Pro-lifers display the “Art of Abortion” at America’s largest art festival
Baltimore’s annual Artscape, held last weekend, July 15-17, bills itself as “America’s largest free arts festival, attracting 350,000+ attendees over 3 days.”
But this year, in addition to paintings, sculptures, fashion, food, and concerts, festival goers were introduced to the photographic art of abortion, as the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform Maryland decided to participate.
CBR Maryland leaders Kurt and Samantha Linnemann wrote in an email alert:
We were strategically located in the center of the festival where 1000’s upon 1000’s of people walked past our display….
When we showed the signs, the Baltimore City Police threatened to arrest us. We asked what we were going to be arrested for. Knowing they had nothing to charge us with, they backed down. Fifteen police officers stood by and watched our display go up and stay up for the following 3 hours.
Pro-aborts, however, didn’t appreciate this graphic display of First Amendment rights. Click to enlarge…
See more of CBR Maryland’s photos here.
Baltimore is a pro-abort stronghold. As the Linnemanns wrote going into the festival, “We are bringing the message of life to an audience that strongly embraces abortion.”
The Baltimore City Council was the 1st legislative body in the US to attempt to force pregnancy care centers to post signage stating they did not commit abortions, although earlier this year a federal judge struck that ordinance down as unconstitutional.
I commend the CBR Maryland group for their bravery!
Donate to help CBR Maryland continue “piercing the darkness with the light of love,” as it says.
Here’s a photo from Artscape’s photo gallery giving a glimpse at the volume of people attending…
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.
Some pictures are worth trillions of words.
Since it’s an arts festival, how about selling some fetal necklaces or cannula bracelets.
Call it “Abortion Wear” or “Choice Jewelry”.
As a Christian artist just re-entering the art field after many years absense, this article really stirs me. Thank you for the encouragement as I have had a bit of anxiety knowing that my art will not be well received in artist circles. I attach scripture to each landscape and it is my dearest desire to reach people through my art. In the next two months I will be submitting to local galleries. I am also a preacher and my messages are based on holiness as taught in the Bible and I exhort my pro-life views.
Concerning the photo of the woman holding up the sign, “Women Matter”: I’m aghast at her insensitivity to the gruesome photos behind her. The spiritually blind are many, however, many hearts were surely stirred by these bold pro-lifers. Surely the darkness WAS pierced with the light of love. Amen!
I love the pro-aborts’ signs in front. It provides such a juxtaposition! All they have is silly slogans. We have documented proof of slaughter. They have slogans!
Pro-aborts sure have us over a barrel now! What if they come up with more slogans??? Whatever will we do?
Thanks pro-aborts! This wouldn’t have been nearly as effective without you!
“Women matter”
Except for the women pictured behind you, torn into many pieces, right? They were just collateral damage in the war for women’s rights…
The juxtaposition with the pro-choicer holding her sign is, indeed, the best thing about this display.
So pro-choicers were unwitting participants in some performance art, eh?
Gotta hand it to the pro-lifers for courage on this one.
When America REALLY SEES abortion, our hearts will begin to change. Let EVERY one of us see this and then ask, “what just happened???”
Answer: slaughter. Nothing else, other, or.
The pro-aborts’ tiny signs scribbled on notepaper with PENCIL is very effective……for showing how insipid they are. That woman, with the scowl, and her ridiculous “Women Matter” sign…..Sure, just ignore the bloody dismembered baby parts behind you. Women matter? Sure, and so do our unborn babies. Pro-aborts are a sick, sick bunch.
MaryBeth, this made me laugh and laugh and laugh:
“Pro-aborts sure have us over a barrel now! What if they come up with more slogans??? Whatever will we do?”
Insipid. Great word!!
The photo of the people holding the “Trust Women: Defend the Right to Choose” banner are proof that you really CAN be “pro-abortion.”
Eye opening. Incredibly.
(And if the photos are “fake abortion pictures,” then why the need to “defend the right to choose” in front of them? If the photos weren’t threatening to these people, they wouldn’t be standing there defending their POV.)
Can you imagine standing in front of a display of other photos of human injustice and claiming “this is our right, and we defend it?” Holocaust photos: “Trust Nazis. Defend the Final Solution.” Slavery photos: “Trust Slaveholders. Defend the Right to Own Slaves.”
