San Francisco’s Pier 39: A different sort of of pro-life picket
Those who traffic this blog regularly know I support pro-life protests that educate the public about abortion by displaying graphic images of aborted babies.
Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust also believes in this approach, but on October 30 at San Francisco’s Pier 39 the group took a different tack.
For 4 hours – in the rain – 20 of our youthful activists displayed huge, beautiful posters of miraculous preborn development and distributed so much literature they ran out… an uplifting change of pace.
Reported Maddie Lopez in a blog post:
Even though we didn’t hold graphic signs, our cause still got attention, especially with my friends holding a sign that read “Giants Fans for Life” (a personal favorite of mine!)….
[W]e still passed out so much literature that we had to scrounge for extras in the back of one of our cars.
My cousin helped a man get more resources because he needed deeper reasons as to why he should be pro-life. A homeless man received the literature and opened it up wide and laid it out so others could see. A few other men gave thumbs up and smiles to our cause. Women with beautifully pregnant bellies walked by, assuring us they were keeping their babies….
I was drenched to the core, but it didn’t really matter. I could have been at basketball practice, but instead I was… doing something life-changing – and one of the people to whom I passed out literature was one of my coaches!…
I guess it doesn’t really matter where you do activism, because some people still thought that because we didn’t support the killing of innocent children we must have been brainwashed or something, and the police there still tried to get us to leave….
I encourage everyone to get involved, but especially teenagers like myself. I used to think that I couldn’t make a difference, but once I learned all the facts, and saw people my age joining in on the activism, I couldn’t stay silent. I saw what seemed to be impossible totally change right before my eyes. I am thankful for the event that happened on Saturday, because it provided an opportunity for me to put my beliefs into action.
See more photos on the Survivors’ Facebook page.
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.
Young pro-life ppl. WONDERFUL
I’m with you on the graphic signs. I’m supportive. Having said that, maybe these signs are more effective because people respond more to a positive message AND because they find them more believable. Something to think about.
I recognize the “I Care” supplement. :) It’s one of many from HLA that I love to have on hand to share with others!
Maddie,
As a post-abortive woman who had an abortion many years ago, I am so grateful to see young women like yourself standing up for life. I am especially impressed by the positive tone you have taken. When I was 19, no one was around to help me think about my disastrous decision, which affected my life forever in horrible ways. Your courage and perseverance gives me great hope.
Please believe me when I say that you are making a difference. I now work for Silent No More Awareness, and I will spend the rest of my days bringing the truth to others.
Love it.
Love it.
Much, much, much better approach than mutilation education in my humble opinion.
I can’t quite see from the picture – does the 4 month sign say “I had a dream today”?
If it does, it’s wrong.
cranium – you don’t dream?
Don’t be disingenuous Chris. A 4 month fetus does not dream. I dream. You most obviously do.
http://www.birthpsychology.com/lifebefore/fetalsense.html
“Finally, researchers have discovered that babies are dreaming as early as 23 weeks g.a.when rapid eye movement sleep is first observed (Birnholz, 1981). Studies of premature babies have revealed intense dreaming activity, occupying 100% of sleep time at 30 weeks g.a., and gradually diminishing to around 50% by term. Dreaming is a vigorous activity involving apparently coherent movements of the face and extremities in synchrony with the dream itself, manifested in markedly pleasant or unpleasant expressions. Dreaming is also an endogenous activity, neither reactive or evoked, expressing inner mental or emotional conditions. Observers say babies behave like adults do when they are dreaming (Roffwarg, Muzio, and Dement 1966).”
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/prof/sleep/res_plan/section6/section6.html
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/tul/psychtoday9809.html
Oh, and this: A homeless man received the literature and opened it up wide and laid it out so others could see.
I. Love. This.
Cranium,
If you say that a 4-month fetus does not dream, then do you have the empiric evidence?
Dream sleep is characterized by brainwave activity and rapid eye movement (REM). Dream sleep seems to be associated with sorting out the sensory experiences of the day. In the developing brain, there are a great many sense experiences that need to be processed, including issues of sight and sound, such as they are at that developmental stage.
