“Where was the National Organization for Women when I was calling for an investigation into antiabortion violence? Did it take them seven years to realize their sisters were in danger? Most of these people are not feminists. I call them what they are — sexists.”
Bill Baird — The Penthouse Interview
Bill Baird displays all the wounds and scars of a man who has spent the last 20 years of his life at War. While he has won some of its major battles, the “father of abortion rights” does not believe he will live to see the end of the struggle. As the religious fervor of some members of antiabortion groups has been transformed into acts of violence, Baird, the most recognizable and outspoken advocate of abortion, has become one of their primary targets.
For Baird, it would be the denouement of his long struggle to allow men and women the right to decide whether or not they want to have children. During this long campaign he has found himself in jail on eight different occasions, beaten, spit upon, forced to be separated from his family, and, at present, on the brink of bankruptcy. His birth control and abortion facilities are picketed, invaded, and firebombed, his patients’ lives threatened. Perhaps what saddens and disappoints Bill Baird most is that despite the fact that he has put his life at risk for women, some shrill, militant, and radical feminists have mounted a vicious attack against him.
But nobody can underestimate the significance of Baird’s victories. In 1972, in Eisenstadt v. Baird, the United States Supreme Court ruled that it was legal to distribute birth control devices to single people. The ruling overturned Baird’s conviction in 1967 for “crimes against chastity,” when he gave a 19-year-old Boston University coed a can of spermicidal foam, a felony crime for which he was sentenced to three months in a Massachusetts jail.
Eisenstadt v. Baird proved to be a breakthrough case which led to legalized abortion in the United States. In 1973, when Roe v. Wade, the case that did legalize abortion, was being debated among the justices, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., cited the earlier decision as justification for the court’s revolutionary ruling: “If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.”
As increasing numbers of teenagers in the seventies found themselves with unwanted pregnancies, Baird challenged other restrictions on abortion in this country. In 1976 and 1979 he returned to the Supreme Court to argue that the law in several states requiring parental consent from two parents for teenage abortions was unconstitutional because it denied teenagers their rights. The 1979 Baird v. Bellotti decision reaffirmed those rights by allowing teenagers the right to have abortions without parental consent.
But while many around the nation were celebrating these landmark decisions, Baird only worried. As far back as the day when the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, affirming a woman’s right to an abortion, Baird had warned that the fight for freedom of choice was far from over. He predicted that religious zealots opposing abortion would fight back. He saw their reaction growing more violent as their frustration mounted. He was ignored when he spoke of a coming religious war over abortion rights.
As the violence directed against abortion clinics has grown, Baird has not been very successful in organizing pro choice forces into a meaningful coalition to fight back. One of the reasons for that is his own volatile personality. He has always been an absolutist on the issue of civil liberties. He believes that social wrongs are corrected when the system is directly challenged. Back in the sixties he recognized the ineffectiveness of such liberal-minded groups as Planned Parenthood in changing birth control laws. The struggle, Baird believed, had to take place in the courts. The timid and cautious leaders of Planned Parenthood shied away from the combative Baird. Though he can understand their rejection, Baird still resents the organization’s lack of encouragement and moral support when he went to jail fighting their battles.
Baird has also been rejected by the feminists. In the early seventies, the National Organization for Women refused to allow him to speak at their meetings because he was a man. Baird was quick to denounce this as sexism on their part. As recently as last January, when he was decrying the government’s lack of zeal in cracking down on groups responsible for the fire-bombings of abortion centers, aging feminist Betty Friedan chose to attack Baird, charging that he was somebody who decided to play the “knight in shining armor rescuing women.”
But Baird has counterclaimed that many of these feminists cannot accept the fact that a man has “led” their battle. Thus he is in the strange, unenviable position of being hated equally by his natural allies as well as his enemies.
The 52-year-old activist’s stormy career began quietly in the mid-sixties, when he was the clinical director of a large pharmaceutical company. One of the products produced by the firm was a spermicidal foam which the company wanted to distribute to poor people, who were unaware that such a nonprescription contraceptive existed. Baird’s assignment was to travel to these groups, inform his audiences about the product, and distribute free samples.
