Graphic Pictures Of Abortions

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]You said: "I feel that pictures of murdered children may or may not sway a apathetic paitent..."

So? Do you just not do it then? Because it won't work for some people? How do you know it won't work if you don't try?[/quote]

Every person is different. I have a very good friend who got pregnant at sixteen and decided to keep her child, in spite of the relentless medical pressure for her to abort. My friend (like me and like so many of my other friends) is autistic. She's a very intelligent girl, but she's so severely affected that she is not even toilet trained and can't leave the house on her own. It now turns out that her daughter is also autistic.

When she got pregnant the second time (aged eighteen) she had an abortion only because the doctors told her that she and the baby were both at risk of death. She never sees her mother, who was abusive. Her father is in prison (due for release in 2009). Her only support comes from a loving and dedicated partner - who himself has mild cerebral palsy.

Her situation is very different from that of a woman who decides to have an abortion because the baby would interfere with her career plans. This does not make it excusable. This does not make it acceptable. But it makes it a little more understandable, at least for me. I would not dream of upsetting and unsettling my friend with pictures of murdered babies. Do you think she doesn't know what she's done? Do you think she isn't sorry? Women enter abortion clinics in all kinds of situations and in varying emotional states. Seeing a picture of a murdered baby might do nothing but burden her with terrible guilt and make her feel like a monster. Pro-life activity is rooted in love and it is in love that we must reach out to these women. No one deserves to stand outside an abortion clinic with a placard if he hasn't donated a used pram or even some baby clothes to a pro-life charity. If he hasn't taken the time to help a harassed-looking single parent take care of misbehaving children on public transport. The women who go for abortions need to know that there is help out there if they only take it. Many of them choose abortion because they think there is no other choice. They're wrong. But who is showing that to them?

Those graphic photos have a place - by all means let the politicans who promote abortion and the abortion supporters who are blithely unaware of the reality of the killing look at them. Let them look long and hard. Very often it is people lile this, and not the women who abort their babies, who are the real murderers.

[goldenchild17]

I won't get into the morality of the specific example you gave. It doesn't really have a place here and would only create more disagreement. I agree that in certain situations (as I already said) these pictures don't have a place. Especially in one-on-one talks etc. it can be more personal and one can work out things through words. But in public settings people walking by aren't going to be as attracted (or repulsed) by a group standing and doing nothing versus a group that illustrates what they are there for.

[traichuoi]

[quote name='zealforChrist03' post='1174157' date='Jan 23 2007, 02:33 PM']
[size=3]I think it most certainly depends on the situation... in high school, i was an active pro-life member of my local parish, and would go and pray outside of the abortion mill once a month with the youth group. We would arrive at the clinic before it had opened. Many protestants who would also be there to pray and minister to the women had signs at the entrance drive way depicting graphic images--- one that i distinctly remember of an aborted late term infant. I remember on several accounts women who would drive up the the clinic and would be taken aback the shockingly disturbing and horrifyingly truthful images of aborted babies. These women would then proceed to turn their car around and leave the clinic. In this situation i do believe that the pictures of aborted infants was very effective in conveying the pro-life message. HOWEVER, i do not believe the graphic images should [i]remain[/i] present [i]after [/i]the women have had the abortion. The message we as Catholics should be trying to convey is a message of [b]love. healing. forgiveness. mercy.[/b] [/size]
[/quote]

I agree with Zeal. I have a hard time using such images especially with women who have had abortions. I don't think in these cases, these violent images would be a prudent means of sharing Truth...these women are already hurting; the approach must be compassion, understanding, and mercy.

Again, I also see the benefits of revealing the truth of what abortion is to people who have such a strong beliefs for abortion and the denial of its reality.


[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1174813' date='Jan 24 2007, 10:11 AM']
Every person is different. I have a very good friend who got pregnant at sixteen and decided to keep her child, in spite of the relentless medical pressure for her to abort. My friend (like me and like so many of my other friends) is autistic. She's a very intelligent girl, but she's so severely affected that she is not even toilet trained and can't leave the house on her own. It now turns out that her daughter is also autistic.

When she got pregnant the second time (aged eighteen) she had an abortion only because the doctors told her that she and the baby were both at risk of death. She never sees her mother, who was abusive. Her father is in prison (due for release in 2009). Her only support comes from a loving and dedicated partner - who himself has mild cerebral palsy.