Jill,
I agree that people need to see abortion in order to understand abortion. However, the love affair with the baby is developed around the awe and wonder when people are able to peek behind the developmental veil. That is the greatest inducer of love for the baby, and abhorence for abortion (because it destroys such beauty).
The popularity, the embrace of the material by the public seems to validate the efficacy of this approach.
This is wonderful – and lovely. Great job!
This is a beautiful thing. Educate, educate, educate.
Educate in other lands, too. All around the world, pro-aborts are proselytizing with zeal, spreading the gospel of abortions, bestiality (or homosexuality, fornication, whatever), and contraception for the solution of every form of sexual repression which has plagued the world until the Glorious Age of Non-discrimination (some restrictions may apply). They do it also in the ESL realm through the textbooks they use, the English vocabulary they encourage, and the ideas they force discussion on in their terms of reference. For example, during a recent course I took, I heard an ESL teacher ask, “How many times has she [a celebrity] been married?” The Asian student thought that the question was, “How long has she been married?” Or, for another example, “What are the top reasons to dump your boyfriend?” The Asian students mentioned unfaithfulness and some other reasons, but the teacher was eventually forced to himself give the reason which he wanted: “because you find out that he’s gay.” I didn’t hear any overt references to abortion, but the textbook emphasized population control and the secular humanist idea of family planning, and a colleague tried to make a joke (not with the students) of the “Abortion Shot” that he had drunk in a bar.
What’s maybe needed, I wonder, is an online pro-life ESL resource, celebrating unborn children and calling them BABIES (which expectant mothers naturally do, don’t they), showing the development of the child in his mother and suggesting ULTRASOUNDS, and generally encouraging a well-developed vocabulary for the fetal stage of the development of a human being, citing also the 2009 November 5 <I>Current Biology</I> study (https://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2009/11/study_newborns.html) that we begin to learn our mother’s tongue while we are still in her womb. (So, young mothers, educate two for the price of one!) In some Asian countries, adult ESL/EFL classes consist mainly of young women, university students, and it is probably this demographic which has the most abortions, especially because a woman who has lost her virginity will have a harder time getting married.
Educate, educate, educate! As a Christian, I consider the gospel to be the first priority, but aspects of Christian culture, such as the pro-life message, are of course also worthwhile.
Oh, geez. I kind of agree with cranium! :) It’s hard to believe they’re actually dreaming of events like we do. But bouncing around sensory “memories” – maybe. Like a newborn pup with eyes still closed and twitching in it’s sleep. Not yet the “Roadrunner” cycling legs of older dogs who seem to be chasing something.
And I also agree with Ex-GOP Voter that this more positive approach is better. You shouldn’t have to drag someone along with a CSI team to convince them that murder is wrong.
If a picture paints a thousand words then wouldn’t it be equally effective to have some ‘plasticized’ coprpses of HUMAN embryo/fetuses on display at different stages of growth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg7FuKqKY4E
“You shouldn’t have to drag someone along with a CSI team to convince them that murder is wrong.”
You shouldn’t need the mangled remains of a dismemberd corpse to convince people, let alone scientists, that abortion is a vile and violent act of aggression.
But, as I am faithful to observe, ‘Humans are stupid.’
considering brain waves are detectable as early as….(is it 40 days after conception?) I could believe a baby in the womb COULD dream.
I like the non graphic approach, along with the little one fetal models.
I think the smiles in the photos say it all. I’m so proud of the young people that put themselves out to spread such a positive message. Humans have a natural inclination to love babies. I think there is a time and place for both kinds of message, the pleasant and the unpleasant. In public, positive works best. But in an exhibit, the viewer is walking in ready to see something graphic so the viewer has agreed to visually participate. Like advertising coca-cola, we need to hit our demographic from many different angles. Strategy to use our tactics, tactics to advance our strategy.