Within a few months, Baird decided that he could best reach a larger audience by purchasing a van and traveling to the poorer sections of the New York metropolitan area, where birth control information was not readily available. By 1965 he began to run afoul of the authorities. He was arrested in New York and New Jersey. The charges in New York were dropped when the state legislature liberalized its birth control laws that year, but in New Jersey he was less fortunate and served his first jail sentence there. At this time he had also established the first birth control – abortion center in the country on Long Island.
By the late sixties, Baird’s time was completely devoted to this cause. His challenge to state authorities was met head-on. Arrests followed arrests. In 1971 he was arrested on a charge of corrupting the morals of a minor, because a mother held her infant on her lap as Baird lectured his audience about birth control. Trouble also came from the Catholic Church. In a celebrated incident in 1974, a Massachusetts church refused to baptize an infant because of the mother’s support of Baird. Priests referred to Baird as a “peddler of death.” His war with the Church has continued to this day.
As concern continues to mount over increasing violence directed against abortion centers around the country, Penthouse asked Special Features Editor Allan Sonnenschein to seek out Baird to learn just how serious the situation has become. Sonnenschein comments: “If Baird had planned to dramatize the extent of abortion-clinic violence in this country, he couldn’t have staged it better than on the first day I visited his Long Island facility. As I walked through the door the first thing I saw was the bomb squad, tearing up ceiling panels in search of a bomb. Fortunately, there was none. Despite the years of strife and struggle, Bill Baird still has the look of a hungry prizefighter — which he once was. He discussed everything openly, passionately, and uncompromisingly. And, finally, he made a special plea to readers who would like to join him in his fight to contact him at the Bill Baird Center, 131 Fulton Avenue, Hempstead, NY 11550.”
Recently, United States Supreme Court Justice Harry A Blackmun, who wrote the Roe v. Wade decision, was shot at by a member of a profile organization. How serious is the violence of antiabortion groups?
Baird: I think that the political climate is ripe for terrorists to feel that they can intimidate and frighten people, ranging from members of the Supreme Court to directors and patients of abortion centers. I think there is a whole climate, thanks to Mr. Reagan and the FBI — who refuse to recognize the fire-bombings of abortion clinics as acts of terrorism.
Why are you so critical of the FBI?
Baird: I recently appeared with FBI Director [William H.] Webster on “Face the Nation,” and he said, in effect, that if you bomb a post office, a bank, or even a church, for that matter, it is an act of terrorism. But if you firebomb an abortion clinic, it is not. If Webster doesn’t know what terrorism is, he doesn’t deserve to be head of the FBI. In my judgment, he is playing politics with Americans’ freedom to receive medical care, and I think he should be dismissed.
It sounds like your argument with Webster amounts to quibbling over the definition of terrorism. Is there any specific evidence that the FBI is not concerned with the bombings?
Baird: In 1980 I was in Anaheim, California, where they were holding the National Right to Life convention. I heard 60 or 70 antiabortionists discuss how they were going to close down abortion clinics. Among the techniques they discussed was firebombing clinics. I had seven witnesses who heard this, including two detectives from the hotel. I called the FBI with the information. They did nothing with it. I mailed the information to the Washington office of the FBI. They did nothing with it. I even went to court with it and lost the case.
You said that this was in 1980. How long have the bombings been going on?
Baird: In Newsweek and Time the FBI said that there have been 29 fire-bombings since 1982. Why did the FBI say “fire bombings since 1982″? Weren’t there bombings in 1981? Of course there were. In 1979 my facility was bombed with 50 people present. There have been 61 clinics blown up. That to me is a major scandal, yet the FBI doesn’t regard that as terrorism.
Are you claiming that the National Right to Life Committee is responsible for all of the bombings?
Baird: No. But such a consideration should certainly be investigated.
What do you think the outcome of the FBI’s inaction is going to be?
