Graphic Pictures Of Abortions

[cmotherofpirl]

I think many many people say they are "pro-choice" without seeing exactly what it means. Reality is not always pretty. Hence the pictures of chopped babies or starving children hit home.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

I'm really not sure. Part of me thinks that people need to see what they're doing to thousands of unborn children every day.

Another part of me wants to show respect for the souls of those children and not allow pictures of their mutilated bodies to be seen on the street.

[Guest zealforChrist03]

[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]

Edited January 23, 2007 by zealforChrist03

[goldenchild17]

I definitely support it. I don't think a person is wrong for deciding not too though. Different approaches can work in different situations. I don't really think it matters WHY a person chooses to get an abortion, I still believe it's murder and whether or not they believe they had a good reason doesn't matter to me. I think they need to see what happened with the decision they make.

Same goes for those who actively take part in the pro-life movement. While one can be active in the movement without looking at such photos I think it helps to visualize what you are standing for, the violence you are trying to stop. If it sickens you, all the better. That's what you should feel. If you don't feel it without the pictures then maybe you need a little reminder of what you stand for and why. Being pro-life is not just a philosophy. It's a real response to a real problem. We need to know just how real it is.

Again, in some situations it would be better to refrain. But in mass settings, public settings and for reasons above I think it's beneficial to do so. I just joined the pro-life group at my campus after seeing their display on the commons. I have always been pro-life, but actually seeing it (I have before but it's been awhile) gives a different response, made me actually decide to do something about it. It turned my philosophy into my action. It should be this way for everybody.

[123]

These photos seem to just make women, going into the abortion clinic, mad. However, I feel that pictures of murdered children may or may not sway a apathetic paitent dooped into thinking that death for her baby is the only way out.

My question is, are these pictures tactics in psychological warfare?

[goldenchild17]

Dialoguing with people about the truth of Catholicism may or may not make them change their mind either, would you argue that it is okay then to just not make the effort? Just because it might not work in all, or most, cases doesn't give one an excuse to not do it. To change just one person should make it all worth it.

[123]

[quote]Dialoguing with people about the truth of Catholicism may or may not make them change their mind either, would you argue that it is okay then to just not make the effort? Just because it might not work in all, or most, cases doesn't give one an excuse to not do it. To change just one person should make it all worth it.[/quote]

Dialouge is not the point I'm making. I encourage that. Taking your point, I would have to say that we, at least I myself do not, utilize [b]graphic[/b] pictures to debate on Catholicism

Of course it is all based on your personal reference. I feel that if graphic pictures are nessessary then use them. If they are not nessessary, then don't.

Edited January 24, 2007 by GloriaIesusChristi

[goldenchild17]

I was using it as an example to show why I disagree with your statement.

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?

Same thing with evangelization. Many, I would say the vast majority, will ignore you and not be swayed by your efforts. Does this mean then that you can just lay down and do nothing? Because it won't work for every single person you came into contact with?

How many of the great theologians in our Church would be non-existant if such a principle were followed. How many great missionaries would never have made the impact that they did. These people surely did not convert every person they ever talked to. But they kept trying because it was all worth it for every person that did listen.

Same principle here. Just because using these pictures won't help some people doesn't mean you can then just not use them. They are an effective means for some, I'd say many, people. How many people would not be swayed if these pictures were NOT used?

I'm not saying that these pictures are the ONLY way to do it, because as you said, it doesn't work for everybody. But for many it does work, and thus is an effective tool for change.

[picchick]

I am not sure what to say. I said that it depends on the situation in the poll but now I am not sure. I know that I would not want kids to see it. It might sway the undecided crowd and maybe even draw from the pro-choice crowd.

However, I agree also with GlorialesusChristi. What message are we sending when we show the aborted babies? How much respect are we giving those who died when we show their torn bodies? I don't think the country would show a dead soldier's torn, blown up body on television.

Meg

[123]

[quote]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]

I undertand your disagreement, What I am saying is that [b] in certain situations[/b] violent pictures of dead or dismembered children are not nessessary to prove a point. When I went to a abortion clinic in Dayton we had a candle light vigil and there were some bloody bad pictures there. I had no personal offense to these images. However, I do feel in certain times in the past after reading about paitients or employees of clinics lashing out at sign-holders and peaceful protestors, because of the signs that they held made them mad, not sorrowful for what they had done. The differences I have with sign is merely out of safety for the protestors. I do, however, urge for more and more funding and fighting for the lives of the innocent. We must speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. But, I feel we must do it the right way.

Edited January 24, 2007 by GloriaIesusChristi

[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.