When talking about “love affair with a baby”, I´d like to call attention to a wonderful French documentary “Odyssey of Life”.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499652/usercomments
It´s a wonderful movie depicting the first nine months of life of a human being – from conception to birth. Examples can be seen on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NapwXX9o56M&NR=1
Those pictures are beautiful. We use the same ones at our Catholic schools/churches for “Spiritual Adoption”. The posters are put up in the classrooms/church to show the development of a child. Then the children pray for all the moms who are pregnant in the school/parish/city etc. and on the 9th month they have a ‘Baby Shower” where they donate baby items to the local pregnancy center. It is a very positive way to promote the pro-life message. Check out their website though an archdiocese (google Spiritual Adoption).
Why would the police want to evict these wonderful pro-life demonstrators-educators?
I love the tactic of showing fetal development. OMSI (Oregon Museum of Science and Industry) in Portland, Oregon (yes – in liberal northern Oregon) has had a Prenatal Development presentation on site for awhile now (http://www.omsi.edu/life-science). It is fun to listen to the kids as they go through this display and talk about the “babies”.
I have also seen miscarried babies preserved in jars by a hospital pathologist years ago. There is absolutely no mistake that these are babies – if you ever get the chance to see them. If only displays like this one at OMSI could be taken throughout schools, it may be all the education that is necessary.
It is very true that pictures like this DRAW people in – whereby pictures of aborted babies cause most people to walk the other way.
Jon, who’s promoting bestiality?
Both means are effective in getting across the point. Veterans of “Truth Tours” have witnessed many situations where startled passers by exclaimed they did not know this is what abortion looked like. On the other hand there are those who achieve a genuine eureka moment when they see the exquisite beauty of human development, but who would otherwise be turned off by the brutal depiction of aborted pre-born babies.
cramium says: “I can’t quite see from the picture – does the 4 month sign say “I had a dream today? If it does, its wrong.”
A reminder: do you remember pro-aborts referring to fetuses as a “glob of tissue”? It is almost embarassing to think that otherwise educated and intelligent people use to say such a thing about unborn babies. We have come a long way since then, even to the point where pro-aborts when faced with the facts actually admit the unborn baby is an unborn baby…but nevertheless claim a woman’s “right to abort” trumps the physical reality of the humanity of the unborn.
The point is: things change. Science constantly reveals more and more about human development…things that today we do not even have a clue exists will become text book facts tomorrow. Yes, I think that not only do unborn babies dream, but I will go one more—that they also have feelings. They have feeings because that is the way we are made. Feelings of happiness and sadness do not magically start once we are born.
Does a baby love?
Nulono, not many yet. But many people are promoting fornication and homosexuality, which was at one time unthinkable. You get the point. History repeats itself. Western civilization is self-destructing.
LIFE!!! Who can be against it!! We ARE alive!! Thank oyu for your good work on the pier and everywhere!
A 4 month fetus does not dream. I dream.
Cranium,
Do you remember anything from when you were a 4 month old? I’d be shocked if you said yes. So how do you know that you didn’t dream. I’m guessing that a 4 month old fetus probably dreams more than we do. All of their other development is so rapid….
All the information I could find said that it is possible that fetuses start dreaming from 28 weeks onwards.
Kel provided a link stating it could be as early as 23 weeks.
Neither of these timelines meet ‘4 months’ now do they.
If you have some empirical data to prove otherwise Dr. Nadal, lets see it.
Hello there yor bro ken, how are you?
Just in case you may be interested, I did provide a little bit of information here
https://www.jillstanek.com/2010/10/sunday-funnies-10-24-10/
to fill the gap in your knowledge which led you to ask “Tell me the name of an automobile that is produced in any of the former satelites of the former soviet union, china, n. vietnam, n. korea, or cuba. There is a reason you can’t.”
Cran,
Please. Reread my post. You did not prove that a 4 mo. old fetus does NOT dream, therefore your assertion at 9:20 AM, is NOT definitive.
Janet, the sign appears to say “I had a dream today” and is labelled as 4 months.
If this is true, please provide some independent information supporting this claim.
Kel provided a link stating it could be as early as 23 weeks.
Neither of these timelines meet ’4 months’ now do they.
