“Roe v. Wade: The Movie” will document the leadup to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 decision striking down legal protections for the unborn, exposing the popular narrative as a pro-abortion whitewash — a distortion of history by abortion sympathizers in politics and the media. According to its website, the film opens with a look back at where it all began: the work of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger.
The movie recalls Sanger’s appearance at a Ku Klux Klan rally, where she delivered a speech describing her plans to reduce population growth among the African-American population — part of her notorious “Negro Project.”
“Roe v. Wade” then examines the mid-century lead-up to legalization. As the sexual revolution gets underway, obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Bernard Nathanson joins a growing movement calling for abortion laws to be lifted.
In 1969, the New York doctor founded the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws — NARAL — later rebranded the National Abortion Rights Action League. A prolific abortionist himself, Nathanson later estimated he killed 60,000 unborn during his career — one of them, his own. He later rejected abortion and became a pro-life champion. Once a self-described “
" >Jewish atheist,” in 1996 Nathanson was received into the Catholic Church.
Next, the film depicts feministBetty Friedan, whose 1963 book The Feminine Mystique sparked the Women’s Liberation Movement, joining the cause. Hollywood has always had an agenda to influence Americans to accept abortion, even if they have to re-write history to do it. Nathanson and Friedan unite with Planned Parenthood to lay the foundation for a legal test case, scouring the country in search of a woman carrying an unplanned pregnancy.
They find their ideal plaintiff in Texas: a penniless high school dropout named Norma Jane McCorvey, better known by her legal pseudonym, “Jane Roe.” (McCorvey later became an ardent pro-life advocate and in 1998, and she converted to Catholicism.)
“Roe v. Wade” spotlights the activists’ manipulation of McCorvey. They deceive the troubled young women, assuring her that if she agrees to sue the government, she’ll be able to abort her child legally. All the while, they know perfectly well McCorvey will give birth long before the final ruling in her case.
The movie reveals that Nathanson, Friedan, Planned Parenthood and their whole abortion activist cabal were pioneers of “fake news.” Once the case is launched in the courts, they feed false statistics and other manufactured data to the media to sway public opinion:
But there were a few people willing to step up to fight them. This fight is led by the film’s protagonist Mildred Jefferson, the first African-American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School. She believed that she became a doctor to protect life, not destroy it. Not only was she trying to save lives, she was trying to save her race. She joined the Catholics, other men, and other women, to try to educate Americans on the truth, but they were up against the most well-funded revolution in 20th century America. … Although they did everything they could possibly do, the ban on abortion was overturned.
“Roe v. Wade: The Movie” is a landmark work, say project collaborators because it tells the truth — a first for depictions of the case.
The film presents “the real untold story of how people lied; how the media lied; and how the courts were manipulated to pass a law that has since killed over 60 million Americans,” according to the project website. “Many documentaries have been made, but no one has had the courage to make an actual feature film, a theatrical movie about the true story.”
“Hollywood only wants you to hear their version of the story — in fact, there are three movies currently in development that take a pro-abortion stance,” it says. “But you shouldn’t be surprised. Hollywood has always had an agenda to influence Americans to accept abortion, even if they have to re-write history to do it.”
“We need your help to fight for the lives of the unborn because Hollywood refuses to,” producers say. “Our movie will not only shed a light on that truth but will also change hearts and minds. We have distribution on 1,000 screens so even if just one person changes as a result of this movie, we will have saved a life.”
Actor and producer Nick Loeb spoke with Townhall recently about his upcoming feature-length film ‘Roe v. Wade’ that tells the untold story behind the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. Loeb calls the film a “
" >war movie essentially” saying it’s “a social war movie,” that shows those behind legalizing abortion and those who fought them.
While the movie is about historical events, Loeb described the film as a “little bit of a conspiracy movie,” comparing it to Oliver Stone’s “JFK.” The film illustrates Planned Parenthood and the media manipulating and lying to Norma McCorvey, Jane Roe in the case, and the public as part of their push to legalize abortion in America. The film also explores the foundations of the pro-life movement as many emerged to fight the legalization of abortion.
Loeb is teaming up with Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King Jr. and pro-life advocate, Academy award winner Jon Voight, Stacey Dash, and Stephen Baldwin to make the film through a crowdfunding campaign at www.RoevWadeMovie.com.
Loeb explained some of the lies involved in what the movie dubs “the most corrupt court case in history.”
“All she wanted was to have an abortion,” he said of Norma McCorvey. She was already in her second trimester when the attorneys met with her. She told them she just wanted an abortion, asking if she would be able to get one. “They outright lied to her and said yes,” Loeb said. The courts don’t work that quickly and McCorvey never got her abortion.
Loeb says the film tracks judicial corruption and media manipulation as the case makes its way to the Supreme Court where, after some intrigue, the justices voted 7-2 in favor of legalizing abortion.