Baird: There is going to be an outrageous confrontation. Many clinics are arming themselves. Many owners have gone out and purchased weapons. You’ve got a setup for an explosive situation where people can get killed.
You have accused antiabortionists of other violent acts besides firebombings. Can you give us some examples?
Baird: For the last several years, the National Right to Life Committee has held workshops on how to disrupt abortion clinics. They call it nonviolent, but they are indeed violent acts. For example, a member will stand outside a clinic dressed in a white jacket, pretending to be a lab person. What he does is offer coffee and doughnuts to patients. Now, that doesn’t sound violent, but it is. When a person comes in for an abortion we ask her if she has eaten anything in the last three or four hours, because if she has, she can’t have the abortion. If that person because of ignorance or desperation doesn’t tell us, she could die. One of the side effects of an abortion is nauseousness, If that person should vomit, she could, conceivably, choke to death.
It sounds like they are out to punish not only clinic workers but patients as well.
Baird: Definitely. They also engage in psychological warfare. They copy down the license plates of patients and find out from the motor vehicle bureau who owns the car. Two or three weeks later, the person will get a phone call, three, four o’clock in the morning. All they will hear is a record of a baby crying, “Mommy, mommy, why did you kill me?”
You said earlier that other clinic directors are prepared to fight fire with fire. What about Bill Baird?
Baird: Nothing would stop me from defending my patients. If I was attacked on the outside, I would try to roll with the punch and bring that person to the police. But I’m a former boxer, and as you can see, I’m in good shape. If anyone jeopardized the life of my staff or patients, it would be a fight to the very end. I will not tolerate their lawlessness any longer.
Not all who oppose abortion are terrorists. If I feel that abortion is murder, don’t I have the right to fight against my tax dollars going to finance abortion clinics?
Baird: Not really. We live in a pluralistic society. Some people may not like to give money to bad schools that turn out zombies. Jehovah’s Witnesses may protest paying for Mr. Reagan’s blood transfusions after he was shot. But they all pay taxes.
But some people say that you, in effect, proselytize abortion, encouraging and brainwashing women who wouldn’t normally have abortions.
Baird: That’s not true. But look at the fact that as a nation we proselytize childbirth at a time when we have world overpopulation. This country represents one-sixth of the world’s population, yet we utilize 48 percent of the world’s resources.
But aren’t you making abortion just another form of birth control?
Baird: I don’t know of any woman who has ever used it for birth control. Now that doesn’t mean it never happens, but aren’t there women who go through childbirth for the wrong reason? I once had a 15-year-old tell me that she was going to have a baby because it would prove to her mother that she was a grownup. I wouldn’t force that child to have an abortion, but one could argue that she was having a baby for the wrong reason.
“I filed a suit against NOW for sexual harassment. It blew their minds. I used the same law that they had been applying against men.”
But why bother with birth control when you can always get an abortion?
Baird: That’s easy for you to say because you don’t know what a woman goes through. Try to think of yourself as a woman, where you are on an examining table, stripped of your sense of privacy and dignity. Think what you are feeling when a stranger comes in and puts two fingers inside your vagina, his other hand pushing down on your uterus. I think it all would be easier if her boyfriend or husband had slipped on a condom.
Don’t many women who have abortions suffer from psychological problems afterward?
Baird: The American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association, both groups which support abortion, have reported there are four times more emotional disorders with women who go through childbirth than with women who have abortions. Sure, some women get depressed, but with all those people screaming abortion is murder, it’s understandable. Years ago I could more readily get women to stand with me and say, “I have had an abortion”; now they are afraid.
As someone who has fought long and hard for women in this country, don’t you find it strange that feminist groups dislike you?
Baird: Some, not all. I was named Man of the Year a couple of years ago in Nebraska by a women’s political caucus. Betty Friedan was also there and she refused to appear with me at a news conference. This is the same woman who a decade earlier claimed I was a CIA agent. I wouldn’t know a CIA agent if I fell over one.
What is Friedan’s real argument with you?