MaryBeth, you’re right about their slogans. If ever they rang hollow and thin, it’s when standing in front of the photos of that which they treasure as a sacred “right.”
good place to do this . one certainly can’t claim they did not expect to find anything that they might find offensive , graphic or disturbing at an art festival .
Kel—I KNOW, RIGHT?! Why do “fake pictures” make them so angry? And “fake letters” written by post-abortive women who question their choice? And why are they so angry that people don’t want little babies to be killed? It’s so twisted! Once I realized exactly what abortion is, I rejected it immediately. It made me vomit. I thought it was about choice, and I thought it was maybe a difficult decision, but it wasn’t a baby. I was wrong. I learned what the truth is, and nothing will change the truth, no matter how many juvenile slogans people write on their memo pads in front of the gruesome photos. I didn’t think I could be MORE pro-life than I was yesterday, but the woman holding the “WOMEN MATTER” sign just proved that I certainly can. These people wouldn’t protest a holy image of Jesus or Mary that was desecrated, but they support the right to dead babies? …..Um, whaaaa?
Kel and Mary Lee,
I totally agree! Notice how pro-lifers are calm and carry on, mostly. You know why? We have the truth. We don’t need to be hysterical.
I believe that, deep down, most pro-aborts still have a spark of truth, a dying ember that is aching to burst into flame. They keep trying to suppress it so they protest very loudly when they see the truth – the truth that briefly ignites that dying ember. The truth hurts sometimes, but I pray that they all see the light and embrace life, especially that Life that will save their souls.
“Pro-aborts, however, didn’t appreciate this graphic display of First Amendment rights”
So they exercised their right to tell you they thought you were wrong. I don’t see where this is a free speech issue in the slightest
“Pro-aborts, however, didn’t appreciate this graphic display of First Amendment rights”
It seems like the Anti-Aborts on this board didn’t appreciate the pro-abort woman’s first amendment rights. The Anti-aborts put their display up and I’m fine with that, so why shouldn’t a pro-abort be able to put it up, because the pro-abort woman isn’t on the winning side of Jesus? I don’t understand why any of you say, “My Free Speech rights are being taken away, yet I’m exercising them, but I don’t want someone who disagrees with me to exercise their free speech rights, nor do I want them to follow any religion but mine, based on the posts about souls being saved.”
2nd of all, I’m confused, why is there all this talk about souls being saved? That sounds like a religious concept and as you know part of the first amendment prevents one religion being put over the other and means that our government is Secular. Leave your religion out of my government.
So right back at ya on the not appreciating someone’s first amendment rights.
2nd of all, I’m confused, why is there all this talk about souls being saved?
Huh? What are you talking about? I’m confused about your confusion. :-/
That sounds like a religious concept and as you know part of the first amendment prevents one religion being put over the other and means that our government is Secular. Leave your religion out of my government.
Um. The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
This does not mean there isn’t any religion allowed in government or among government officials. It means that the government cannot squelch religious rights, nor can it force one religion on the populace.
Tsk, tsk, Mr. Jefferson, Washington, and numerous other Founding Fathers. Shame on you for putting religious language into our founding documents. Guess you didn’t know what you were doing!
P.S. – Religion has nothing to do with the scientific fact that humans are killed in abortions.
Jane,
I don’t think Jill is saying that the pro-choice counter protesters took away our free speech rights. All she said was they didn’t appreciate this exercise of our free speech, which they clearly did not (hence exercising their own).
Also I was most struck by the “women’s bodies, women’s choices” So all those bloody limbs are part of women’s bodies?
Jane,
You’re correct. The pro-aborts had every right to express their wrong beliefs under the First Amendment.
We have to wonder what motivated the 15 policemen to want to arrest the CBR troupe though, don’t we?
Bravo, Center for Bio-Ethical Reform. Exercise your First Amendment rights, or lose them.
Wow, absolutely sickening. Those pictures make me shudder.
One says: “I like sex not babies.” Yep, we can tell.
Isn’t it amazing that even in the face of these photos, abortion advocates still exclaim “I don’t see..”
Yep, we know.
Hopefully what’s making you shudder, Jack, is the fact that people would defend that kind of atrocity and human carnage as a “right.”
Well yeah, those people disgust me, goes without saying. I am just really grossed out by tiny little torn apart bodies and always hate seeing them.
I am just really grossed out by tiny little torn apart bodies and always hate seeing them.
Me too. And THAT is the appropriate response.
