Video: When kids see photos of aborted kids; the principle of double effect
The Anti-Choice Project has just posted video of an altercation its street protesters had with 2 female pro-abort prattlers on September 5 at a busy intersection in Silverdale, WA.
I really appreciate the pro-lifer’s measured, honest response to the stereo rant. I also love his simple explanation of the principle of double effect. And I wonder who was caring for the tie-dyed woman’s 2 young daughters, who she complained were crying. I question how disturbed she was by their reaction, really – if they really had that reaction – if she so readily abandoned them to verbally spar (in their view?). Finally, what a great ending – a police officer stopping the magpies cold….
The Anti-Choice Project further explains the principle of double effect:
Although the conditions of this ethical principle may sound complicated, all of us apply them frequently. A little boy cuts his hand, and his mother puts an antiseptic on the cut. This action has 2 effects: it causes the boy pain and it wards off infection. Although the mother may not realize it, she actually used the principle of double effect. She performed an action that was good in itself, that had 2 effects, 1 of which was bad (pain).
Though the Anti-Choice Project never intentionally shows small children pictures of abortion, it can be foreseen that our strategy will result in their viewing.
Employing the criteria of the Principle of Double Effect, we have weighed the “bad effect” against the “good effect” and, since the graphic images change minds, have come to the conclusion that the lives saved from a torturous death matter more than the feelings and emotions of born children.
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.
I’d like to hear those women explain how they can be so outraged by the pictures but not by the action that caused them. The ultimate hypocrisy of the pro-aborts. Get crazy-mad about seeing pictures of bloody, dismembered babies, yet militantly stand by the “right” to keep dismembering and killing babies.
I wish the pro-lifer had said that perhaps by seeing the pictures, the children would realize the truth about abortion and what it really does. They should be upset by what they see in those “disgusting” images. We all should be. Those ranting women were upset by the wrong thing, as all pro-aborts are.
Why are they screaming about just “a bunch of cells?”
There simply is no point in trying to talk through their ranting and raving.
Love the ending!! :)
WOW! A police officer protecting constitutionally protected rights! Finally!
Look, I as I’ve stated time and time again, I was 8 when I first saw a picture of an aborted baby. It upset me. Sure. It made me cry. But I wasn’t angry at human life international for putting the picture in a magazine that I happened to pick up and see. I was angry at the DOCTORS who tore the head off that baby. I was angry that a mommy would do that to her own baby.
These women don’t seem to grasp what I as a little 8 year old child grasped. That abortion is murder. It is disgusting. It is cruel and its happening all around us, so lets place our anger on the people who are doing it not on those trying to stop it.
And to those two ranting women…having a vagina has nothing to do with the debate. Women can’t reproduce without a man’s sperm so whats your point? I hope your daughters are upset. And in ten years when some boy pressures them to have sex I hope these images will flash into their minds and they will hold onto their purity because of it. Or if they find themselves pregnant they will remember that abortion is sick and choose life for their baby.
One more point, do these moms flip out when nasty condom commercials come on tv or half-naked pop stars? Why do I have the feeling these two crazy women are not really that interested in protecting their kids and probably let them watch miley cyrus gyrating and Lady Gaga stroking herself. Just an assumption but I’m probably right. Save your ranting ladies for the real problems in life.
Considering the garbage on our televisions and in the movie theaters, I tend to think this is feigned outrage.
Wow. What a hysterical, pearl-clutching rant. I can not count the number of times I hear people bemoan how “O WON’T SOME1 THINK OF TEH CHILDRENZ!!!1!” is a ridiculous argument, but as soon as something offends those people’s sensibilities it’s “O WON’T SOME1 THINK OF TEH CHILDRENZ!!!1!” And I find the raving of abortion apologists rings astonishingly hollow when they’re trying to defend innocent children. Now they care? Now? It’s okay to kill children, but not to show them pictures?
No one can bubble-wrap the world. And the fact that these pictures exist to be shown is far more outrageous than the fact that children see them.
You know I’ve driven by billboards that had scantily clad women advertising gentleman’s clubs and things like that, yet hardly anyone ever raises a fuss about that. But put a few pictures up of babies and the effects of abortion and suddenly we’re all concerned about what kids see.
It amazes me. And where were their children? Who was watching those crying children while the women were ranting at that man?
And to those two ranting women…having a vagina has nothing to do with the debate. Women can’t reproduce without a man’s sperm so whats your point?
EXCELLENT observation, SydneyM!
No, thank YOU, officer who actually appears to know the law!! WOOT!
I have one question for these people: During Halloween season, do you run into every store that has a gruesome Halloween display outside, visible to children, and tell them how disgusting it is and how they are harming children psychologically by displaying skeletons and bloody, gruesome masks with evil faces? No? Why not?
I get it. Celebrating death the way we WANT to celebrate death (if it’s make-believe) is ok. But facing the reality of actual death is not.
Oh, and pro-aborts? If these pictures are fake (as you so often claim), like the aforementioned Halloween costumes, then why are people so up-in-arms? What’s the difference?
Kel,
Also EXCELLENT points!
This is how you do it. The prolifer in the video handled the situation perfectly. Getting angry with these women would have only made the situation worse.
I have a vagina AND I am pro-life…so now what was your argument exactly? Hmmm?
I don’t think she was saying that she had two children who were upset. She said seven year old first, and then it sounded like she corrected herself to say six year old. Either there are two kids, but as a mother of a large family myself, I would have said my daughters… or my six and seven year old daughters…. not my seven year old daughter, my six year old daughter… it could have just been emotion, but I really wonder if either she isn’t sure how old her child is…. or if she doesn’t really have one and is just trying to make a scene and thinks the child angle will garner sympathy.
I’m all FOR the use of graphic images. It helped to end slavery and the Holacaust.
As Fr. Pavonne says, “America will not reject abortion until America SEES abortion”.
The manner in which the women speak under the circumstances, only serves to defeat their own words. Thanks for posting Jill. the more people who see the outrageous behavior some people who support abortion, the more they will see the inherent falsehoods and cover up of truth.
A solid question to ask is – why are your children upset? What is it they know about these images that you don’t?
Agree with the woman who says the pictures are disgusting, then ask her: ”what aspect of this imagery do you find disgusting?”
All pro-lifers need to take the playbook from Center for Bio-Ethical Reform and Justice for All campus campaigns and attempt to convert the dialogue from mere outrage to constructive engagement.
Kel’s engagement question above is excellent – because it starts a dialogue that makes their own logic work against them.
2 other observations:
– the guy recording the contact wisely didn’t turn the camera towards the police officer.
– the police officer provide a perfect opportunity to offer a toned down conversation on the issue to either woman (but not both at the same time).
I’m all for providing graphic images in public, providing there is prior warning that disturbing graphic images will be displayed further down the road. That removes any notion that viewers didn’t have an alternative. (Just a guess – there probably were warning signs posted – but ignored.)
The opportunity to slip a pebble into the shoe of someone who voices their opinion shouldn’t be lost, but a sincere effort to win them (or at least debunk their primary arguments) should be made, prior to humiliation (which this video does.)
I’d be curious to hear Gregg Cunningham’s take on that tactic.
If her daughter was so upset and crying why isn’t the woman going to comfort her daughter instead of confronting the prolifer? The daughter knows full well what those pictures are!!! Maybe the daughter is crying because the pictures break her heart or maybe because she is witnessing her mother losing complete control.
Where do these losers get all this free time? Do they not have jobs? What adult with a family has time to stand around waving fetus pictures all day?
And no, sorry, graphic images haven’t stopped abortion. We’ve been seeing them for decades. I don’t know any adults who haven’t seen bloody fetus pictures. And abortion bans continue to be voted down in every state they’re tried.
That said, pictures of early-term aborted fetuses don’t bother me. A fetus the size of a dime? I’m underwhelmed. As is the public, apparently.
This is a 4 week fetus, the most common time for an abortion. (88% are done in the first 9 weeks). This is it. This is what we’re supposed to be worked up about.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i539.photobucket.com/albums/ff353/NorthernMomToBe/week4-embryo-and-info.jpg&imgrefurl=http://sonyaspages.blogspot.com/2009/03/4-week-old-fetus.html&usg=__sPcm0iQ2S29rvnklb5x8Zn5NjtI=&h=379&w=500&sz=30&hl=en&start=24&zoom=1&tbnid=oDmnAOCPx08h-M:&tbnh=126&tbnw=181&prev=/images%3Fq%3D6%2Bweek%2Bfetus%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D554%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C440&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=138&vpy=112&dur=472&hovh=195&hovw=258&tx=137&ty=118&ei=V-GQTPrNJMH_lgfw-KjjAQ&oei=S-GQTMvOE4bGlQfp_-HiAQ&esq=2&page=2&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:24&biw=1280&bih=554
No wonder the public is under-whelmed. Even the sign-wavers go for pictures of late-term abortions (which are incredibly rare and usually because of medical problems).
Reality,
“This is what we’re supposed to be worked up about.”
Yes. It is a good thing we have science to inform our understanding of what that 4 week old fetus IS rather than our emotions or appealing to a picture. Science tells us that it is an individual human being. This is a much more sophisticated view to base our judgments on rather than the language of how things look. For example, it “looks” to me like the earth is stationary and the sun is rising and setting. I could post a video of the sun “rising” and “setting”, moving up and down to “prove” that we live in a geocentric universe. But that would be an extremely unscientific argument. No, when it comes to science, it is clear that 4 week old fetus is a human being just like you or me, lacking only those attributes which are not intrinsic to their humanity.
Um. I didn’t even know I was pregnant until I was 5 or 6 weeks along.
Oh and the link you provided sent me to a blog of a mother and father who desperately wanted to be pregnant and at 9 weeks she had a miscarriage. It was an interesting and poignant read so thank you.
Reality, someone kidnaps you, kills you and burns your corpse to a crisp (this is an analogy, not a threat so stay with me). After your body burns there is nothing left but a few charred bones, and some ash. I see your remains and am underwhelmed. How does it then stand to reason that you were not a unique, innocent human being who was wrongly killed?
Whether or not a human being’s murdered remains ignite outrage and sorrow does not have anything to do with the immorality of the act of killing that human being. How do you not grasp this? Right and wrong is not dependent on feelings.
You know, the one thing that stuns everyone I know to silence is the stat that 1/3 of pregnancies were ended by abortion in the seventies. That’s the childhood of me and my friends. That there is a person standing to your left, or right, who isn’t there at all.
I wonder if that is the genesis of so many ghost stories, and so much vampire love. We know there are people who aren’t here, in this concrete life, who should be. People our age, people who could have been our friends, our loved ones, our future husband or future wife, just ( blows across hand) not here.
You’ve asked before what is persuasive. 1/3 of all pregnancies, of people in their late thirties and forties and early fifties- gone.
Ah, Ari recites one of my favorite lines from anti-choicers. Is this a persuasive argument for you? That there would have been people who totally would have liked you and been your friends if they weren’t aborted? This sounds like the lament of someone who has no friends and is dissatisfied with their relationships…yearning for people who never existed. Of course, if you get to looking into the personal lives of people who are obsessed with abortion (like daily clinic protesters), they rarely have any meaningful relationships or anything of value going on in their lives. Look at Scott Roeder.
JILL I HAVE FOLLOWED YOU SINCE HEARING OF YOUR STAND AND I LOVE YOU BEING A PART OF LIFE DYNAMICS MINISTRY. I REALLY JUST WANT TO PUT SOMETHING FOR OTHERS TO PONDER UPON……
THIS MORNING I WAS IN A CONVERSATION WITH A YOUNG MAN AND THE CONVERSATION TURNED TO OBAMA. I TOLD HIM I HAD DONE RESEARCH ON HIS ILLINOIS CONTRIBUTIONS AND THAT UNEQUIVOCALLY DETERMINED MY STANCE.
I SAID MANY YEARS AGO I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH ON WITCHCRAFT AND RAN ACROSS A TESTIMONY OF A WITCH, TALKING ABOUT SACRIFICES TO SATAN. SHE SAID, “SATAN LOVES CHILDREN TO BE SACRIFICED TO HIM AND THE YOUNGEST SACRIFICES ARE STILL IN THE WOMB (SHE WAS SPEAKING OF ABORTION)” THAT WAS A DEFINITE WAKE UP CALL TO THIS DARK REALITY SO MANY CALL A WOMANS’ CHOICE, I ALWAYS SAY IF A WOMAN BELONGS TO GOD THEN SO DOES HER VESSEL OF LIFE.
Of course, if you get to looking into the personal lives of people who are obsessed with abortion (like daily clinic protesters), they rarely have any meaningful relationships or anything of value going on in their lives.
LOL, first we supposedly hate sex sooo much, and now we have no meaningful relationships? Wow. You’re really serious, aren’t you? :D
Look at Scott Roeder.
Oh, and “reality,” if you think we’re all a bunch of Scott Roeders, too, then I’m thinking you need to change your moniker. Quickly.
@reality:
1. I am one of the proud Anti-Choice Project volunteers. Most of us have full-time jobs, but know that informing the public of what “choice” means when used in reference to abortion, is one of the most important ways we can spend our otherwise-free time.
2. These images DO stop abortions from taking place. Just last Sunday a woman stopped her car and thanked us, saying that it was those pictures that convinced her not to abort her daughter, who is now a toddler and was in the car with her. Just ONE concrete example among hundreds.
3. The most common time for an abortion is 7-9 weeks, not 4. It’s rare for a woman to even suspect she’s pregnant before 5 weeks. Get your facts straight, especially if you’re going to call yourself “reality”!!
4. The pictures we show are all labeled as to the gestational age of the aborted child. Most are 9-11 weeks. The only place I’ve seen late-term abortion photos displayed is at the Genocide Awareness Project run by the Center for BioEthical Reform. And the reasons given for late-term abortions are the same as for early ones: financial, lifestyle interference, lack of support from the father – in other words, convenience.
5. Our lives are pretty normal, thank you very much. Again, find out the facts before you make accusations. On the other hand, I have to say I’m always amused when people have to turn to attacking us personally because they’re unsuccessful in countering our message.
I’m curious what those women do if they pass a scantily clad woman showing her breasts and nether regions? Do they harass her? Do they get in her face? Are they bothered their children saw that?
I would be more concerned about my daughters seeing a half naked man or woman than I would pictures of aborted babies.
We can only shelter our children so much. The pictures of the aborted babies are the reality of abortion. Seeing a half naked woman or man is the reality of their depravity.
I feel bad for those women’s children…I feel bad their moms chose to leave them crying in a car to accost a volunteer. Great example, moms—if you truly are moms! You should be so proud. gag
Thank you, anti-choicers and Mr. Police Officer!
Reality said: Of course, if you get to looking into the personal lives of people who are obsessed with abortion (like daily clinic protesters), they rarely have any meaningful relationships or anything of value going on in their lives.
Reality, I’m a married woman who’s crazy about her husband and a Mom. I’m also one of eight children and a very loyal friend. But I guess those things don’t count as “meaningful relationships”?
On my reply to Reality I was trying to make my answer not be italicized. Something happened and I couldn’t fix it. LOL
scragsma,
THANK YOU! Thank you for being out there showing the Truth!! I applaud your project and pray that you continue to prick the conscience’s of our nation! Fight the good fight!
A very grateful post abortive mom
These images DO stop abortions from taking place.
Not really. There are still a million abortions in the US every year despite bloody abortion pictures being readily accessible. If you Google information on abortion, they’re the first images that came up. Seeing a bloody embryo the size of a dime, where you may or may not be able to make out a head, hands and feet (but usually just stumps where limbs would be) doesn’t seem to move 1 million women to go through with a pregnancy they absolutely don’t want.
Did Scragsma say these photos stop ALL abortions from taking place? Noooooo but don’t let that stop you, Reality.
A young mother stopped to thank them and to say that she saw the photos and chose life. So YES the photos stopped an abortion from happening.
Why do you hate embryos so much? You have made it quite clear that you are completely underwhelmed by embryos to the point that you don’t care how many are destroyed but you seem to HATE them. Embryo hater.
Lest you forget,
you were once an embryo, Reality. Unless you can find evidence to the contrary.
If anything, I think the pro-lifer was TOO MILD in his responses to those two crazed women!
He should have challenged them: it’s heartening that you’re speaking out (yelling, more like) in defense of your child, to protect them from harm. But we pro-lifers are speaking out in defense of children who have no one to protect them.