Baird: What it stems from, I’m sure, is when I picketed women’s groups who banned men from their public meetings. I have also picketed male groups who ban women. All of this came to a climax in 1975 on a college campus in Connecticut.
What happened?
Baird: I had been invited to debate a minister, Reverend Rod Fink, from the right-to-life group. When Fink showed up for the debate, this militant woman grabbed me by the arm and started to shove me. They told me to leave, that no man can speak on abortion. So I did what any fair-minded American would do — I filed a suit with the Human Rights Commission in Connecticut against the National Organization for Women, and charged them with sexual harassment. It blew their minds. I was using the very same law that they had been applying against men.
Friedan has said that you think of yourself as a “knight in shining armor.” Is it so?
Baird: I can only suspect that Friedan talks that way because she is insecure about a male leader who happened to be ahead of her on this most important issue. But it’s not only Friedan. Robin Morgan is another one.
What did she say about you?
Baird: She and I were on a stage once when some men raised their hands to ask a question. Robin said that she would not allow men the right to ask questions. I said, “Robin, your fee is paid by both men and women.” I’ll never forget what happened next. This young guy insisted on raising his hand, and in front of my eyes, about eight to ten women beat him up and dragged him outside.
Didn’t Robin Morgan also charge that the reason you were involved in the birth control and abortion movement was so that you could get laid?
Baird: Look, I’m not the ugliest guy in the world — some would consider me attractive to the opposite sex — but to think that I have given 22 years of my life to be shot at, punched, thrown in jail eight times, so that I can take a woman to bed is an insult to women and to me.
What is your attitude toward feminists?
Baird: Many of them are not feminists. I call them what they are — sexists. There are men who are sexists, and there are women who are sexists, as well. I know that it is hard for liberals to accept this fact.
What do you mean?
Baird: I’ve run into a lot of liberals who say, “Hey, we’ve got to see that these women have equal opportunity.” I say, You’re right, but have you ever looked at the masthead of Ms. magazine? Ninety-nine percent of them are women, yet 52 percent of the labor market are women. So I’m saying to the Gloria Steinems of the world, Practice what you preach. A true feminist believes in the equality of both sexes, and practices it.
Although you have been successful in fighting for women’s rights in this country, are you saying that you have received no support from the national feminist movement?
Baird: Absolutely none that can be translated into terms of financial support. But I don’t want to be misread or misunderstood. I need emotional support. How great it would be to once have a Betty
Friedan or a Gloria Steinem or a Ms. magazine say something like, “Bill Baird, thank you for putting up with a lot of stuff we did not have to put up with.”
I gather that you don’t believe feminists are aware how serious the threat of violence is from antiabortion groups.
Baird: Well, now they’re issuing statements condemning it. But where was NOW in 1978 when I was calling for an investigation? Did it take them seven years to realize their sisters were in danger? Every time I get clobbered by anti-abortion people, you never hear a word in my defense from NOW.
What is your quarrel with Planned Parenthood? Don’t they support abortion on demand?
Baird: No, not really. They backed a reform bill that only allowed for abortion in cases of rape, incest, mental instability of the woman, or a malformed fetus. But 93 percent of the women I saw did not fit those categories. Most wanted to have abortions for economic or social reasons. My feeling was, Who the hell is Planned Parenthood to compromise the freed om of these women?
Tell us something about the “Army of God.”
Baird: The FBI claims that the Army of God does not exist. I say that it does. and I have seen enough evidence from people across the nation who have gotten messages from them. Justice Blackmun, before his home was fired upon, received calls from them that he would be killed. I received a letter from them that said, “As you have tortured others, you will be tortured. As you have murdered little babies, so will you be.” Dr. Hector Zevallos, who runs a clinic in Illinois and is a friend of mine, was kidnapped by the Army of God along with his wife. I know that the Army of God is real and that they are entrenched in some fundamentalist sect.
Would you agree that these people generally justify their violence in the name of religion?