Ally, and Jane, you’re missing the point entirely. Nobody’s claiming they have no RIGHT to express their opinions. It’s just sort of mind-blowing, since they’re standing in front of dead, dismembered baby parts which are, in fact, the “CHOICE” you guys love so much.
As Kel said:
Can you imagine standing in front of a display of other photos of human injustice and claiming “this is our right, and we defend it?” Holocaust photos: “Trust Nazis. Defend the Final Solution.” Slavery photos: “Trust Slaveholders. Defend the Right to Own Slaves.”
Also, Ally, I’m not religious, so cut it out. I’m a secular pro-lifer. I can recognize injustice with I see it. Dead babies? BAD. Life? GOOD.
Mary Lee,
I wasn’t saying that directly to you, but just take a look at some of the posts on here about souls being saved. That’s what I was responding to. In particular please scroll up to “Melanie says:
July 20, 2011 at 7:28 am” and “LibertyBelle says:
July 20, 2011 at 10:45 am”
I was responding to them. You’re a Secular Anti-Abort, good for you.
“I was responding to them. You’re a Secular Anti-Abort, good for you.”
So am I. I would agree that the majority of pro-lifers are religious, but many aren’t. And the people who are religious can express their feelings about it in religious terms if they wish.
Melanie talked about hearts being touched.
LibertyBelle was the ONLY PERSON ON THIS THREAD of 25 comments who said anything about anyone’s “soul.”
You come here hyperventilating over that?? Uh… I don’t think it’s the pro-lifers on this thread who have a religious hangup.
Many pro-lifers happen to be Christian, many are not
Many Christians believe in a pleasant afterlife in heaven where no one cries or dies
Many Christians don’t want to go to a nearly empty heaven with only a handful of boring, super-righteous people in it.
Many Christians expect heaven to be FULL of people who love each other.
Many Christians want to save the souls of people who don’t know the good news
Some atheists are angry that Christians want them in heaven.
Question: would atheists be more happy if Christians only wanted a few people in heaven? If heaven is a nice place, isn’t it nice that we want you there too? After all, we want to save souls, not send them on the “down escalator.”
Where do atheists hope Christians go when we die? Oblivion? Nothingness?
If atheists don’t believe in an afterlife, why don’t they value THIS life more? If this is all there is, wouldn’t atheists want to nurture and value all life as much as possible because this is it? Huh?
Is disrupting a completely unrelated event with images that are designed to elicit a negative reaction really the best way to promote a political cause? I guess those brave souls standing there with their 10-foot-tall pictures of aborted fetuses can say to themselves “we really grossed out and annoyed a lot of people today!”
Jane and Ally,
Not only did the pro-aborts have a right to express themselves, it was AWESOME that they did!
They provided such a wonderful service. Whatever you all have been coming up with at your strategy meetings, keep it up!
And, thanks Mary Lee and Kel:-)
Joan,
The truth of abortion IS gross. I wish murder annoyed you a little bit more.
I just don’t get what abortion has to do with the Arts… Is it just because they knew a bunch of liberals would be there??? Seems kind of spiteful to me…
And yes you have photographic evidence that abortions do happen in 3rd world countries and if a “pro-life” organization pays an abortion doctor to stage a picture of a mangled fetus positioned over a US quarter to make a political statement about abortion and money… Some jerk will hold it up in public, in front of children, and call it truth…
Those signs hurt your movement more than help it.
And yes you have photographic evidence that abortions do happen in 3rd world countries and if a “pro-life” organization pays an abortion doctor to stage a picture of a mangled fetus positioned over a US quarter to make a political statement about abortion and money… Some jerk will hold it up in public, in front of children, and call it truth…
Hi Biggz,
How about finding out exactly how/when/where/by whom these pictures were taken? Link to your references.
Thanks.
P.S. It isn’t just about making a statement about abortion and money. It also points out how tiny, perfect and beautiful that fetus used to be.
Ok, thanks Biggz! Since the pro-choice side has been so effective lately, we really should take advice from your side. You are winners!
Uh, Ally, I know what you were responding to. I can’t respond to your comment? Give me a break.
I guess those brave souls standing there with their 10-foot-tall pictures of aborted fetuses can say to themselves “we really grossed out and annoyed a lot of people today!”
I’ll be sure to let museum staff know that the next time I am forced to walk by their Holocaust/Nazi photo exhibits.