Her situation is very different from that of a woman who decides to have an abortion because the baby would interfere with her career plans. This does not make it excusable. This does not make it acceptable. But it makes it a little more understandable, at least for me. I would not dream of upsetting and unsettling my friend with pictures of murdered babies. Do you think she doesn't know what she's done? Do you think she isn't sorry? Women enter abortion clinics in all kinds of situations and in varying emotional states. Seeing a picture of a murdered baby might do nothing but burden her with terrible guilt and make her feel like a monster. Pro-life activity is rooted in love and it is in love that we must reach out to these women. No one deserves to stand outside an abortion clinic with a placard if he hasn't donated a used pram or even some baby clothes to a pro-life charity. If he hasn't taken the time to help a harassed-looking single parent take care of misbehaving children on public transport. The women who go for abortions need to know that there is help out there if they only take it. Many of them choose abortion because they think there is no other choice. They're wrong. But who is showing that to them?

Those graphic photos have a place - by all means let the politicans who promote abortion and the abortion supporters who are blithely unaware of the reality of the killing look at them. Let them look long and hard. Very often it is people lile this, and not th women who abort their babies, who are the real murderers.
[/quote]

well said.

I agree that (while you are not condoning abortion), to show such images to a woman in that state does not offer room to meet her where she is at and walk with her. It can be taken as an action that is condemning. How, when you hold a picture like that to a woman who has had an abortion, become vulnerable to you so that you could share healing, truth, forgiveness, etc.?

Granted, this is one situation we are speaking about.

[traichuoi]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1174813' date='Jan 24 2007, 10:11 AM']
Every person is different. I have a very good friend who got pregnant at sixteen and decided to keep her child, in spite of the relentless medical pressure for her to abort. My friend (like me and like so many of my other friends) is autistic. She's a very intelligent girl, but she's so severely affected that she is not even toilet trained and can't leave the house on her own. It now turns out that her daughter is also autistic.

When she got pregnant the second time (aged eighteen) she had an abortion only because the doctors told her that she and the baby were both at risk of death. She never sees her mother, who was abusive. Her father is in prison (due for release in 2009). Her only support comes from a loving and dedicated partner - who himself has mild cerebral palsy.

Her situation is very different from that of a woman who decides to have an abortion because the baby would interfere with her career plans. This does not make it excusable. This does not make it acceptable. But it makes it a little more understandable, at least for me. I would not dream of upsetting and unsettling my friend with pictures of murdered babies. Do you think she doesn't know what she's done? Do you think she isn't sorry? Women enter abortion clinics in all kinds of situations and in varying emotional states. Seeing a picture of a murdered baby might do nothing but burden her with terrible guilt and make her feel like a monster. Pro-life activity is rooted in love and it is in love that we must reach out to these women. No one deserves to stand outside an abortion clinic with a placard if he hasn't donated a used pram or even some baby clothes to a pro-life charity. If he hasn't taken the time to help a harassed-looking single parent take care of misbehaving children on public transport. The women who go for abortions need to know that there is help out there if they only take it. Many of them choose abortion because they think there is no other choice. They're wrong. But who is showing that to them?

Those graphic photos have a place - by all means let the politicans who promote abortion and the abortion supporters who are blithely unaware of the reality of the killing look at them. Let them look long and hard. Very often it is people lile this, and not th women who abort their babies, who are the real murderers.
[/quote]

well said.

I agree that (while you are not condoning abortion), to show such images to a woman in that state does not offer room to meet her where she is at and walk with her. It can be taken as an action that is condemning. How, when you hold a picture like that to a woman who has had an abortion, become vulnerable to you so that you could share healing, truth, forgiveness, etc.?

Granted, this is one situation we are speaking about.

[Katholikos]

I was in a biology class at a local college several years ago. Students who supported abortion regretted it when they saw fully formed babies (presumably aborted, obviously unwanted by their mother) floating in formaldehyde, on a shelf with other lab materials, available for study. A picture is worth more than a thousand words. The real thing is beyond price.

Did anyone see "Multiples" on the National Geographic channel recently? Twins, triplets, and quads touching each other, fighting, establishing a connection with siblings in utero. The new ultrasound equipment that shows the humanity of the baby(ies) is a deterrant to abortion also. We've been fed that "blob of tissue" bull-oney since 1973.

