is necessary for social reform, but what is the balancing act between being a social agitator and trying to win over the culture? Tightrope walk

FIXME deepish-dive on civil disobedience re: Red Rose Rescue, with some interesting game theory thrown in

1) “There is a key difference between those social movements and the pro-life movement: in history, the people who were victimized participated in public protest. By their presence and attitude of peace and respect, they conveyed to the public that they were human like everyone else. Often they were victimized during their marches and images of this further injustice, communicated via the media, turned the public against the injustice. But with abortion, the very people being victimized—the pre-born—cannot participate. Therefore, those who participate in their place (born pro-lifers) need to convey whom they’re standing for and what they’re standing against. This is why public pro-life gatherings should have images of pre-born children and graphic images of what abortion does to them.”