RCJC – I have tried many times to post links on this blog and they almost always get blocked by admins. That is ok it is their blog but you will have to look it up for yourself. Just google fake abortion pictures and you will learn where these pictures came from, who purchased them, and why they don’t look like modern abortions done in the US today. A little while ago I tried to post the link to the “Army of God” website as it pertained to the conversation or debate we were having on that thread. I have tried posting links to websites totaling the number of anti-choice violence and intimidation incidents gathered by the FBI but admins would not let it on this blog.
Mary Beth – Is abortion legal? Has it been legal for over 40 years? Is the president of the United States and his wife Pro-Choice? Yea we are doing fine… you might think of taking a little advice from a group of people who have already won this fight… over 40 years AGO!
As always Biggz, we await the pro-aborts’ accurate pictures of abortions. Any medical text book will confirm the size of the limbs at the stated age of development. The coins are also there for sizing purposes.
Kel – Abortion is a personal and legal medical procedure… The Holocaust is a part of our world history and is a part of all our lives… Your way off base with this one…
CT – No they are not there for sizing because they could have used anything for that. A thimble, a spoon, a human finger, or hell they could have used a lego… No they choose to use money for a reason. Don’t kid yourself. Also I tried to post a link to medically accurate pictures but the admins would not allow it…
BTW I am still waiting to here what abortion has to do with the Arts???
Hey Biggz, I’m not a fan of the pictures either, but unless you are arguing censorship I am not sure what you are trying to prove here.
Biggz it is really frustrating to me that the mods on this board are so willing to censor facts, links, and articles that disagree with their viewpoint. If their beliefs are so backed by “science” and “truth” then why don’t they allow the other side to speak up?
I’m sorry they are censoring your comments because I’d really like to see the response but thank you for trying anyway.
Jack, I believe he’s trying to argue that the pictures used at rallies and protests are not of actual abortions performed in the modern age in the United States. I think it’s important to differentiate what actually happens instead of just presenting sensationalized graphic pictures that aren’t even of REAL abortions happening around the country right now.
why they don’t look like modern abortions done in the US today
I looked it up. The argument that “big words don’t prove anything” is a lame rebuttal, Biggz. I am the daughter of an OB/GYN and a pediatrician, both of whom would confirm that the vast majority of abortion pictures are accurate and accurately labeled.
A thimble, a spoon, a human finger, or hell they could have used a lego… No they choose to use money for a reason.
Maybe because a quarter only comes in one size, whereas the other objects that you listed vary with respect to that characteristic.
It must be my birthday or something because pro-aborts keep giving me the best presents!
“Yea we are doing fine… ” says Biggz. Great! I’m glad you call 8 states defunding PP to the tune of $60 million doing fine…limits on abortion in several states, abortion mills being closed down due to filthy conditions..
Please keep on thinking you’re doing fine, that’s the best gift you could give us.
Great big thank you Biggz!
“Kel – Abortion is a personal and legal medical procedure… The Holocaust is a part of our world history and is a part of all our lives… Your way off base with this one…”
Circular reasoning. A Nazi would claim killing Jews is no big deal because it was a legal, personal issue that only really affected the Third Reich.
“I’ll be sure to let museum staff know that the next time I am forced to walk by their Holocaust/Nazi photo exhibits.”
When was the last time an unofficial, impromptu Holocaust photo display sprang up at an otherwise unrelated museum exhibit?
Oooh, good one Joan!
Except, let’s say Baltimore was known as a city full of Holocaust deniers instead of pro-choicers. It would not only be acceptable, it would be essential to have a Holocaust display there to show the truth. Yes, even sprung up at an art festival where many Holocaust deniers were likely to be.
And by doing so, you would accomplish what, exactly? Besides disrupting their art festival and annoying them?
Post the links, Biggz. I will make sure they get through. We never censor links that aren’t blasphemous or irrelevant or vulgar or whatever. Sometimes links get caught up in the spam box and we never know about it. So post them. If they don’t post, write a post without a link saying it didn’t post. Believe me, I will not let a posted link not get through.
You would give them evidence that it happened, joan.
Joan,
They would be exposed to the truth, and those who already know the truth will be strengthened and continue to fight for what’s right. Many may have never seen proof of the holocaust and just believed what was told to them.
Visual evidence is very powerful. Sorry you didn’t know that, but thanks for asking!
RCJC – you beat me to it!
