":In the interest of keeping this discussion constructive, I will pass on your questioning my ""motivation"" - let's stick to the substance of the issue. I don't know why you put this in terms of symetry/asymetry with violence against abortion providers. The only legitimate concern regarding symetry is methodological: that, especially on an issue subject to contentious debate, the same criteria be used to judge, in this case, the relevance of given events - and that's what WP guidelines are for (As an aside: the tolerance on WP for non-neutral terms such as ""pro-life"" and ""pro-choice"" is a sign that symetry is important, and in that case trumped general guidelines). And of course, to answer your concern, there will be no symetry of result between this section and the one above it: the asymetry (quantitative and qualitative) will always appear clearly. Concerning the real issues: Is there such a thing as ""violence against pro-lifers ?""? I think this is well established by the references - and reinforced by the presidential declaration that reads the Pouillon murder as being linked to the abortion debate. Is this concern relevant to the general article, the pro-life movement? I also answer yes, both thematically and on the question of importance (the mere fact that the President reacted publicly to the Pouillon murder certainly establishes that event as important). Is the section perfectible? Well, yes, of course! If you don't feel ""targeting"" is the right word, let's try to find a better one (""subjected to"", ""victims of""... ?)  "