Weekend question
President Obama has just reversed policy in place since 1991 banning photographs of caskets of American soldiers killed in war.
My immediate response was anger. But is the rationale for this any different than that of pro-lifers wanting photos of aborted babies shown? Wrote the Seattle Times:
Anti-war activists have long lobbied to lift the ban, believing presidents have blocked photographs as a way of hiding the human costs of war from the American public. If only the public could actually see the images of the dead returning, the reasoning goes, perhaps they would internalize the tragic costs and turn on the wars in Iraq and elsewhere.
[Photo courtesy of Tami Silicio]
Feb.28, 2009 1:28 pm |
Weekend question |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Would you feel comfortable elaborating on why your immediate response was anger?
Because I think it’s a political ploy and disrespectful, to which I expect you’ll say touche. I know there’s a difference; I just can’t identify it and was hoping for help.
The families of the fallen soldiers will now make the decision as to whether their flag draped coffins will be photographed. I think a major difference in these two tragic situations is that the soldiers volunteered to risk their lives, while the unborn babies had no say in their violent demise. Both are tragic and awful. The thing is, the soldiers gave their lives to something bigger than themselves, while the unborn child will not have that chance because its mother didn’t hold those same ideals.
Kristina at February 28, 2009 2:46 PM
——-
Thanks – that’s a great response.
Great Response, Kristina. I agree completely.
The dignified portayal of military caskets and funerals, with the consent of the families, does not compare to the activities of the “pro lifers”
If someone made huge posters of the mutilated bodies of soldiers, without the permission of their families, and displayed them to shock and annoy others, particularly children, in order to make some crude political point, THAT would be comparable to the conduct of the “pro lifers”.
Fortunately, only a very small minority engages in this type of despicable behavior.
No one claims that soldiers do not die in combat. No one claims that war is anything but terrible. However, the pro-abortion feminist blogs are full of posts and comments that deny that a human life is taken with every abortion. I believe that is a significant difference.
Bystander 4:15PM
The left has never hesitated to show the mutilated and maimed victims of war, and yes that has included and still includes our soldiers, for their own political purposes.
Because I think it’s a political ploy and disrespectful, to which I expect you’ll say touche.
Do you think that merely lifting the ban is a political ploy? Or that pictures of caskets are a political ploy?
I’m inclined to say that banning them was more of a political ploy than allowing them. I’d view a ban on abortion pictures as a political ploy too. Allowing them doesn’t support any specific use of them by any specific political side — it just doesn’t keep them hidden unless people choose to hide them voluntarily. And while I do think that there are some contexts in which abortion pictures are clearly a political ploy, I wouldn’t say that the pictures are, by default, politically manipulative or disrespectful.
I’d say that if someone put pictures of dead soldiers missing limbs on gigantic trucks, and drove them around to show people the reality of what they were voting for — then that would be a political ploy. Whether it would be a political ploy justified by the ends it hoped to achieve is another discussion entirely. But I think that the pictures themselves are generally neutral. They’re the truth.
The liberty part of me says there is no reason why the ‘press’ should not be allowed to publish pictures or broadcast video of flag draped coffins containing the bodies of our fallen soldiers as long as they respect the dignity and privacy of the surviving families. It is one way, among many, that we can honor their sacrifice of the fallen as well as the survivors.
When Ronald Reagan, the former Commander in Chief, passed away, photos and videos of his flag draped coffin were published and broadcast around the world. It was one way, among many, to honor him.
“But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.”
President Abraham Lincoln
yor bro ken
Posted by: Yo La Tengo at February 26, 2009 11:27 PM
George Bush started a war that has killed 4000 american men and women. I think you’re letting your partisanship loose sight of your humanity – or are people dying for nothing in Iraq and Afganistan?
——————————————————-
YLT,
To quote Ronald Reagan, “There you go again.”
You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to your facts.
One of conclusions of the 911 commission is that the terrorist were at war with us, while we were not at war with them.
That informed conclusion contradicts your ‘opinion’ that Bush started the war.
Bush and the United States did not respond militarily until after 3,000 American civilians were killed in one day. Maybe that event escaped your notice.
Google 911 or 9/11.
Bush did not act unilatterally. He had the approval of Congress and of the majority of the American people to take action against Afghanistan and Iraq.
Saddam Hussein in Iraq had pre-existing problems with the United Nations. Even that loony body had authorized action against Iraq for their repeated refusals to comply with sanctions levied against them after Iraq had invaded Kuawait.