In fact Biggz, I just checked the spam folder under the name “Biggz” to find all your comments that we have not published. I only see two with links. They are actually the same post (you must have tried twice) and it was about abortion violence. It was a HUGE copied and pasted article with multiple multiple links, something that I would expect to go directly into spam. So next time please tell us about it. Otherwise, I see absolutely no evidence of your having tried to post links only to be censored by mods.
Is disrupting a completely unrelated event with images that are designed to elicit a negative reaction really the best way to promote a political cause?
“ It would not only be acceptable, it would be essential to have a Holocaust display there to show the truth. Yes, even sprung up at an art festival where many Holocaust deniers were likely to be”
You didn’t answer Joan’s question:
“When was the last time an unofficial, impromptu Holocaust photo display sprang up at an otherwise unrelated museum exhibit?”
Given that Baltimore is the home of the great John Waters, the fetus art is just so “Pink Flamingoes.” As performance art, it’s “Divine” if you know what I’m saying and I don’t think you do but whatever… Suffice to say, I don’t think that B’more will be experiencing a vast pro-life conversion.
Did they win the surrealist category then?
When was the last time an unofficial, impromptu Holocaust photo display sprang up at an otherwise unrelated museum exhibit?
Had one sprang up during the actual Holocaust, a few deaths would have been prevented.
Did they win the surrealist category then?
The pro-choicers may have with their “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” imitation.
I could not resist.
You guys are terrible. You shouldn’t make me laugh at a thread about holocaust victims and aborted baby pictures. For shame.
The pictures work. They save lives (I am personally aware of one life saved when a young man pointed out a graphic image to his girlfriend on their way into the abortion mill). The pictures also provoke discussion, especially on the college campuses.
The pictures are authentic and “American-made”, the results of picking through the trash cans of abortion mills. In the tradition of William Wilberforce (slavery) and Dwight Eisenhower (the Holocaust), we show the evidence of the atrocity.
Had one sprang up during the actual Holocaust, a few deaths would have been prevented.
^This.
I note that one of the signs says “This moral wrong should never be a constitutional right” yet there are no signs protesting against things such as divorce or non-marital sex.
“I note that one of the signs says “This moral wrong should never be a constitutional right” yet there are no signs protesting against things such as divorce or non-marital sex.”
When did divorce and promiscuity deliberately kill anyone?
I note that one of the signs says “This moral wrong should never be a constitutional right” yet there are no signs protesting against things such as divorce or non-marital sex.
Lol. According to legal abortion supporters, pro-lifers are too self-righteous and judgmental…until we’re not, I guess. Go figure.
I don’t care what consenting adults do with their lives. So divorce, screw anything that moves, it’s all the same to me honestly. But when you end up with a kid on the way, you don’t get to kill it.
so how come we can deliver votes and results, but not deliver all children? (instead of abortion) Just a thought.
I don’t care what consenting adults do with their lives. So divorce, screw anything that moves, it’s all the same to me honestly. But when you end up with a kid on the way, you don’t get to kill it.
Agree.
It was brilliant to include these pictures (or works of photography, if you will) in the ArtScape. They perfectly fit within the definition of art (from Wikipedia):
“Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music, literature, film, photography, sculpture, and paintings. The meaning of art is explored in a branch of philosophy known as aesthetics, and even disciplines such as history and psychology analyze its relationship with humans and generations.”
“The purpose of works of art may be to communicate ideas, such as in politically, spiritually, or philosophically motivated art; to create a sense of beauty (see aesthetics); to explore the nature of perception; for pleasure; or to generate strong emotions.”
Oooh, golly gosh, SORRY, but this thread is actually about the use of graphic abortion photos at an art show.
Not premarital sex or divorce.
Nice attempt at derailment, though. :) Perhaps if you’d like to run a poll, you could direct users to your own website with the aforementioned poll. Thanks!
“Oooh, golly gosh, sorry”? – no need to apologise.
My bad Kel. To derail to the extent you intimate was not my intent. I did think my original question was pertinent though, in light of the sign stating that ‘this moral wrong should not be a constitutional right’. But you are the boss :-)
It is entirely up to you as to what polls are run on this site. But I don’t think the poll would be relevant anywhere but on a site such as this due to the nature of the comparative moral positions.
But again, you’re the boss.
Cheers and that thing Dave Allen used to say (not rude).
