Thursday, May 21, 2020


UPDATED 
Woman behind ‘Roe v. Wade’ said in a ‘deathbed confession’ that conservatives paid her to lie about her conversion

Published May 19, 2020 By Travis Gettys


“Jane Roe,” the plaintiff in the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion, admitted in a deathbed confession that she faked her conversion later in life to oppose legal abortion.

Norma McCorvey, who died in 2017, became known as Jane Roe after suing for the right to get a legal and safe abortion in Texas, made the stunning confession in the upcoming FX documentary “AKA Jane Roe,” reported The Daily Beast.

“This is my deathbed confession,” McCorvey chuckles in the film.

Director Nick Sweeney asks whether the evangelical movement used her as a trophy, and McCorvey agrees she was “the big fish,” but admits she also got something out of the arrangement.

“I think it was a mutual thing,” she told the filmmaker. “I took their money and they took me out in front of the cameras and told me what to say. That’s what I’d say.”

“I’m a good actress,” she added. “Of course, I’m not acting now.”



Conservatives crowed for years after McCorvey announced that she had renounced being a lesbian and became an anti-abortion, born-again Christian, and actors Jon Voight and 


Stacey Dash starred in a preachy film about her conversion.

But she makes clear in the film, which is out May 22, that she hadn’t really changed her ways.

“I wonder how many abortions Donald Trump is responsible for,” McCorvey said in the film. “I’m sure he’s lost count, if he can count that high.”

“If a young woman wants to have an abortion—fine,” she added. “That’s no skin off my ass. You know, that’s why they call it ‘choice.’ It’s your choice.”




Woman in landmark US abortion case was paid for later activism: documentary
GETTY/AFP/File / TRAVIS LINDQUISTNorma McCorvey (C-Podium), the Roe of Roe v. Wade, speaks on the steps of the US Supreme Court on January 18, 2005 after petitioning the court to reverse its landmark decision that granted women the right to an abortion

The woman at the center of the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United States, Roe v Wade, says she was later paid by anti-abortion groups to denounce the landmark ruling, according to a documentary set for release on Friday.

Norma McCorvey was the anonymous "Jane Roe" who went to court in 1969 to challenge laws against abortion after she was barred in the state of Texas from obtaining one.

Her case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which on January 22, 1973 ruled that a woman could legally terminate a pregnancy.

In the 1990s, however, McCorvey became a fervent opponent of abortion, converting to evangelical Protestantism and later Catholicism.

In the documentary "AKA Jane Roe," which airs Friday on the FX network, McCorvey asserts she was paid to be the face of the anti-abortion movement.

"I think it was a mutual thing," she said in a clip from the documentary published in US media. "I took their money and they'd put me out in front of the cameras and tell me what to say. That's what I'd say."
AFP / CHRIS KLEPONIS
Norma McCorvey, who brought the original suit that resulted in the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 ruling granting women the right to abortion, says she was later paid by the anti-abortion movement to denounce the decision, according to a new documentary
"I was a big fish," she told director Nick Sweeny, who met her several months before her death in 2017, at the age of 69.

"It was all an act?" Sweeny asked.

"Yeah, I did it well too. I am a good actress -- of course I'm not acting now," McCorvey replied.

In what she described as a "deathbed confession," McCorvey said, "If a young woman wants to have an abortion, fine. You know, that's no skin off my ass. You know that's why they call it choice, it's your choice."

Since the Supreme Court decision, the right to abortion continues to deeply divide Americans, with many opposing it for religious reasons.

In recent years, some states have passed laws severely restricting access to the procedure, igniting legal battles that seem likely to end up once again before the Supreme Court.

No comments: