Anti-abortion protest signs - how far is too far?

[quote=carol marie]I disagree and think they SHOULD NOT be shown in a public place where small children can’t avoid seeing them. There is already so much in the world thrown in their little faces - their innocence is robbed way too early and if LARGE GRAPHIC PICTURES of murdered babies bother me, I can only imagine what it does to a small child.

I say that as a 100%, no compromise, pro life supporter.
[/quote]

I tend to agree.

:crying: I am so sorry you went through this:crying: I am sorry,that you have born this pain:crying: May God Bless you in your endeavers to save babies and their moms from this tragedy.I am an activist as well and I also believe the pictures are necessary for truths sake.You have a powerful story,that needs to be shared,thankyou for sharing with us.God Bless

[quote=SUNRISEDAWN]I am not Catholic, but I want to be. I dont’ if I can after what I say here.

[/quote]

What are horrible tagedy. I will keep you in my prayers. Have you spoke with anyone from project Rachel?

hopeafterabortion.com/

[quote=SUNRISEDAWN]I am not Catholic, but I want to be. I dont’ if I can after what I say here…
Dawn
[/quote]

Dawn,

Please know that God forgives you if you are truly repentant, and from what I have read here, you are. As for would you be accepted into the Church with such a history, most certainly YES. Christ came to save sinners, so welcome to the fold.

There is a program called Rachel’s Vineyard that you may want to look into, where you may find help healing the terrible wounds you received on that awful day.

God Bless you,

CARose

That is the sadest thing I’ve ever heard. THESE are the stories that need to be told. My heart breaks for you.

I’m pro-life, of course. My issue is children and how hypocritical people can be. I once watched an anti-abortion rally that took place in front of a public school. My highschool was right beside it and they weren’t targetting the teenage crowd, they were targetting the little children with their disgusting signs. I witnessed the trauma that these children went through. I even tried to talk to the people in the rally, to get them to the highschool side of the property, but all they could say is “target them young”. This is the same speech used by network TV execs, trashy magazine editors, music moguls and fashion experts to turn our children from children into tiny wannabe adults. Many of you complain that there is too much violence on TV, that you do not want your child to see the horrors of murder or rape at such a young age. These images on TV are based on real life events whether it claims to be or not. It happens to people everyday. Your children cannot see this but you force feed graphic pictures of aborted fetuses to them to show them “the truth”. There is also truth in people getting shot on the streets everyday, but they cannot see it, it’s too violent for such small minds.

When God said, Thou shalt not kill, he meant any murder anywhere. That includes gang murders, thefts gone wrong, terrorist actions, hostage situations and yes, even abortion. They are all the same, they all claim innocent lives against God’s wishes in t he commandments. So treat them as equal, either show your kids all the evils of the world or don’t show them any. Just DONT make it seem that it is okay for young children to see aborted fetuses because God hates murder and then turn around and say that a “regular” murder re-anacted on TV is too violent for them, because in God’s eyes, each crime is equally as heinous as the next.

my objection would be: how were these images obtained? obviously if they are genuine, a horrible sinful act had to be performed in order to obtain the image. The situation would be comparable to photos taken during wartime atrocities, broadcast for their propaganda and news value. did the photographer participate in the sinful act, or was he merely recording it? should he have attempted to stop the action, or was he justified in doing his job recording the action?

I understand news correspondents and cameramen in Vietnam experience the same mental anguish and moral dilemma.

[quote=Tom444]Yesterday, some friends and I drove past a pro-life protest on Forbes Avenue by Magee-Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh. Normally, I agree with such protests, but in this case, most of the protesters were holding huge (3 to 4 feet high) full-color photographs of aborted fetuses. While I can appreciate their motive of wanting to show the reality of abortion, I’m not sure whether this is really an appropriate way to do so. They weren’t even on the sidewalks outside the hospital (the building is actually on a side street), but right on one of the busiest roads in the city on a Sunday afternoon. My biggest reservation about this is that families with young children will also see these extremely graphic pictures. Overall, I’m not sure whether or not this is an appropriate means of protest. What does everybody else think?
[/quote]

I think it’s absolutly necessary for these pictures to be displayed. Women arn’t going to see these pictures or find the truth from any clinics or counseling places they go. If this is the only way that the truth can be told then so be it. I don’t think it’s wrong for children to see these pictures, either. It’s a part of our lives and our children should be taught against these things from day one. We shouldn’t try to shelter them from the real world. This is the world we live in, better to talk to them and give them knowlege from the very beginning rather than shove it all on them all at once. My grandfather was very big in the right to life committees in my town and when I was a kid he got me very involved with him. He didn’t shelter my eyes from the disturbing pictures. I know that this is the reason why I have such strong opposition to abortion now. He helped form my moral back bone by exposing me to the truth.

[quote=asquared]my objection would be: how were these images obtained? obviously if they are genuine, a horrible sinful act had to be performed in order to obtain the image. The situation would be comparable to photos taken during wartime atrocities, broadcast for their propaganda and news value. did the photographer participate in the sinful act, or was he merely recording it? should he have attempted to stop the action, or was he justified in doing his job recording the action?

I understand news correspondents and cameramen in Vietnam experience the same mental anguish and moral dilemma.
[/quote]

I sent a post but the forums went down so maybe it will turn up…

Anyway I support the Center for Bioethical Reform (www.abortionno.org) They use large photos placed on trucks, fences etc. The photos are GRAPHIC. I called my contact Rose to see where they were obtained. CBR did get the cooperation of an abortion clinic to allow both the photos and a film of the actual process. I do not know their motives but she wanted to stress that they were in the clinic with permission. Maybe it was a government run clinic and they had to be given access. At any rate Rose stressed that they do not support or participate in abortion obviously. As to the concern that they may be ‘participating’ by photographing and not physicallly stopping the abortions, for one most of the photos are of babies already aborted. (there is the film that does show the actual procedure), for another they believe that they are exposing evil by publishing the photos.

While I am having some mixed feelings due to this discussion, consider that we should think about what WILL happen (abortion) if people are not educated about the reality and brutality of this procedure. We should be less concerned about what MIGHT happen if someone is upset by the photos.

I do think that these photos should be used with discretion and that they should not deliberately put the photos in areas where they know there will be many small children.

I cannot speak for other photos or organizations but that is the source and reason behind the CBR campaign. Please visit their website for some incredible yet horrible information.

Lisa N

[quote=anjel13]I think it’s absolutly necessary for these pictures to be displayed. Women arn’t going to see these pictures or find the truth from any clinics or counseling places they go. If this is the only way that the truth can be told then so be it. I don’t think it’s wrong for children to see these pictures, either. It’s a part of our lives and our children should be taught against these things from day one. We shouldn’t try to shelter them from the real world. This is the world we live in, better to talk to them and give them knowlege from the very beginning rather than shove it all on them all at once. My grandfather was very big in the right to life committees in my town and when I was a kid he got me very involved with him. He didn’t shelter my eyes from the disturbing pictures. I know that this is the reason why I have such strong opposition to abortion now. He helped form my moral back bone by exposing me to the truth.
[/quote]

Does this mean we should also show children of explicit sexual acts because it is part of the “real world”? Should we also show them images of crime scenes because it is the “real world”?

Don’t you think this is up to the parents when and how such things will be revealed?

[quote=anjel13]. I don’t think it’s wrong for children to see these pictures, either. It’s a part of our lives and our children should be taught against these things from day one. We shouldn’t try to shelter them from the real world
[/quote]

There is a difference between sheltering them, and exposing them to things before they are ready. I mean they also live in a world were homosexuality is becoming ‘accepted and normal’ and I’m not showing them pictures or describing that to them at young ages either. You know what your children are ready for, the parents should be allowed to bring this up when a child is ready, not because it was pushed upon them.

Whose agenda does it serve in keeping the silent scream horror of abortion sanitary and out of sight, out of mind? Why cannot the good conscience of America not tolerate in an open embrace the “industry” of abortion on demand? Why all the secrecy, behind hidden doors and byways, if it is just another “medical service” being performed?

They have open heart surgery, trauma triage victims, etc. on routine media display. Why the special consideration for removing a simple “product of conception”? Such a level of denial that supports the evil of the pro-abortion agenda. I think that an open media display of aborted fetuses ***has a proper place ***in our schizophrenic society, for the sake of the children and for God’s sake.

If someone already recognizes the evil of abortion, they are already shaken up; if someone does not, then they need to be shaken up to the reality at hand that is in our midst. As I write this, the horror of the segregated genocide camps of WW II Germany come to mind. Maybe more young one’s need to be asking their “pro-choice” or otherwise parents “why Mommy/Daddy?”.

It is not that I think that displaying the raw truth about an abortion is wrong, I just don’t think it’s a good idea. If we are interested in changing people’s hearts, we have to analyze how *they *would react and what would make them have a change of heart. Let’s face it, if a person does not recognize an unborn child as a person, the graphic depiction would only turn them off more. They will label us as extremists or even “whackos” and may even confirm their erroneous belief that the unborn are not truly “persons”

I think the best way to have a child be recognized as a person is to display their person-like characteristics. A good way to do this is with the use of a 3D ultrasound. Below, is the 3D ultrasound of my daughter, Elaina, and a picture of her after she was born. I think using a tactic such as this will do a much better job of showing people that life is to be protected.

The reasons that we are pro-life is not because abortion is an ugly, violent, barbaric thing. We are pro-life because life begins at conception. Lets focus on showing people *why *we are pro life

http://home.comcast.net/~pprimeau/images/elainaultrasound.jpghttp://home.comcast.net/~pprimeau/images/elainabirth.jpg

[quote=felra]Whose agenda does it serve in keeping the silent scream horror of abortion sanitary and out of sight, out of mind?.
[/quote]

All we’ve suggested is that very young children who can’t or don’t even understand pregnancy sex or abortion shouldn’t be subjected to these images on street corners and parking lots.

I’m all for getting the word out, but does a 5 year old little girl who doesn’t grasp these concepts yet need to see these pictures NOW because someone else decided to post them? I would think her parents would be the best judge as to when she is ready for these.

Yes I definately have discussed these issues with my daughter now that she’s 13. She’s appalled now, she’s sickened by the fact that a woman would kill her child. But when she was 5 and we went to a mall parking lot and saw these pictures, she had no clue what it was and it scared her badly. It would be the equivalent of letting her see a slasher movie - she just wasn’t ready to see this or put it into a perspective she could understand.

This is not sweeping something under the rug - this is being responsible parents.

We keep being lectured that our children shouldn’t see The Passion of The Christ - because it’s too graphic.
This is a story of great love for us and the ultimate sacrifce for us, but our children should be shielded from it, yet these pictures should be shown to them out of the blue with no warning whatsoever because 'it’s life’
I don’t get it.

[quote=pprimeau1976]The reasons that we are pro-life is not because abortion is an ugly, violent, barbaric thing. We are pro-life because life begins at conception. Lets focus on showing people *why *we are pro life
[/quote]

Well said. There is plenty that is ugly in the world. Most likely, more converts will be won with what is beautiful and true.

It’s not about sweeping something under the carpet…when you state it like that someone could just come along and say “Well Catholics don’t want children to be taught about homosexuality, you Catholics are just sweeping it under the carpet!” Sorry to use the “gay card” but it’s such a big issue right now that people understand immediatly. Why do Catholics not want homosexuality taught to their children? Because it’s wrong! Do you want your child to see pictures of men in embrace, kissing each other on the lips? Or would you rather sit down with your child and discuss to them about how God tells us that homosexuality is wrong? Do you want to scare them out of their minds or lovingly teach them?

My mom taught me that cherry’s cause cancer to prevent me from eating so many, I was also taught to brush my teeth by being told my teeth would all fall out like what happened to Ren in “Ren and Stimpy”. I was told if I didn’t eat my vegetables that I would turn out like the elephant man and I was shown his picture. I was raised on fear do you know all that has been done has cause me to be scared of everything. If only I had been told in a gentle manner where all my questions would have been answered, oh how I would have grown to not be so scared of the world!

In your agenda, no matter how good you believe your way might be, please PLEASE see outside of your world and see what harm you may be doing to these children. We must stop using children to meet our agendas!

[quote=CatholicPoet]Well said. There is plenty that is ugly in the world. Most likely, more converts will be won with what is beautiful and true.
[/quote]

I agree with Fr. Frank Pavone that many in America are in a psychological state of DENIAL. This is a psychological defense mechanism that unconsciously/pre-consciously prevents a person from recognizing aspects of reality.

For some the picture of a developing fetus and the sight of a newborn child is enough to break through the psychological defenses of denial, whereas for others, a graphic presentation is needed to achieve this encounter with reality. For others, it is simply narcissitic selfishness or siding with evil and no amount of gentle of confrontative overatures will reach them. To quote my previous post, “I think that an open media display of aborted fetuses ***has a proper place ***in our schizophrenic society” to break through the denial of the evil of abortion.

[quote=felra]“I think that an open media display of aborted fetuses ***has a proper place ***in our schizophrenic society” to break through the denial of the evil of abortion.
[/quote]

What is the “proper place” though? Do you remember how outraged people got over Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction? We thought that the SuperBowl was about football, and then, POOF, we were blindsided by Janet’s breast. That is the same concept. I will be driving down the street and POOF, I will be blindsided by a protester with a sign.
People will react the same way.

I think Fr. Pavone means well, I just don’t think that he advertises the pro-life cause well by endorsing these signs.

[quote=pprimeau1976]What is the “proper place” though?
[/quote]

That’s the challenge. Perhaps small enough pictures where adults can recognize/figure out the picture, whereas young one’s will only decifer indistinguishable shapes/colors. Perhaps adequate forward warning signs posted of the visual display ahead for detour or proper shielding one’s eyes/glance. Perhaps the courts need to allow for pamphlets with graphic images to be available in the abortion mills across the country, along with post-abortion risk factors (depression, substance abuse, etc) and available support groups.

[quote=Shinobu]Does this mean we should also show children of explicit sexual acts because it is part of the “real world”? Should we also show them images of crime scenes because it is the “real world”?

Don’t you think this is up to the parents when and how such things will be revealed?
[/quote]

No, there is a big difference between the sin of explicit sexual acts and the sin of abortion. But I think that parents should be honest with their children about the realities of life. That there are bad things out there and there is a difference between right and wrong. I understand that every child is different and the parents know when the right time is to start imparting this information to their children. You are right about that. You are right that there is a difference between it being slammed in their face and maybe scaring them. I will go back on that. But I think I was more referencing to another poster on here who said “I want my kids to be oblivious to this evil for as long as possible” I just don’t agree with that, I believe that most children are more understanding than we like to believe. and keeping your kids purposfully oblivious to what goes on in the world is wrong and dangerous. It’s just like not telling your children to beware of strangers because there are some bad people out there. Just because you don’t want them to be scared. You as a parent have a duty to teach your kids about the real world. So I do go back on my first statement somewhat, it should be up to the parents to impart this knowlege, but what I worry about is that there are a lot of parents that don’t want to go there with their kids, and these are the kids that end up getting the abortions because they don’t realize the reality of what it really is. I guess I kindof have mixed feelings on this issue, in one way I feel that these pictures are necessary because there are a lot of misinformed people out there who if not exposed to the truth will take part in this sin. But at the same time I do feel that small children shouldn’t be exposed to it in this manner, it should be shown to them when they are ready. That’s where the responsiblility of the parent comes in. Sadly however, there are a lot of parents out there that are misinformed themselves.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.