Holocaust exhibits do “spring up.” The Scientologists have been booking space at convention centers that have big events going on. They set up an exhibit in unused space, and using posters, sandwich boards, and people handing out flyers, they direct visitors over to their pictures. The exhibit that I saw like this was called “The History of Psychiatry” and it’s the pictoral explanation of what Tom Cruise was trying to talk about on TV a few years ago. (He didn’t articulate it very well, but after I saw the exhibit myself I got what he was trying to say).
So me and my friend walked through it. It contained huge pictures like the pro-life exhibits and they showed Holocaust victims in camps, the piles of bodies, etc.
So, yes, it’s been done. Did people like it? Most of them found it very controversial. Did it get them talking? You bet it did!!
Bobby – Carla censors me all the time. I will try again.
What most abortion in the USA look like – http://www.abortionaccess.info/abortionpictures.htm
Pro-lifers supporting murders in prison –
http://www.armyofgod.com/
Lists of anti-abortion violence from vandalism to murder – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion-related_violence
LOL!!
Poor, poor Biggz. :( Censored all the time by Carla.
HA! Biggz, if anyone here were censoring you, we’d be able to fish your comments out of spam or the unpublished folder.
We delete nothing.
Sure, I agree that that is what an abortion can look like at 5-6 weeks of pregnancy… but notice a couple of things. 5-6 weeks pregnancy translates into 3-4 week old embryo. Remember, pregnancy is counted to begin two weeks before conception occurs. Also, a picture of an abortion of a 3-4 week old embryo does NOTHING to undermine the fact that the pictures that are shown of, say, 8 week old embryos (fetus at that point?) looks exactly how we claim it looks. If you claim that all the pictures are fake, you not only have to provide actual pictures at 3-4 weeks, but 8 weeks, 15 weeks, 20 weeks, etc. of actual abortions.
But we can take this further. Most pro-life pictures of aborted fetuses are exactly how we would suspect them to look. For you can find images of 8 week old fetuses on any kind of website you like, you can find descriptions of suction aspiration abortion method on the websites of those organizations that perform abortions, put 2 and 2 together, and you would imagine a result quite similar to that of the photos. Increase the gestational time of the fetus, and factor in the D&E and D&X methods, and once again, we imagine that the results of a D&E or D&X look exactly like the photos.
Granted, there are a fair amount of Biggz comments in the unpublished folder which spans back to ever since he used teh name Biggz. But only two of them contain links.
Biggz,
Re: the site that shows a picture with the caption “All tissue removed from uterus for 5-6 week pregnancy”
Any woman who has miscarried at 5-6 weeks will know what a crock this photo is.
Most prolifers have seen these sites already. None of what you show changes the fact that human life begins at conception and abortion kills human life.
That is correct. His statement about us trying to censor his links is completely untrue.
If a post has more than 3 links, it is automatically held for approval. Sometimes we catch them, sometimes not.
So, if people would like to post links, limiting them to 2 or 3 per post should help to ensure the comments get through.
http://tree-in-the-sea.blogspot.com/2008/05/pro-abortion-violence.html
I know that there is a much better site somewhere, I just can’t find it. It documented pro-life and pro-choice violence and all of the information was organized into charts. :( If anyone knows what I am talking about, could they please post the link?
I support showing those photographs 100%. Females must know what they are doing if they get an abortion. However, to be fair, shouldn’t this famous picture be displayed as well? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Exposure_photograph_5.jpg
It is certainly part of the gruesome and tragic story of abortion.
what about help for young families iwth babies via welfare?
To prevent some women from killing themselves via botched home abortions, we should allow all women to kill their children instead? The picture tragic to be sure – needless human death always is regardless of how old the human is.
CT says:
July 22, 2011 at 11:58 am
To prevent some women from killing themselves via botched home abortions, we should allow all women to kill their children instead? The picture tragic to be sure – needless human death always is regardless of how old the human is.
(Denise) I just believe the hideous picture of Geraldine Santoro should be included because it is part of the tragic history of abortion. The picture of her terrible, agonizing, squalid, and lonely death wouldn’t necessarily be a plea for legal abortion. It could be a reminder that even abortion was illegal, not nearly enough was being done so that pregnant women would not feel panicked and desperate because they were pregnant.
“The picture of her terrible, agonizing, squalid, and lonely death wouldn’t necessarily be a plea for legal abortion.”
It would be difficult to divorce it from the way it’s been used since it was taken, which is to advance the cause of “safe” legal abortions.