Does it matter to you, cranium, whether you abort a 4-month-old who dreams or a 5-month-old who dreams? I’m guessing NO.
And actually, I’m thinking someone did, indeed, goof on that sign. It really should be on a 5th month or 6th month sign to be in accordance with the scientific research I’ve seen, even from pro-life websites. But the posters are all really nicely done. Most do state the earliest they’ve found is 23 weeks.
Brain activity, on the other hand, has been recorded in the JAMA as early as 40 days.
The point is Kel, that yet again we see misrepresentations paraded as facts in a campaign. Why is that necessary?
Cranium, we don’t know that it was a purposeful misrepresentation. These are students. Give them a break.
And no, I believe the POINT is that you wouldn’t care if it was a fetus who could dream or couldn’t dream. You only pretend that the details matter, but really, when the fetus is dead and you’ve fought for the right to kill him/her at ANY stage of prenatal development, what does a one month error matter to your pro-choice sensibilities?
Kel, excellent point. If you have to err, isn’t it best to err on the side of protection of the life of a human person?
You’re right, it doesn’t matter to most pro-choicers.
But anti-choicers claim to campaign on a raft of knowledge and facts which support the premise that the fetus is as real as a post birth baby.
Yet I keep finding inaccurate information being disseminated.
So the error should matter to your sensibilities.
But anti-choicers claim to campaign on a raft of knowledge and facts which support the premise that the fetus is as real as a post birth baby.
Uh… are you saying a fetus isn’t as “real” as a neonate? A neonate isn’t as developed as a toddler, but is just as “real.”
We DO have real science and facts on our side, cranium. One mislabeled poster doesn’t change that. But despite all the ultrasounds and scientific proof of the humanity of the fetus, you continue to promote the “right” to kill the human fetus. Is the fetus is not a member of the human species? It doesn’t appear to matter to you that scientifically, we KNOW the fetus is human. What matters to you is that you continue in your ability to kill them at will or whim. Nitpicking a poster put up by a student group is pretty disingenuous when you couldn’t care less what ANY of those posters had to say. And now I’m done going down this rathole with you.
Yes I am. A fetus is not a baby. People who do not want to continue a gestation do not see it as a baby.
During debate over federal restrictions on the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure, Sen. Rick Santorum asked Sen. Barbara Boxer: “[Do] you agree, once the child is born, [and] separated from the mother, that the child is protected by the Constitution and cannot be killed[?] Do you agree with that?”
“I think that when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born … the baby belongs to your family and has rights,” she said…. “Think for a moment about that disturbing statement that is now immortalized in the Congressional Record. T…hough she did not say so, the position taken by Sen. Boxer would clearly support the murder of an infant until, and if, the mother and father decide that they want to keep it. As long as the baby is still in the hospital, however, he or she has no rights whatsoever – not even the right not to be killed.”
California voters just re-elected this person.
Cranium,
It really doesn’t matter to you. When I have presented ABC papers from this year and last, you came here and lied through your teeth, telling people that all I had were old and outdated papers. I corrected you here, and then you came back and repeated the same lie.
Nobody here should waste their breath on you, because you have demonstrated a capacity to lie in the face of the scientific evidence you yourself have demanded. You don’t care about the data, and that is not surprising.
You cheer for the slaughter of babies in their mother’s wombs.
Those students whom you mock have it more together at their young age than you will if you live to be 100. As for the veracity of their poster, there remains no reason to suspect that dreams cannot occur, given the state of neural development at 16-20 weeks. The limitations of technology or current understanding do not preclude the existence of phenomena in science.
The limitations are with our diagnostic technology and understanding, and not with existential realities beyond that capability to detect and understand. This is the common thread that runs through the entire history of science.
The witness of those young people is as beautiful as yours is reprehensible.
“When I have presented ABC papers from this year and last, you came here and lied through your teeth…” – not factually accurate. You need to read a little deeper into what I said.
“…you have demonstrated a capacity to lie in the face of the scientific evidence you yourself have demanded…” – why, because the evidence I provided was more factual than yours?
“You cheer for the slaughter of babies in their mother’s wombs.” – factually inaccurate.