Baird: In 1979 my facility was firebombed with 50 people present. A man named Peter Burkin walked in, carrying a gallon of gasoline in one hand and a two-foot flaming torch in the other. He claimed that he was sent by God to get Bill Baird and cleanse the facility with fire.
Did Burkin belong to any of the national antiabortion organizations?
Baird: Here’s what we do know. He was seen the week before the bombing, according to evidence given at his trial, picketing with antiabortion people outside my facility in Long Island. We also know that he was seen in Philadelphia, and prior to that in New York City, yet he reportedly has no money. Who was supporting him?
“The political climate is ripe for terrorists to feel that they can intimidate and frighten people, thanks to Mr. Reagan and the FBI.”
Did you ever find out?
Baird: I appealed to Nassau County District Attorney Dennis Dillon to investigate it. but what I later learned was that for the previous two years the district attorney had been given an award by a local right-to-life group. So I don’t put much stock in anything he may have done about the information.
Do the antiabortion terrorists have any relationship to the neo-Nazi groups that have been active lately?
Baird: Well, I would certainly like to investigate the Ku Klux Klan, which is very antiabortion. They see themselves as fundamentalist Christian soldiers marching on to war. We also know they have been organized a long time, using violence and weapons. They’re of that mentality that goes around bombing and shooting at clinics. They’re mental clones of people like the Ayatollah Khomeini and Jerry Falwell, believing that God is on their side. They are totally intolerant of differences of opinion, intolerant of freedom of other individuals. They tell you that unless you believe the way they do, you are never going to be allowed to exercise your rights.
Falwell certainly has a right to oppose abortion. But how is that kind of opposition related to people who attack abortion clinics?
Baird: I’m talking about religious leaders in general, and I only use Jerry Falwell as one of them. I could cite Archbishop O’Connor, who should be sent back to a farm in Pennsylvania. Here’s a man who comes to New York and says that his No. 1 priority is to stop abortion. Not drug addicts, not the hungry, not the people who freeze to death in these cold winter months, but abortion. Then he equates abortion with the Nazi Holocaust. It is this kind of rhetoric that turns emotionally crippled people loose to kidnap doctors, blow up clinics, and take shots at United States Supreme Court justices.
It sounds as though those who extend such rhetoric into acts of violence are all loonies. Are they?
Baird: I’m not convinced that they are all loonies. I think that they are people who are definitely misguided and are following what they think is a moral viewpoint of imposing by law or terror a particular religious dogma. They are the same types of people who took part in the Salem witch trials a few hundred years ago.
How has all of this affected you personally?
Baird: I was a dreamer when I began, 22 years ago. I thought people would not let me go to jail. I believed that they would come to my side because I was fighting for justice. Now, 22 years later — and it’s painful for me to say this — but people don’t give a damn about it. The number of people who supported me in the beginning was monumental compared to the support I have now.
Why?
Baird: Because people are now frightened. They’re frightened of the shootings, the fire-bombings.
Are you going to fight this battle for the rest of your life?
Baird: No, because I don’t think I am going to make it. I feel this more than ever. I’m not paranoid, because the threats are here, but I wake up in the middle of the night thinking of being murdered. I am separated from my family because of my involvement and I’m also dead broke. There are real efforts made by antiabortion people to block my appearances on radio and television and particularly at colleges and high schools.
But you go on.
Baird: Yes, but I need help. That is why I am trying to put a coalition together of people from all kinds of groups — women, blacks, gays — because the common denominator for all is freedom.
Of course as we sit forty years after this discussion with Bill Baird, many, many people have learned the difference between a Supreme Court decision and a law passed by Congress. Consequently, questions like “But why bother with birth control when you can always get an abortion?” seem at least ironic, if not painful. Of course that question also display a remarkable lack of understanding of how women (or girls) struggle emotionally with that decision. Basically, men can be real idiots, but they usually do not mean to be. As for Mr. Baird himself, now a lucid nonagenarian, he just recently found himself the subject of a documentary entitled Yours in Freedom, Bill Baird. You know, some people honestly do not do things for purely personal gain or recognition. We appreciate that.
