Written by Tony Kaye
Directed by Tony Kaye

When it comes to the abortion debate, there is plenty of rhetoric and jingoisms to be found on both sides of the argument.  Most people on either side get their information fed to them by friends or others in authority (religious or otherwise) who already share the same opinion on the topic.  Very few people will actually challenge themselves to try and see varying perspectives and are comfortable accepting certain facts that fit their preconceived notions while jettisoning the ones that don’t.

With Lake of Fire, Director Tony Kaye attempts to show all sides of the abortion debate in a balanced way.  I have to say, he does a fantastic job.  It’s probably one of the few documentaries I’ve come across that cuts through much of the rhetoric and challenges what we think.  The film’s title comes from a description of what hell might be like.

Created in 2006, before the rollback of Roe vs. Wade, Lake of Fire begins with some of the legislation that’s been both proposed and sometimes passed over the years.  Of course, the most famous on the topic is Roe vs. Wade, but there have been many more pieces of legislation people haven’t heard of.  In South Dakota, legislation was passed that would outlaw abortion except when the mother’s life was in danger.  The hope was that the (then) President Bush would be able to appoint another justice to the Supreme Court who would be pro-life before arguments about the law would be heard.

HB 1215 banned all abortion, including in cases of rape and incest, including cases that threaten the health of the mother; the only exception is if the mother’s survival itself is at risk, and even in those instances the doctor MUST “make reasonable medical efforts under the circumstances to preserve both the life of the mother and the life of her unborn child.”  Remember folks, these are the same people who have been protesting this past summer saying they don’t want the government to come between you and your doctor when it comes to health care.  However, they are all too eager to legislate what a doctor needs to do when it comes to their views.

Kaye interviewed people from all sides of the debate, such as Douglas Kmiec (Professor of Constitutional Law), Dallas Blanchard, Noam Chomsky, Frederick Clarkson, Alan Dershowitz, Nat Hentoff (writer), Peter Singer, Randall Terry, Bill Baird, Frances Kissling (Catholics for Free Choice), Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe), and more.  They provide a fascinating cross-section of viewpoints on the topic, and for the most part, the people are intelligent and compassionate.

The point made that the Pro-Life movement is largely against sex education as well as promoting birth control.  The Pro-Choice side is the one that is doing anything to try and prevent the need for abortions by making this information available.  This seems contradictory in a way as it would seem to me that if you wanted to eliminate abortions, you’d want to do more to help birth control get into the hands of those who need it.  The argument seems to be one of a particular religious denomination trying to impose their morality on the topic of sex on the rest of us.

However, Lake of Fire doesn’t stray too far from the central topic here and it’s not something that’s just going to target one particular point of view.  Kaye lets faceless women talk about their decisions or talk as they are attempting to come to a decision.  Some graphic images of a woman undergoing the procedure.  It’s not pretty, that’s for sure.  Having undergone a D&C after a miscarriage myself, it’s not fun even then.  Kaye has footage of what the tissue is that comes out after an abortion and it can be quite sobering for those on the pro-choice side who just want to call it a “clump of cells.”  Seeing the tissue that comes out of it is shocking in a way as there are parts that do seem fully formed, but the tissue more resembles a malformed frog than anything else.  When does it change from being this clump of cells to life?  I don’t know and I don’t have the answers, but I take some comfort in being able to admit that rather than wanting to force my “certainties” down someone else’s throat.

There is footage from a protest in Washington DC in 1993 where, under the moniker “Children of Hillary’s village”, crosses are erected surrounding the Washington Monument to illustrate the number of abortions these particular protestors choose to believe have been performed.  Kaye really attempts to show all sides of this and let all of the arguments be heard, including the ones where the people on both sides come off nuttier than fruitcakes.  This is especially offensive when some of the so-called preachers and abortion foes tie abortion in with “promoting homosexuality and perversion.”