“It could be a reminder that even abortion was illegal, not nearly enough was being done so that pregnant women would not feel panicked and desperate because they were pregnant.”
Perhaps it could. There will be a lot of work that needs to be done if we are ever fortunate enough to have all human life protected under the law. I don’t think it has a place in these displays, though, b/c in order for us to get to your point, we need to first convince people to feel for the dismembered children what they feel for that poor woman (and her dead child, not pictured). Her humanity is clear. We want to make the humanity of the unborn equally clear.
Before making assumptions on Geraldine Santoro’s death, you should read the following two articles:
Abortion — Solution for Abusive Husbands?
Geraldine Santoro, Illegal Abortion Death
The use of her image and the claim of women dying and injured in droves from coat-hanger and back-alley abortions is nothing but propoganda. Untrained/amature and self-induced abortions, including Geri’s consisted of less than 5% of all illegal abortion deaths, 95% were preformed by trained personel and doctors in good standing. Nor did these feminists have Geri’s family’s permission to publish and distribute the image of her bloody and naked body for their propoganda, which is disrespectful to her and her living children.
Geri’s husband was physically and emotionally abusive towards her and her children. And yet, when a man makes his wife fear for her and her children’s safety because she is pregnant, they shift the focus away holding the abusive man responsible and helping her into safety to only focusing on getting rid of the pregnancy and making sure she can get a “safe and legal” abortion to avoid his wrath (putting the responsibility and blame on her). What then would of become of her and her children’s safety and wellbeing had she obtained a “safe and legal” abortion?
Thanks for the links Rachael.
Rachael C. says:
Geri’s husband was physically and emotionally abusive towards her and her children. And yet, when a man makes his wife fear for her and her children’s safety because she is pregnant, they shift the focus away holding the abusive man responsible and helping her into safety to only focusing on getting rid of the pregnancy and making sure she can get a “safe and legal” abortion to avoid his wrath (putting the responsibility and blame on her). What then of her and her children’s safety and wellbeing after the abortion?
(Denise) This is part of the point I was trying to make. Geraldine Santoro didn’t have that horrible abortion because she feared childbirth or even because she didn’t want to carry to term. She was separated from an abusive husband and pregnant in an adulterous relationships. However, all evidence suggests she was perfectly willing to carry to term and give birth — until she learned that her husband was coming to visit his daughters. She was terrified that he would kill her when he saw she was pregnant by another man. It was this fear that led her to that horrendous death on that hotel room floor. People should have done a lot more to ensure that someone in this awkward position was physically safe. She shouldn’t have had to choose between getting murdered by her husband or butchered in an illegal abortion.
At the following link, you will find a letter and certificates from Dr. Anthony Levantino, lawyer, physician, and former abortion provider, saying the following:
“I, the undersigned, having performed induced abortions earlier in my career, have examined the photos depicting the aborted human embryos and fetuses used by The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform in their public education projects (www.abortionNO.org). It is my professional opinion that the photos depict aborted human embryos and fetuses and that the depicted aborted human embryos and fetuses are accurately captioned as to age, in weeks since fertilization.” (Add 2 weeks for LMP)
http://www.clinicquotes.com/site/story.php?id=158
Also, at the following pages, you can find images of healthy, live embryos and next to images of aborted embryos of the same gestational age for comparison (yes, the images are enlarged to show detail).
7 Weeks Gestational Age (9 Weeks LMP)
8 Weeks Gestational Age (10 weeks LMP)
8-9 Weeks Gestational Age (10-11 weeks LMP)
10 Weeks Gestational Age (12 weeks LMP)
Well, you get the idea.
Mods,
I have a post pending with links relevant to the topic, please approve (see how easy that was Biggz? I’ve never had a post not approved which was on topic and within site guidelines).
“People should have done a lot more to ensure that someone in this awkward position was physically safe. She shouldn’t have had to choose between getting murdered by her husband or butchered in an illegal abortion.”
Well, no kidding, I don’t know a single reasonable person who would argue with you there. How in the world do you think using Geraldine’s photo (which is still used for propaganda on the debate forums I go to) will get this point across at all? That photo leads to a huge argument about back alley abortions, not a discussion about assisting pregnant women.
JackBorsch says:
July 22, 2011 at 4:11 pm
“People should have done a lot more to ensure that someone in this awkward position was physically safe. She shouldn’t have had to choose between getting murdered by her husband or butchered in an illegal abortion.”