You are entitled to your opinion that “people died for nothing in Iraq and Afghanistan”. But it is only an opinion.
History will makes it judgement. The jury is still out.
yor bro ken
If we had actual abortion photos might be comparable to war if only in the squirm factor. But right now we’ve got obviously faked abortion photos on one hand and very few photos of combat casualty on the other. Any medical photo will make a certain portion of the population squirm, and fascinate other people. YoLikewise some will vomit at the sight of war casualty but it will make others want to join up.
None of the abortion photos are FAKED, YLT. They are photos of actual babies KILLED in the womb.
Perhaps you need to see a LIVE abortion to see the truth?
If Obama is going to allow military caskets to be shown as a result of war he ought to also show those that are beheaded, murdered and raped by dictators and their armies and similary, the mutilated bodies of babies murdured by the bio-fascist abortionists.
a “The cult of Moloch lives on today” by Fr. Richard Perozich .
Mike
Posted by: kbhvac at February 28, 2009 5:50 PM
Reagan was senile from the word “go”. He lied about Iran Contra and cost american lives with a stupid invasion of Granada. He lived as a liar and he died as a liar. We are indebted to him for nothing but he is indebted to us for everything. May God have extreme mercy on his soul.
I can see both sides of the debate amongst pro-lifers about if/when/where to exhibit photos of the unborn victims of abortions.
As a parent, I am bothered by the open exhibition of anything that is not age appropriate and though I work on the pro-life “coal-face,” I would not allow my own children to see them, yet.
As a carer for women who are considering abortion, or who have already had an abortion, I am acutely aware that those photos can do as much harm as good. Some ask to see the photos. Some can’t even bear to look at a photo or model of an intact fetus. Others, post-abortive, say they wish they had seen all of the most gruesome photos before they chose.
As a pro-life activist, I remember that one of the tactics Wilberforce used to end slavery was to make people aware through hearing, sight and even smell, the disgusting treatment slaves received. I have to wonder if many atrocities in world history would have been fought against sooner if leaders and common people had been shown pictures of what was going on. I know women and babies who have been saved by these photos, and people who have had their eyes opened.
(But, of course, you’ll always have people like YLT who have been looking at “obviously faked” abortion photos and who are holding onto their wishful thinking with a death grasp. Here’s an exercise for you, YLT- do a Google search for a photo of a living fetus on any reliable, medically accurate website- find one that’s somewhere between the ages of 9-12 weeks gestation, when the majority of abortions occur- and then when you’ve had a good look at the fingers and toes and little face, and pictured the heart beating, close your eyes, and imagine what the same fetus looks like once dissected by a sharp instrument and sent through a vaccuum hose the width of a ball point pen. I’m guessing the image in your head will look something like the “fake” abortion photos that pro-lifers pass around.)
There is a time and a place for everything and the truth needs to be told. Is there a way that we can tell the truth, specifically about the brutal destruction of the unborn, that doesn’t supercede parents’ rights to protect their children from burdens their young hearts are too tender to handle? The truth is a powerful weapon and we should make it known, but how can we minimise the collateral damage?
As a mom of both a Marine who served in Iraq and an aborted baby, I feel the difference is huge.
No one is in denial about the horror of war, especially those who have loved ones serving. Our children volunteered to protect our country and our freedoms. They knew the risks the sacrifices. We as families live with that risk each day they serve. While a film like “Taking Chance” which shows the honor shown to those who have fallen while bringing their bodies home is respectful of their sacrifice, using pictures to promote an agenda which can add injury to a family already suffering so much is unacceptable. I know they have said the families will decide, but I do feel concerned if they are asked at such a time of trauma. I once spent hours looking for a cheap electrical flag put up to show the war day, that had the name of a friend of mines son who died in Iraq. It was not an honor to have his name there in the anti war display, it was an insult. Another Gold Star mom I know spent hours looking through thousands of boots with tags to find her sons name and remove it..this extra grief in a time so painful should not exist…they have sacrificed enough.
In contrast, in abortion, our country is in denial. We allow the deaths of thousands of children EACH DAY without blinking an eye.
Although I believe these pictures need to be used with respect as well, they do have a place in educating to the truth of abortion. My aborted son had no choice..he did not volunteer…
Theresa,
An incredible post. Thank you. I thank your son as well for his service to our country.
Posted by: Yo La Tengo at March 1, 2009 2:26 AM
“Reagan was senile from the word “go”. He lied about Iran Contra and cost american lives with a stupid invasion of Granada. He lived as a liar and he died as a liar. We are indebted to him for nothing but he is indebted to us for everything. May God have extreme mercy on his soul.”
—————————————————
ylt,
“There you go again.”
I respect verifiable facts.
“Trust but verify.” (I really do not trust you.)
We have read your opinions. Where are your corroborating facts?
Ronald Reagan has passed from this time and space realm so he cannot defend himself against your accusations, even if he was so inclined.
I will not defend him. History will be a better judge of him than you or I.
I used to interact with some Marxists in Bellingham, Washington. They were angry and bitter people too. Their outrage was as selective as yours. They were still seething about the Viet Nam war. They probably still are.
“From each according to his ability to each according to the need [of the ‘state’].”
Few of those Marxist I encountered had the ability or the desire to contribute to the ‘need’ of the individual. It was all they could do to provide for themselves.
They viewed people as inferior to the ‘state’. In their humanist utopia they would have been eliminated because they had nothing tangible to offer to the ‘state’.
yor bro ken
The sooner this war ends, the fewer young Americans will be sent home in coffins, filling cargo planes, like in this photo. My heart weeps for their loved ones.
Posted by: Theresa at March 1, 2009 6:17 AM
Semper Fi
I have walked in your shoes.
yor bro ken
God Bless you Theresa for your insightful post and thank you for having the courage to speak the truth after your abortion.
I was thinking about this and I guess it is like putting up the crosses to represent the lives lost to abortion. Theresa is right, we close our eyes to the killing through abortion. They did not volunteer and their death did not bring freedom to anyone.
re: kbhvac at March 1, 2009 10:59 AM
I trust the marxists have forgiven your snide-ness much as I have. You seem to remember your enemies long after the supposed enemies have forgotten about you. I find living in the present, even with a knowlege of the past to be much preferred to living in the past with no knowlege of the present.
As much as Reagan was a monster, he is also a monster of the past. In time he will be forgiven and forgotten entirely. For now, all that remains is the bitter shell of what passed for his humanity. More a laughing-stock than a subject of rage. Pretty soon even the punchline that was his life will seem dated and tired.
Roman Catholic Bishop Henry of Alberta in Canada said the following:
It is no secret that I am opposed to the Genocide Awareness Project. This is not a classical case of genocide. GAP, in its usage of pictures of aborted children, violates their human dignity, denies human remains the respect that must be accorded them, and reduces them to things, albeit for an arguably good reason. Furthermore, the in-your-face approach is irresponsible and poor pedagogy.
Yo La, you are allowing your anger to blind you. You seem more intent on slandering and dragging people down then in entering into civil debates.
Theresa, thank you for your witness and God bless you.
YLT: What exactly is “faked” in abortion photos?
Oh wait…I get it: If I take a carrot and put it in a food processor, and it comes out all shredded, it’s not a carrot anymore. Right?
The next thing you’ll try to convince us of is that the photos of rubble of what once was the World Trade Center were faked as well.
Keep on deluding yourself.
Posted by: Yo La Tengo at March 1, 2009 11:03 PM
“You seem to remember your enemies long after the supposed enemies have forgotten about you.”
—————————————————–
YLT,
I will be generous.
You have a vivid imagination.
I never said or implied that I considered the self avowed Marxist I interacted with were my enemies. I never considered them my friend either.
In fact our one on one conversations were very cordial.
I never considered them a threat.
There was nothing about them that would cause emotionally healthy people to follow them.
Keep throwing stuff against the wall. Maybe some day something will stick.
Your day will be as good or as bad as you make it.
Spread happiness where you go…….not when.
yor bro ken
ps: Your diatribes are corroborating my observations about you. Keep doing my work for me.
Peace, love, dove.
not that this man’s response was necessarily right–and the Bible doesn’t say–but it was a little like the Genocide Awareness Project:
When he entered his house, he took a knife and laid hold of his [dead raped] concubine and cut her in twelve pieces, limb by limb, and sent her throughout the territory of Israel. And it came about that all who saw it said, “Nothing like this has ever happened or been seen from the day when the sons of Israel came up from the land of Egypt to this day. Consider it, take counsel and speak up!” (Judges 19:30)
Then all the sons of Israel from Dan to Beersheba, including the land of Gilead, came out, and the congregation assembled as one man to the LORD at Mizpah. (Judges 20:1)
In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. (Judges 21:25)