“Those students whom you mock have it more together at their young age than you will if you live to be 100”- yep, until they have an ‘oopsie’ and decide that abortion may be a valid option for them.
“…there remains no reason to suspect that dreams cannot occur…” – so if we imagine it is possible we’ll promote it as a fact? Even though the evidence to date says no?
“reprehensible” – is that an opinion?
“reprehensible” – is that an opinion?
In the community of civilized persons it is a fact.
“…there remains no reason to suspect that dreams cannot occur…” – so if we imagine it is possible we’ll promote it as a fact? Even though the evidence to date says no?
There’s a difference between research saying “there is no evidence that a fetus before 23 weeks has dreams” and research saying “the earliest REM sleep so far detected is 23 weeks.”
So is that a waltz, tango or swing Kel?
It doesn’t surprise me that you don’t understand the difference, c. ;) Goodnight!
Ha Ha! Your ‘troops’ published propaganda which is inaccurate, again. What if the final outcome of studies show that fetuses don’t dream at all?
So stop dancing around the issue.
But I thought it was your opinion Dr. Nadal?
REM sleep is good enough for scientists and biologists to conclude dreaming can and does occur, but it’s not good enough for a member of the general public. Big deal.
It’s a great display and sends the message that very small humans have an amazing development.
The interesting thing about Cranium’s insistence that if he isn’t convinced pre-born babies of a certain age dream, and if so then the sign is wrong, and if so the pro-life display lies, is that abortion supporters don’t have any problem whatsoever with abortionists’ lies. As soon as you point out the ‘blob of tissue’ they immediately go into denial mode, just to use one example.
I recently had a conversation with someone who is “pro-choice” but completely inexperienced in arguing the pro-choice side. I asked him why a little stretch of the truth or wearing green smocks was so wrong for us to do, if its harmless and helps save lives? He said bluntly, “because you’re on the side of right and you have to act pure.”
And don’t that say it all? Abortionists and their supporters know that they themselves are in the wrong and we are on the side of right. That is why Cranium is so uncomfortable with the idea that babies might dream in utero. If we are wrong and so impure, then he can sleep a little easier at night.
Ninek, great observation. We must bear in mind that REM is a characteristic of dream sleep as manifested in organisms that have passed a certain developmental threshold. It doesn’t mean that organisms not having reached this developmental milestone don’t dream. It only means that we use these observable phenomena as a simple indicator.
The history of science is loaded with examples of experts claiming that a phenomenon doesn’t exist, only to be contradicted by observations arising from new and more sensitive technologies.
As regards such issues as dreaming and abortion, we need to remember that the absolute always remains in force; namely that humans are accorded a certain dignity based upon the type of organism they are, namely human.
We use science to show the barbarity of abortion in its effects on a living, sensate, sentient member of our species. But one need not show evidence of sentience in order to be accorded full human dignity and the protection of the law.
Cranium is a great example.
Cranium would argue with GOD himself just for the sake of argument…so just ignore the troll. It’s pointless to try to convince him of anything.
It doesn’t mean that organisms not having reached this developmental milestone don’t dream. It only means that we use these observable phenomena as a simple indicator.
The history of science is loaded with examples of experts claiming that a phenomenon doesn’t exist, only to be contradicted by observations arising from new and more sensitive technologies.
Bingo. According to cranium’s logic, before ultrasound technology came along, an embryo/fetus was just a blob of tissue. Only after the technology arrived did the fetus become more human-like. ;)
As regards such issues as dreaming and abortion, we need to remember that the absolute always remains in force; namely that humans are accorded a certain dignity based upon the type of organism they are, namely human.
Common sense would dictate that, sure. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who don’t have common sense.
Thanks, Gerard. My friend also noted during the same conversation why it wasn’t as outrageous when abortionists lie. “Are you kidding? These people are killing babies, who’s going to be suprised that they lie too?” It was refreshing to hear such untrained bluntness. He hasn’t been on websites or blogs commenting anywhere and has not been directly infected by the new pro-abortion rhetoric. He hasn’t learned to couch the truth in verbal acrobatics, kind of like a 5 year old that blurts out, “Mommy, you look fat.”
