posting their website was halfway facetious, but they do have a "leader" (Orly Taitz) and some US legislators support. I don't know what else you think they need to be a "movement". Their efforts won't be successful, but that doesn't make their organization of people and resources any less real
---------- Post added at 07:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:11 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I think something becomes a (political) movement only after a group of people actually have enough power to change the political dynamics of an issue. For example our historic equal civil rights quest, did not become a movement until about the early 1900's. I would argue the birth of the NAACP was the birth of the "movement. There was a much sharper focus and ability to affect change after the formation of the NAACP, a clear moment of demarcation in my opinion.
|
So is Pro Life not a movement because they haven't had the political power to change the issue?