Pictures of the "products of abortion" and dead babies in bottles sear the brain and are unforgettable.

Jay

------------------
Blessed Father Damien, pray for us!

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Katholikos' post='1175090' date='Jan 24 2007, 04:19 PM']I was in a biology class at a local college several years ago. Students who supported abortion regretted it when they saw fully formed babies (presumably aborted, obviously unwanted by their mother) floating in formaldehyde, on a shelf with other lab materials, available for study. A picture is worth more than a thousand words. The real thing is beyond price.

Did anyone see "Multiples" on the National Geographic channel recently? Twins, triplets, and quads touching each other, fighting, establishing a connection with siblings in utero. The new ultrasound equipment that shows the humanity of the baby(ies) is a deterrant to abortion also. We've been fed that "blob of tissue" bull-oney since 1973.

Pictures of the "products of abortion" and dead babies in bottles sear the brain and are unforgettable.

Jay

------------------
Blessed Father Damien, pray for us![/quote]i would submit though, that the ultrasound equipment and programs that you speak of are more in keeping with the dignity of unborn babies than are the pictures of mutilated babies

[Norseman82]

I voted yes because that is what woke me up to the seriousness of the issue. I think they definitely belong in protests in front of clinics and in events at college and high school campuses. At an event, maybe there should be a "graphic" section and a "non-graphic" section so that young children can avoid them.

[quote name='Era Might' post='1173464' date='Jan 22 2007, 09:29 PM']
If I were organizing an event, I would not use them, and I would ask those with me not to use them. I would hold up icons and similar images. I can't say whether others are wrong for using them, but I don't feel that they convey the right message. Abortion is often an act of desperation, and the horror of the act weighs already on the conscience of these women. Do some women turn back when they see these images? It does happen. But I think a lot women are inclined to see abortion as a necessary evil. If we can give them a glimpse of Heaven, I think it is more effective than a glimpse of hell. They live in a vale of tears; they have seen hell, which is partly why they are considering abortion. I believe the power and the hope of the Gospel of Life is more effective than grim reality. Public displays are a sort of condensed message. If some women are willing to listen to what we have to say, we can maybe offer privately to show them graphic images of aborted children, and explain the medical aspect. But I think that first "message" that we convey should be positive, of another way out of despair and towards life.
[/quote]

If anything, [u][i]it is the religious icons and images that do not belong![/i][/u] Abortion is not about the Pope, Mother Thrersa (unless you are trying to guilt people with the "it is poverty that a child must die" quote), or the Virgin of Guadalupe (unless you are trying to tug at the emotions in a Mexican neighborhood). It is not a religious issue...it is a human rights issue! It is not about being Catholic, protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, goat-sacrificer, or what not. It is about the murder of unborn babies, and it is murder no matter what religion (or lack thereof) you are. Until we stop allowing ourselves to be backed into the corner and portrayed as religious nuts, we will never control the agenda (save a mass conversion to orthodox Catholicism).

[Socrates]

While I have met convicted pro-lifers who strongly disagree, I definitely believe there is a place for graphic images of the results of abortion. They may not be appropriate for all times and places, but I certainly think they have their place in showing people the reality of this horrific and murderous "procedure."

I know seeing such images as a young boy helped powerfully impress on my mind the horrific reality of abortion, and how it was clearly wrong and evil. Sometimes a picture truly is worth a thousand words.
They help expose the lies of pro-abortionists, who constantly hide behind nice-sounding abstractions like "choice" and "women's rights" and "personal autonomy."

They may not work for everybody, and may not affect those whose hearts are truly hardened, but I think they can be effective for converting many "fence-sitters."

Edited January 25, 2007 by Socrates

[IcePrincessKRS]