San Francisco is a beautiful city (a bit too cold for my taste, though) but its not exactly prolife territory. These young people have a lot of guts.
Dr. Nadal, how about you read a little more into the reasons why most experts agree that fetal dreaming starts somewhere between 28 and 32 weeks. Actually, you probably already have.
And the history of science is also loaded with examples of experts claiming that a phenomenon does exist, only to be contradicted by observations arising from new and more sensitive technologies.
“But one need not show evidence of sentience in order to be accorded full human dignity and the protection of the law…..Cranium is a great example.” – oh look, another nicely constructed snark :-)
“Cranium would argue with GOD himself” – actually no, I couldn’t.
“before ultrasound technology came along, an embryo/fetus was just a blob of tissue. Only after the technology arrived did the fetus become more human-like.” – that is not completely true.
“Dr. Nadal, how about you read a little more into the reasons why most experts agree that fetal dreaming starts somewhere between 28 and 32 weeks. Actually, you probably already have.”
Bingo! Now, how much of the literature have YOU read?
Enough to know that there are no legitimate claims that fetuses dream any earlier than 28 weeks.
By the way, your article on gays kissing in protest at the pope contains numerous inaccuracies.
Cranium,
Actually it doesn’t. And we can discuss it at my blog, not here. My article, my blog. This is Jill’s house where we discuss her posts.
As for inaccuracies, you lie so much that you have zero credibility with thinking, moral and ethical people.
Well I did say a while back that I would leave your blog alone. But if you are ok with it I might visit when I deem it necessary.
I shan’t harp on against every ABC article you post as we would simply be covering the same ground over and over.
When it comes to other topics which interest me though, I will contribute.
I find your accusation of lying to be …untrue ;-)
What you really mean is that I have zero credibility with people of your particular mindset, which is far from exclusively thinking, moral and ethical.
I applaud what these students are doing, especially in such hostile territory.
Funny how you pick one possible inaccuracy and run with it, Cranium.
Makes you seem kind of desperate.
I have an issue with you calling a little boy or little girl fetus ‘it’.
I’m 21 weeks pregnant with a little boy, and saw evidence of his maleness quite clearly on the ultrasound screen. Human Fetuses are male or female. Your consistent use of referring to them with the dehumanizing ‘it’ is intellectually dishonest and insults all women who love their fetuses like I love my little Domnic.
Mary Ann, because it is indicative of most campaigns run by anti-choicers in various spheres and mediums.
I think waving around huge signs with inaccuracies is desperate.
Heard of hermaphrodites or other anomolies which means that gender isn’t 100% clear until very late in gestation?
I do offer you hearty congratulations :-)
Ah, the hermaphrodite. Trot out the rare case which makes you think you are fine referring to overwhelmingly male or female fetuses as ‘its’.
And hermaphrodite children and adults aren’t called ‘its’, so why should fetuses with the same rare condition be referred to that way?
Waving around huge signs… Plural usage?
What other possible inaccuracies did you find?
Perhaps you can make an informative list of similar inaccuracies regarding fetal development that have been used on this blog. It seems you reaching for any info that lessens the cognitive dissonance in your cranium.
I wonder what you would have thought of Dominic’s cranium, speaking of your moniker. All the measurements taken at the 20 wk ultrasound are so interesting. It’s a great biology lesson for my kids.
It usually crosses my mind (Dominic is my fourth son) how strange and sad it is
that these little people, so obviously human, so evidently alive, are so often called non-persons and aborted.
You’re a bit late to the party Mary Ann (or are you really). Go back over several threads and make your own list.
It’s simpler to say ‘it’ when referring to a fetus rather than ‘male or female fetus’.
There are conditions other than that suffered by hermaphrodites.
Cognitive dissonance, oh wow.
Why would Dominic’s cranium even enter my mind? He’s your fetus, not mine.
There are a number of things that make me sad too Mary Ann.