I was surprised at the comments from Alan Dershowitz as he states that when you have well-reasoned arguments (and not histrionics) on all sides, they all have a point and are all right.  The arguments both for and against abortion have merit and are right.  There are also people interviewed I believed at first would have a certain viewpoint that ended up completely surprising me.  Nat Hentoff is a writer, an atheist, and a women’s rights activist who also doesn’t believe in abortion.  He serves to illustrate that there are a lot of lines in this argument that aren’t clear-cut.  Noam Chomsky makes the point that values aren’t always absolute.  I can see that in my own life as I know there’s a prominent west-coast Republican who thinks there was one abortion that should have happened.

Some women make the case that some of the arguments against abortion are more attempts by men to control them and to keep them in traditional roles.  With what’s gone on in the country over the last eight years, that’s a pretty obvious take. It seems the arguments being made against abortion by many of the religious people are that they want to make the choice for women not to have sex at all and to control their choices about sex by keeping abortion illegal – it seems to be a tool to impose their version of morality on the populace.  They talk about freedom, but it’s in the context of “you are free to believe the way I do and make the choices I think you should make.”

If you think I am exaggerating, you may be a bit shocked by the scene of a male protestor standing outside the murder trial (of the killer of a physician who performed abortions among other services) who is saying they should execute people who are blasphemous, sodomites, feminists, etc.  These people are seriously advocating killing people for saying “God dammit”.

Lake of Fire continues to follow some of the trial of the man who murdered a doctor who provided abortions and the testimony of the minister who influenced the murderer. Parts of anti-abortion films are shown, in particular one that was shown to the murderer, Hard Truth.

At the same time, Kaye has sought out more tempered pro-lifers such as the woman whose lawsuit was at the heart of the abortion debate, Jane Roe herself Norma McCorvey.  That coupled with the people Kaye has interviewed who I at first thought were going to come down on the pro-choice side really gives this documentary an evenhanded feel to the debate.

Even as the moderate pro-lifers are being shown, Kaye shows that the pro-choicers trying to keep abortion legal and keep clinics offering abortions open, operating, and available to those who have made that choice can be just as extreme at times.  One woman who works at a clinic declares that the men who sit and stare at the clinics trying to intimidate those who visit are somehow getting sexual gratification.

Lake of Fire does attempt to go back into history and show the desperation of women when abortion was illegal.  Bill Baird of Planned Parenthood fame talks in this section and shows the history as well, including a graphic picture of a woman who died in a motel room while trying to perform an abortion on herself.

There is some discussion about what would happen to the children if abortion was not legal.  While some pro-choicers say that there isn’t a market, I believe the opposite.  I believe in some ways that’s exactly what these “Christians” want which is to take these babies and have them raised by “good Christian families”. Hence Justice Alito’s remarks about a “domestic supply of infants.”

Finally, Lake of Fire follows a woman who goes through an abortion.  It’s not something she goes into lightly and it’s not like she has it and goes out shopping to Macy’s later.  It’s a very real and emotional time for her, despite the fact that she’s secure in the decision she’s made.

Lake of Fire is very long at about 2 1/2 hours.  However, it’s very thorough in the arguments on both sides of the debate, which is something I appreciate.  The length and topic do make it difficult to sit through, but I’m glad it wasn’t shaved down further as I think everything presented in the film had merit.  It’s a powerful piece of filmmaking.  There is quite a bit of footage in this that is very graphic.

I can’t really say I “liked” this film in the conventional sense as it does deal with a topic that is so emotionally charged.  It is probably the best and most balanced film I’ve seen on the topic. I did find it hard to take the entire film in one sitting, both because of the topic and the length of the entire film.  It’s not that it drags or anything, it’s just a lot of time to sit and absorb such an emotional topic.  The look of the film is good as it’s shot in black and white which I saw as a way of illustrating how both sides see the issue, but the truth is in the shades of gray in this film. The lack of color also doesn’t give the documentary a slick or polished look – it has a raw and realistic feel to it.

I don’t know that this will change any minds, but it does cut through those jingoisms and rhetoric we’ve heard bantered around for so long.  If your mind is so closed that you can’t think another side might have some merit to their argument, I don’t think you’ll appreciate Lake of Fire all that much.  For the rest of us who do struggle with these questions, it is more food for thought.