I've skimmed over most of the replies in this thread... I agree with everyone to some extent... I still am not fully decided on how I feel about the issue. I definately don't like the idea of my kids seeing the images, I find them unsettling to say the least. But, images of babies in the womb don't seem to have as dramatic an effect on the pro-abortion folks or those who are just plain ignorant of the facts as do the graphic images... so it seems that they are almost a necessary "evil" at protests and rallies.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1175130' date='Jan 24 2007, 07:15 PM']If anything, [u][i]it is the religious icons and images that do not belong![/i][/u] Abortion is not about the Pope, Mother Thrersa (unless you are trying to guilt people with the "it is poverty that a child must die" quote), or the Virgin of Guadalupe (unless you are trying to tug at the emotions in a Mexican neighborhood). It is not a religious issue...it is a human rights issue! It is not about being Catholic, protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, goat-sacrificer, or what not. It is about the murder of unborn babies, and it is murder no matter what religion (or lack thereof) you are. Until we stop allowing ourselves to be backed into the corner and portrayed as religious nuts, we will never control the agenda (save a mass conversion to orthodox Catholicism).[/quote]
I disagree. I am Catholic. I have nothing to offer the the world except what has been given to me: Jesus Christ. I don't just want to stop abortions, I want to convert hearts. As far as I'm concerned, it is completely about being Catholic, because the alternative to abortion is the Gospel of Life, the redemption of the cosmos and the hope that is found in the Son of God. Mother Teresa used to remind people that she was not a social worker. She did everything for Jesus. Abortion is not a "religious issue," but I don't believe the pro-life movement is about an issue. It's about [i]people[/i] who are degraded and driven to desperation and death, death of their child. A mother who despairs to the point of taking her child's life may one day take her own life. My mission as a Catholic is to lead her beyond that despair to Jesus Christ, and hopefully, save the life of mother [i]and[/i] child.

[SJRod55]

Do the graphic photos not just compound the tragic death / murder of these innocents? Is it not adding to the disresepct of the human life to show these mutiolated corpses? Many countries experimented with graphic posters showing the 'actions' of terrorists in attempts to get people to 'turn in' the terrorists. The posters were no more effective than regular 'wanted' notices.

I think it is a definite cross roads. There are many innocent people who are assaulted by these photographs indirectly and unsuspectingly. I for one say No to the graphic posters.

[hierochloe]

I think there is definitely a time and place for graphic scenes of the aftermath of abortion. Just as strongly I agree that outside of this apropos time and place these things should definitely be absent.

I make a living as a GIS specialist, doing computer cartography, etc. I can fully support the proverbial statement that a picture is worth a thousand words and beyond. You can describe a particular geography ad nauseum both verbally and mathmatically to someone yet still not accomplish the same as displaying an aerial photo draped over topographic relief in a dynamic 3D display. It inevitably illicits literally physical responses such as 'ooooo' and 'ahhhhh', even 'wow'. Heh, makes the job a bit more fulfilling to be sure.

I know so many veg-heads whom will not consume animals after seeing the carnage of a slaughterhouse or the sqaulor of feedlots and poultry factories. Most of the people I know whom vehemently refuse to purchase any cosmetic product that was tested on animals became convicted along those lines after seeing PETA images of vivisected rabbits. Many of these life choices required such graphic, visual exposure despite prior awareness of the nature of these things through written and spoken word.

Likewise with so many things, including the carnage of war, the holocaust of the Jews during WW2, starvation in third world countries, withdrawal sickness resulting from drug abuse, total debilitation and deterioration of HIV/AIDS/cancer victims, even environmental devastation like oil spills and wildfires.

In the same way that so many people are passively or even willingly ignorant to the true nature of what is involved in food and cosmetic production, people tend to be ignorant of the true nature of the abomination that is abortion. Nothing breaks through this barrier of ignorance faster nor deeper into the core of our empathic nature than these striking images. While there's a strong argument that the images alone demonstrate little or nothing in terms of right vs wrong, at times it seems this is the only way to clear a path for an open, honest discussion or at least reflection on the nature of abortion and all the issues surrounding it.

This is your brain on drugs, this is your baby on abortion. Dirty little secrets laid open for the light of day. If graphic imagery can lead people to abstain from meat and recycle, then it can certainly lead them to recognize proper status of the unborn. I think most here can agree on which is most important.