I’ve had it with the repeated word “anti-choicers.” It’s one of the most absurd words I’ve ever seen coined. The reality is that if you ask women why they had an abortion, most of them will tell you that it is because they felt they had NO choice. Abortionists and clinic workers lie to women and young girls. We want to know ALL the choices and what exactly goes on during an abortion, as well as the truth about the developing human person we are carrying. You cannot make an informed decision about something so crucial if you are not given the facts. I should know.
Now. Please stop using that insulting and ridiculous word.
Catherine,
If cranium stopped using insulting and ridiculous language, there wouldn’t be much left for him/her to say.
Rather than reject ‘anti-choice”, I embrace it. The choice being spoken of is the one to slaughter a baby. Sure, it doesn’t encompass ALL of the pro-life ethos, but it is nonetheless a necessary component. Anti-choice, anti-abortion are fine with me. Spit at us as they are by people who ardently advance the cause of child slaughter, they are badges of honor.
God Bless.
Catherine, can I suggest you take a look around this site and observe the terminology used in place of the term ‘pro-choice’. Using the term ‘anti-choice’ is one of the less abusive terms I see here.
Come on Dr. Nadal, you can do better than that. “Insulting and ridiculous language” – really? How about you read some of your own words. “You cheer for the slaughter of babies in their mother’s wombs”, how urbane and intellectual of you.
Cranium,
Your acceptance of butchering babies ought not be dressed in respectful, intellectual, urbane or sophisticated language. The practice of abortion is grubby, cold, and barbaric, as are its apologists. The language ought to reflect the reality, which I know really upsets those who prefer the verbal gymnastics that come with the verbal engineering that precedes social engineering.
‘acceptance’ is significantly different to ‘cheering’ Dr. Nadal. Use what sort of language you wish so long as it is accurate.
I do not consider it ‘grubby, cold and barbaric’ – that is your application of subjective language.
‘social engineering’ is something I consider organized religion to have a strong track record in. Not all, and not always, but it has and does occur.
It doesn’t really matter what we say, Catherine. People like cranium and hal and others here will simply nitpick our use of “subjective language” while they support the slaughter of the unborn human and will completely draw the conversation away from the topic at hand in order to engage in rathole discussions which offer nothing of substance whatsoever. And round and round it goes.
I don’t care what they call me. Nothing they could call me would change my position.
‘rathole discussions’ – that’s funny. :-)
I certainly haven’t called you anything which would be anywhere near the extent of the ‘name-calling’ that Dr. Nadal has demonstrated. But no matter.
Catherine,
Congratulations! The care we take when we bother to type “him or her” “he or she” “his or hers” indicates our high regard for them. What’s a few more keystrokes to show you care?
How exciting to see students getting out there and showing the truth of unborn life. And in San Fran … that takes a lot of courage! :) It’s nice to know that there are other young pro-lifers out there who aren’t apathetic about what they know is right. Sometimes that apathy just really gets to me. How could you not defend beautiful, precious life?
After seeing that, I don’t know how anyone would want to have an abortion. Absolutely precious.
Excellent work Survivors. I work with Human Life Alliance that creates the publications such as “icare” pictured above. If anyone is interested in requesting copies of these publication for their pro-life work or simply to read for themselves, visit http://www.humanlife.org to read more!
Marie
Does anyone else remember the wonderful (and, IIRC, unprecedented) huge photo spread in LIFE magazine years ago, which showed the fetal development of the baby from conception onward? Though I was very young when I saw that, it made an indelible impression upon my heart and mind, and I was the richer (and more knowledgeable) for it.
This marvelous display in San Francisco (a hotbed for liberals even in the ’60s) is breathtaking! What a stupendous idea! GOD BLESS those young people for their wisdom which far exceeds that of many of their elders.
A note to cranium: The word fetus is simply the Latin word for offspring. Since a human offspring is a baby, fetus = baby.
I know I’ve explained this to you before. Maybe you’ll get it this time. ;)
Claire, I’m quite happy to start using the term ‘pre-born’ instead of ‘fetus’ if you wish?
The meanings of words are not a black and white science. There are nuances and interpretations.