Well, no kidding, I don’t know a single reasonable person who would argue with you there. How in the world do you think using Geraldine’s photo (which is still used for propaganda on the debate forums I go to) will get this point across at all? That photo leads to a huge argument about back alley abortions, not a discussion about assisting pregnant women.
(Denise) You could point out that its use is somewhat ironic. For one thing, what she and her married lover tried to do IS STILL ILLEGAL UNDER ROE V. WADE! She was 6 1/2 months pregnant — 2 weeks past the Roe v. Wade cut-off.
As I’ve pointed out, she wasn’t averse to the pregnancy itself.
It was only the prospect of her husband seeing her and killing her because of it that led to the horror. People who want abortion illegal have got to admit that they were complacent when abortion used to be illegal and not active in addressing the concerns of females who feared violence because of their pregnancies.
“People who want abortion illegal have got to admit that they were complacent when abortion used to be illegal and not active in addressing the concerns of females who feared violence because of their pregnancies.”
Uh-huh. Forget the fact that in the sixties domestic abuse wasn’t taken nearly as seriously as it is today, and that there are a ton more resources today for women in those situations. Your argument doesn’t fly anymore than the back alley argument does. With the amount of CPCs, shelters, and other resources, it is a different story today. Try making an argument that takes that into consideration.
Jack, as the father of a daughter, what precautions are you taking about her puberty to ensure that she will feel comfortable telling you and Mom if she gets pregnant?
My father has told me he wasn’t worried about me getting pregnant when I was a teenager. “You didn’t date,” he said. “Boys weren’t around and you were always in your room. How could you get pregnant when you were alone all the time?”
My daughter turned eight months old yesterday. I tell her every day about safe sex and responsibility.
In all seriousness, I am a pretty open person and I really don’t forsee my kids having a lot of problems talking to me. What that had to with what we were just talking about, I have no idea.
Jack,
I think by now she should be surfing the web. What kind of father are you??!!
:)
Ah, Carla, I am way too busy trying to keep her from drinking and smoking to teach her how to use a computer! ;)
Teach her to just say NO and I think you are all set.
Well I do, and she says “dadadadadadada” so I’m not sure if the point has sunk in yet. We shall see.
What that had to with what we were just talking about, I have no idea.
conspicuous subject change is conspicuous. lol.
Recently got away from an ex myself. Called the cops a couple times. Stuff happened. Got an order of protection. It was easy. The focus on Gerri Santoro should be more about the point of helping a woman who would be in such a mental state that she could do something like that to herself in order to harm her baby, because in this day and age, there’s really no excuse any longer. The only way I can see it is as mental illness, honestly.
Carla says:
July 22, 2011 at 7:00 pm
Teach her to just say NO and I think you are all set.
(Denise) No, period, don’t start.
No, breasts and hips — don’t grow.
No, feelings of wanting intimacy, attention, and caring — don’t exist.
No, desires for pleasure and orgasm — don’t exist.
Does that work?
Hi Denise,
Smiley faces. Do you see them?
Smiley faces=Jack and I were kidding with each other.
Good grief.
JackBorsch says:
July 22, 2011 at 5:10 pm
“People who want abortion illegal have got to admit that they were complacent when abortion used to be illegal and not active in addressing the concerns of females who feared violence because of their pregnancies.”
Uh-huh. Forget the fact that in the sixties domestic abuse wasn’t taken nearly as seriously as it is today, and that there are a ton more resources today for women in those situations. Your argument doesn’t fly anymore than the back alley argument does. With the amount of CPCs, shelters, and other resources, it is a different story today. Try making an argument that takes that into consideration.
(Denise) That these things weren’t available pre-Roe v. Wade is my point. People were complacent about the circumstance that led to abortion horror stories. That complacency contributed to the legalization of abortion.
(Denise) That these things weren’t available pre-Roe v. Wade is my point. People were complacent about the circumstance that led to abortion horror stories. That complacency contributed to the legalization of abortion.
(Praxedes) People wanting to do whatever they wanted without facing any responsibilities for their actions contributed to the legalization of abortion more than anything else. This is still the number one reason the proaborts want abortion to remain legal.
DENISE NOE
ENOUGH!!
You last post was deleted and this is your final warning.
You will be banned.
WTH?!?
Edit: Ah, I see the insanity has now been deleted. Thank you.
Oh my goodness.
Denise, please don’t mention my daughter again. Or me, for that matter. It’s getting creepy.