So within the correct frame of time and place, I say go for it. If it has a chance of guiding someone to enlightenment on the truth of abortion, then it becomes warranted imho. It's a tough call on walks/protests. Depending on the venue, I think it's OK for some imagery to be present but definitely not the centerpiece! In nearly all cases I would say one image is plenty. Positive is generally better than negative, but there's nothing like a bucket of ice water to get someone's attention.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1175413' date='Jan 24 2007, 10:41 PM']
I disagree. I am Catholic. I have nothing to offer the the world except what has been given to me: Jesus Christ. I don't just want to stop abortions, I want to convert hearts. As far as I'm concerned, it is completely about being Catholic, because the alternative to abortion is the Gospel of Life, the redemption of the cosmos and the hope that is found in the Son of God. Mother Teresa used to remind people that she was not a social worker. She did everything for Jesus. Abortion is not a "religious issue," but I don't believe the pro-life movement is about an issue. It's about [i]people[/i] who are degraded and driven to desperation and death, death of their child. A mother who despairs to the point of taking her child's life may one day take her own life. My mission as a Catholic is to lead her beyond that despair to Jesus Christ, and hopefully, save the life of mother [i]and[/i] child.
[/quote]

Sorry, but as someone who used to lead a pro-life group at a large [i]public[/i] university, I must disagree with you on a few counts. Religion is OK for one-on-one personal discussions, but other than that, you don't need to be Catholic or other Christian to be pro-life. And while we're attempting to convert the world, how many unborn children are you willing to lose?

Edited January 26, 2007 by Norseman82

[jmjtina]

Have you seen The Learning Channel? More people tune in to watch the TLC for surgeries of every kind. In fact if you ask people if they have seen a surgery, most likely they have. Even kids. I've never really understood people who oppose abortion who were opposed to letting it be seen, citing that it isn't appropriate. But when you ask them, the root of the answer is that, "They won't like us." or my favorite, "They will hate you for showing that pic"

Certainly, showing images of an abortion, and what an abortion does to a baby, has to be done in ways that properly prepare the audience for what they are about to see, and place the matter in the context of the compassionate care which the Church gives to those who are guilty of an abortion. One of the most well-known videos of abortion footage is called "The Harder Truth" (a revision of the previous "Hard Truth"). It comes with a manual which gives clear instructions about how to prepare the audience for viewing. People are told, for example, that they are not being asked to watch anything that they don't want to see. They are invited to avert their eyes, and the video has no narration, so that people do not even have to hear anything they don't want to hear. (The video, incidentally, has been used with great effect in Churches.)

Yet even with all that in place, there is still a great deal of resistance to the notion that we should expose the evil for what it is, bringing it into the light of day for the naked eye to see.

If we study social reform movements, we find that they always exposed the injustice they were fighting, and that this was an integral key to their success.

The civil rights movement was galvanized, for example, when the 14-year-old boy, Emmett Till, was killed and thrown in the Tallahatchie River. Authorities wanted to bury the body quickly, but his mother insisted on an open casket funeral so the world could see what was done to her boy. Black Americans everywhere saw the mutilated corpse when the photo was carried in Jet magazine.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was guided by the philosophy he expressed in his famous Letter from a Birmingham Jail, in which he wrote, "Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured."

As long as segregation was hidden under the veils of euphemism, or was discussed in words alone, it could not galvanize the opposition required to overcome it. But when the injustice of it was brought before the TV cameras of America as our black brothers and sisters were attacked with dogs, hoses, and other forms of violence, people saw the evil that words alone could not convey.

My point is, Graphic pictures need to be shown, in context, to have an impact and a chance of saving a life. My definition of abortion is very different from the average 25 year old's definition of abortion. You can't deny that abortion has been sugar-coated with downplaying the real life that has started in the womb which will become a baby at conception.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1176164' date='Jan 25 2007, 07:52 PM']Religion is OK for one-on-one personal discussions, but other than that, you don't need to be Catholic or other And while we're attempting to convert the world, how many unborn children are you willing to lose?[/quote]
No, you don't need to be Catholic to be pro-life. I'm talking about what it means for [i]me[/i] to be pro-life, as a Catholic. When we demonstrate at an abortion clinic, we are trying to change someone's mind. It's not the same as, for example, stopping a person from shooting a gun; that is an act of force. We can't force women not to have abortions, we have to convince them. I believe, as a Catholic, that my duty is to convince them why they should not have an abortion, and that involves the Gospel of Life. Disgusting or shocking them with public images of aborted children may turn them away that day, but if their hearts are not converted with the hope of the Gospel, then there is nothing there to replace that despair, and they may go back and have that abortion eventually. I don't have a problem with discussing and showing the medical aspect of abortion, I believe it is important to do that individually. What I do not support is the [i]public[/i] display of these images, because that "snapshot" message that I want to convey is an alternative to abortion, that there is hope, that there is adoption, that there is forgiveness for past abortions, and with the holy images, that there is redemption.