life.jpg (15971 bytes)



Operation Outcry

From: Mary Doe, of abortion-legalizing Doe v. Bolton

Dear John,

My name is Sandra Cano. You probably know me best as "Mary Doe." That's what I was called in the Doe v. Bolton case that was the companion to Roe v. Wade and legalized abortion on demand.

It was "my" case that has brought on the horrors of partial-birth abortion. The Roe case legalized abortion through the second trimester, but pro-abortion militants used my case to establish the new "right" to have an abortion right up until just before the baby is born.

What you may not know is that I am trying to undo the tragic consequences of this case, in which pro-abortion advocates used me to further their own agenda without letting me know their intentions.

You see, abortion is against every belief I have. I've never been for abortion. I never went for an abortion. I was not the person they say I was.

I was never given an opportunity to speak for myself in this case. Lawyers who were desperately seeking for cases to make abortion legal by judicial decree seized upon my situation and spoke for me in court, even though their arguments are against everything I believe.

I am a Christian. I know there are babies being killed and I know that I have something to do with it. I didn't know about it and I didn't consent to anything, but that's my name on the affidavit. That's something that's going to be linked to me forever.

So I am doing my best to stop the widespread slaughter of innocent babies, whose only crime is being "inconvenient."

That's why I'm so glad to tell you about Operation Outcry, a real opportunity to wipe out the effects of Roe v. Wade forever.

I am asking you to be a part of the effort to make it happen. CLICK HERE

I am adamantly opposed to abortion: It is a violent act that kills human beings and destroys the peace and the real interests of the mothers involved.

In the past, we pro-lifers have limited ourselves to protecting a life here and there -- passing a limited law to control abortion in the most outrageous cases. But we've always tiptoed around the Supreme Court.

With your help, we're now going to take the Supreme Court head on.

The main thrust of Operation Outcry is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton leading to reconsideration by the Supreme Court.

You see, the Supreme Court has said in recent decisions that they KNOW Roe v. Wade is bad law.

But they also say they think they have to continue to allow abortion because society "depends on it."

This direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton will mobilize those who have been silent about the horrible, detrimental effects of abortion and show that our society DOES NOT depend on the widespread killing of unborn children.

In fact, we will show that we'd be much better off without it.

But the long, difficult legal road to the Supreme Court is very expensive. That's why I am asking for your help today:


By turning up the heat through this direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, one of two things will happen:

If you and other pro-life activists can help fund this direct legal challenge to Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton before the Supreme Court, the Court will probably be forced to finally overturn legalized abortion-on-demand (in fact, the court has already indicated they would do this if the right arguments were proven).

But even if Roe and Doe aren't overturned immediately, the case will, as never before, expose the horrors of abortion and send another crew of radical abortionists down to defeat in the next election.

Either way, the unborn win . . . unless you do nothing.

That's why I'm contacting tens of thousands of pro-life Americans just like you to mobilize a grass-roots army to help overturn these decisions that have had such tragic consequences.

To take this case all the way to the Supreme Court, it will take a lot of money.

But I'm sure you'll agree pro-lifers cannot just sit by watching the slaughter continue.

That's why it's vital you send $15, $25, $50, $100 or even more if you can.

A sacrificial gift of $35 or even $100 or $500 now could spare literally millions of innocent babies in years to come.

So please respond now. If every person reading this could spare just $36, we can complete the next phase of our litigation process: our scheduled trial in Doe v. Turkish and our filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Santa Marie v. Whitman. These cases have started a new movement and have inspired a new thrust to overturn Roe v. Wade. With your help, cases like these are ultimately winnable.

Some people have already send as much as $500. Others have sent $50 and $100.

But no matter how much you send, whether it's $15 or $150, I guarantee this:

Your contribution is urgently needed and will be deeply appreciated.


You can be sure that the abortionists' lobby will not give up their power without a fight. The abortion industry makes untold millions from their "business" every year.

They are already filing needless motions and performing delaying actions to stop this effort.

That's why I hope and pray that you will not delay a moment to send your contribution of $1000, $500, $100, $50, or at least $25 if you can.

Your contribution will be the first step toward reversing Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton and waking up our nation about where our barbarous abortion policy is taking us.

Please help make this happen with a sacrificial contribution of $100, $50, $25, or whatever you can afford.

Thanks so much and God bless you,

Sandra Cano
"Mary Doe" of Roe v. Wade / Doe v. Bolton

P.S. If every person reading this could spare just $36, we can complete the next phase of our litigation process: our scheduled trial in Doe v. Turkish and our filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Santa Marie v. Whitman.

These cases have started a new movement and have inspired a new thrust to overturn Roe v. Wade. With your help, cases like these are ultimately winnable. Please CLICK HERE now.

Please help today. Also, PLEASE forward this email to every pro-life person you know. Thank you so much!

horizontal rule

Jane Roe' Takes Roe. V. Wade Back To Court By Christine Hall Staff Writer June 01, 2001

( - Nearly three decades after the Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide, the original plaintiff in the landmark Roe v. Wade case is urging a federal court to reconsider the 1973 Supreme Court decision.

"My case was wrongfully decided and has caused great harm to the women and children of our nation," said Norma McCorvey, better known as "Jane Roe." McCorvey had a change of heart about abortion in the years since the Supreme Court ruling.

McCorvey and Sandra Cano (of the Roe companion case Doe v. Bolton) filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a class action lawsuit on Thursday in the federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. McCorvey and Cano want their respective cases overturned so that the class action suit against abortion providers can proceed.

The two are represented by the Texas Justice Foundation, a San Antonio-based public interest law firm. Their brief states that their cases were improperly applied by the lower court in dismissing the class action suit, which is now on appeal to the 3rd Circuit.

According to Allan Parker, CEO and founder of the Texas Justice Foundation, the class action lawsuit alleges in part that neither the state of New Jersey nor abortion providers adequately protect the health of women and the life of the unborn child.

In the case of one plaintiff, her parents allegedly forced her to have an abortion. On top of that, the abortion clinic allegedly never asked for her consent.

The other two plaintiffs allege that abortion clinics gave them false or misleading information, not telling them that the abortion would "take a human life."

"There are other states that ... have allowed you to sue for the loss of life in the womb," said Parker. "We call that a denial of equal protection. Some women in some states whose children are injured while in the womb can recover legally for damages."

"In this case, in New Jersey, they're not allowed to recover for injuries to children in the womb," she said.

Abortion law expert Michael Scaperlanda of the University of Oklahoma College of Law says that whatever the legal merits of the case, the court of public opinion may be more important for the time being.

"You're fighting this battle on two fronts: the courts and public opinion," said Scaperlanda.

"If they can get the courts and or the public, and preferably both, to see that abortion really is in many instances coerced - either legally or just persuaded - then maybe that will turn the tide of public opinion more and more against abortion," he said.

The court probably will not give weight to the fact that Norma McCorvey and Sandra Cano have filed amicus briefs, said Scaperlanda. "But it is a value added, and that is whether the court pays attention to it and the extent that the media pays attention."

"Also," Scaperlanda added, "if they can successfully sue doctors, it raises the cost and makes it more likely doctors won't want to pursue it."

Abortion foes should pursue a strategy that is very similar to the strategy employed by civil rights activists that toppled segregated schools and led to Brown v. Board of Education, Scaperlanda advised.

"You do it incrementally at first. You go after the things that all of society is going to agree are the most egregious things."