The movie also follows the story of Dr. Mildred Jefferson, the first African American woman to graduate from Harvard medical school, who ended up being the second president of National Right to Life. Loeb says Jefferson’s opposition to abortion came from taking the Hippocratic Oath as a doctor to save lives not to kill them but also her belief that “abortion was the number one killer of African Americans in our country.”
The story has not been an easy one to tell. Loeb spoke of the many obstacles he’s faced in making the film, including Facebook briefly banning them from sharing the crowdfunding link and from advertising.
As word spread online about the movie, Facebook banned the promotion of this film – preventing the producers from spreading the word about the film, and blocking anyone from “liking” or linking to the film’s Facebook page. “Hollywood and the liberal media don’t want you to know the true story of how a law that has killed over 60 million Americans was formed.”
In another example, Facebook is now targeting Breitbart News as a “far-right site” that publishes “falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and intentionally misleading stories.” Next to all Breitbart stories that someone forwards via facebook, it posts a link to Wikipedia’s smear description, currently only viewable for American users.
According to Breitbart, “The description repeats several anti-Breitbart News obsessions popular in the corporate and left-wing media: that the site has “misogynistic, xenophobic, and racist content,” and a single throwaway comment from former Executive Chairman Steve Bannon describing the site as a “platform for the alt-right.” Breitbart News has consistently rejected the alt-right label,which has been applied to the site by the mainstream media.” [The media portrays it as synonymous with “white supremacy” just because it defends Western culture.]
Facebook claimed they “were spamming by inviting our friends,” Loeb says. Facebook eventually backed down and said the ads were disapproved “in error.”
Loeb still worries that Facebook “has a monopoly on promoting online to crowdfund,” given all the problems they’ve experienced about allowing the ‘Roe v Wade’ movie to advertise.
He discussed his own path to the pro-life movement as well. He said an ex-girlfriend had an abortion in college and that “had a long-lasting effect” on him. Loeb wrote more about this in a 2015 New York Times op-ed about the legal battle he’s in with his ex-fiance, ‘Modern Family’ star Sofia Vergara, over custody of frozen embryos they created.
“I know the sex of them,” he said, “they’re two girls and they’re five days old and you know they’re lives, they’re individual distinct lives.”
“Technology today I think really changed the scope of the argument,” Loeb said of the pro-life cause in general. He said one of his film’s characters, Dr. Bernard Nathanson is an example of this.
“Dr. Bernard Nathanson, he was the biggest abortionist in history. He committed over 70,000 abortions and was a leader in the pro-choice movement,” Loeb said, “he realized that he could commit an abortion under a sonogram and realized this is actually killing a human being and he has a major conversion and becomes pro-life and becomes a major leader to protect and fight for life.”
Nathanson, originally the founder of the abortion advocacy group NARAL, ended up making a controversial documentary in 1989 called ‘The Silent Scream’ which depicts an abortion under a sonogram to show people what the unborn child undergoes in the procedure.
“Technology today is moving faster than the law,” Loeb said, “and I think the laws need to catch up to technology.”
He hopes his movie “will open up the eyes of people to know what the truth is.”
Cast, Crew Quit Film Project After Discovering Its Pro-life Message
Loeb also told the Hollywood Reporter that actors and crew had bailed on him, and owners of filming locations have barred filming, after they learned that the movie takes a decidedly pro-life approach to the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that gave women the “right” to kill their pre-born babies.
As just one example, Loeb recalled that a crew member, a woman working as the film’s on-set electrician, stormed up to him and demanded to speak with the director over the content of the film. “When I told her I was [the director], she told me to go f*** myself,” recalled Loeb, who had hidden the true intent of the film by using the working title 1973. “Then she threw her headset on the ground and walked off. I found out later she was our electrician.”
He also said that in addition to losing crew members, individuals who have been cast in the film have bailed over the movie’s perspective. “We had to replace three local actors, including one who was to play Norma McCorvey, even after she begged for the role,” he said, referring to the real-life “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade.
So far, the film’s production has moved ahead under strict secrecy for security reasons and to ensure filming locations. Nonetheless, production has still been a challenge. Loeb told the Hollywood Reporter that at Louisiana State University, “we were told we were rejected [for filming] due to our content, even though it will be a PG-rated film. They refused to put it in writing, but they told us on the phone it was due to content.” And at Tulane in New Orleans, the university pulled the plug on a filming location when the school newspaper reported that the project was pro-life.
Loeb noted that the news of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s impending retirement makes the upcoming movie especially relevant, since President Trump’s replacement may give the High Court enough votes to overturn Roe v. Wade. “But even without that news, it’s one of the most controversial political decisions in history,” he told the Hollywood Reporter. “It divides us and makes us uncomfortable.”
Loeb added that when he delved into the background of Roe v. Wade, “I discovered conspiracy theories, fake news, made-up statistics, and a whole lot of people involved who switched their positions from pro-choice to pro-life, including Norma [McCorvey].”