Here is a journalism question for you: When is a death threat an actual “death threat”?

Let me state that another way: When do words that clearly communicate a death threat represent a “real” or legitimate death threat in the eyes of journalists, local police and (wait for it) the Department of Justice?

We can add another question I received via email from a religion-beat veteran: In what sense is a death threat “pro-choice”?

Yes, once again we are looking at a story that is linked to abortion, a topic that mixes politics, religion, law and science. In this case the event that made news (barely) was the vandalism of yet another Catholic church in a blue zip code. Here is the entire report from a local CBS newsroom and note the headline, which inspired that email question: “Catholic Church in Lansing vandalized with pro-choice graffiti.”

(CBS DETROIT) - The Diocese of Lansing released video footage of three people vandalizing the Church of the Resurrection with spray-painted pro-choice graffiti.

The incident happened on Saturday, Oct. 8, between 11:52 p.m. and 11:56 p.m. Video footage shows the three suspects walking up to the church from the area of Jerome and Custer, spay-painting the church, and then leaving the area.

The suspects spray-painted on the doors, signage, and sidewalk of the church, and the messages included: "Restore Roe" and "Is overturning Roe worth your life or democracy?"

Police are reviewing the security footage and searching for the suspects. According to the Diocese of Lansing, the graffiti has been power-washed.

If anyone has any information about this crime, they are urged to contact the Lansing Police Department at 517-483-4600.

The key language: “Is overturning Roe worth your life or democracy?" What are the logical implications of the words “worth your life”?

I realize that some anti-abortion demonstrators use chants claiming (thinking “mortal sin” consequences) that those taking part in abortions are risking their souls. Is that the same thing as saying that the U.S. Supreme Court voting to overturn Roe v. Wade is, addressing Catholic worshippers, “worth your life”? Obviously, I know there have been fatal attacks in the past by fringe anti-abortion activists on abortion providers and that these cases deserve strong news coverage and should be prosecuted to the letter of the law.

Do I think that the demonstrators shown in the crime-scene video were planning to kill someone? Frankly, I would say “no.” But how — my main point — do police, journalists and federal officials make that call?

A bit more background: This is not the first attack on Catholic sites in the Lansing area, drawing some local coverage. And, of course, this new attack drew coverage from conservative Catholic media, such as the Catholic News Agency. That CNA report included additional details:

The words “Abort the court” and “Death to Christian nationalism” were spray-painted in black on the walkway in front of the steps at the Church of the Resurrection. The vandals also painted a cross with a slash through it between those two statements.

Two upside-down red crosses were left on two of the church’s doors as well.

At this point, is a Catholic parish in the Midwest an example of “Christian nationalism”? I’d be interested in knowing if this particular parish has done something egregious, such as helping sponsor a crisis-pregnancy center.

Looming in the background, of course, is the contrast between regional and national legal efforts to arrest anti-abortion demonstrators with the mysterious silence surrounding law-enforcement efforts to investigate and prosecute the demonstrators vandalizing or even attacking churches and crisis-pregnancy centers.

The former pivots on the nature of demonstrations in which activists in any way block access to abortion facilities. Here is Department of Justice language describing arrests earlier this month here in Tennessee:

The indictment alleges that, beginning in February 2021, Chester Gallagher utilized social media to promote a series of anti-abortion events scheduled for March 4-7, 2021, in the Nashville area.  Other co-conspirators then utilized Facebook to coordinate travel and logistics and to identify other participants for the blockade.  On March 4, 2021, Coleman Boyd and Chester Gallager advertised the blockade of the Carafem Health Center Clinic, in Mount Juliet, Tennessee, which was planned for the following day.  In his social media post, Gallagher referred to the blockade as a “rescue.” Boyd also began a Facebook livestream broadcast of the clinic blockade at 7:45 a.m. on March 5, 2021.  This livestream broadcast was titled, in part, “Mt. Juliet, TN Rescue March 5, 2021,” and livestreamed the blockade event as his coconspirators and others blocked the clinic’s entry doors and prevented a patient and an employee from entering.  The livestream also broadcast members of the group attempting to engage a patient and her companion as Boyd told his livestream audience that the patient was a “mom coming to kill her baby.”

The indictment further alleges that on March 5, 2021, the 11 individuals, aided and abetted by one another, used force and physical obstruction to injure, intimidate, and interfere with employees of the clinic and a patient who was seeking reproductive health services. 

If you have a history of covering protests and blockades — in my case, that would be nuclear-weapons sites and abortion facilities — you know that demonstrators chant, pray, sing and, frequently, attach themselves, in various ways, to doors and gates. It’s common for protestors to use what many would consider intimidating religious language.

After reading that DOJ language, I would like to know more about what happened in this case that led to physical injuries. It’s interesting to contrast that language with the details of this Focus on the Family report:

The defendants describe their peaceful protest as involving lining a hallway of a medical building where an abortion facility is located while singing and praying. Local police arrested the group on minor trespassing charges, which have been resolved.

The federal indictment, however, alleges seven of the rescuers conspired together to organize the event, and all of them acted to “block” the abortion facility’s entry doors and prevented a patient and an employee from entering.

If convicted, the seven charged with “conspiracy” face up to 11 years in prison and fines up to $250,000. The others charged could face up to a year in prison and fines of up to $10,000.

The larger issue, in this case, is this: What is going on with DOJ and FBI efforts to investigate and prosecute cases linked to the attack on churches and crisis-pregnancy centers?

The answer appears to be “silence,” in terms of both elite press coverage and government reports. Please correct me — by email or in the comments pages — if I have missed significant coverage in the national mainstream press.

Here is another recent Daily Signal report, which is typical of conservative news coverage of this issue: “FBI Won’t Provide Updates, Say Whether It Has Arrested Anyone Over Attacks on Pro-Life Organizations, Centers, Churches.” Some of the key details:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation will not share whether it has made any arrests related to attacks on pro-life centers, organizations, and Catholic churches following the leak of the Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

At least 83 Catholic churches and 73 pregnancy resource centers or pro-life organizations have been attacked since the draft opinion was leaked in May. And some of these pro-life centers and organizations have told The Daily Signal that they have not heard anything from federal authorities.

The FBI confirmed this week to The Daily Signal that it is investigating “a series of attacks and threats targeting pregnancy resource centers, faith-based organizations, and reproductive health clinics across the country, as well as to judicial buildings, including the U.S. Supreme Court.” …

This statement is almost identical to one that the FBI gave The Daily Wire in mid-June, four months ago, as attacks on pregnancy centers escalated. The militant abortion group Jane’s Revenge has claimed responsibility for many of these attacks and threatened more if pro-life work does not cease. …

“It’s open season, and we know where your operations are,” Jane’s Revenge warned over the summer.

Do we need mainstream press coverage of these issues? Of course. Otherwise, the public — with large red and blue chunks of the nation on each side of this standoff — is left with the impression that attacks on churches and crisis-pregnancy centers are not “real” news and “real” crimes.

I would also say that it’s crucial to old-school First Amendment liberals (like me) that journalists contrast the legal efforts linked to these recent protest events — both at pro-abortion-rights sites and anti-abortion sites — with the history of protests linked to nuclear issues, apartheid, racial justice, etc. Ditto for previous journalism coverage of protests on both the cultural left and right.

What is “real” news, these days? Do we know?

FIRST IMAGE: Photo from The Daily Signal of damage at the Capitol Hill Crisis Pregnancy Center in Washington, D.C., an organization that I have worked with in the past.