Stanek weekend question: Which would be the more persuasive pro-life Super Bowl ad, graphic or nongraphic?
Pro-life activist Randall Terry is running for President of the United States precisely with the goal of running an ad during the Super Bowl game that shows the graphic reality of abortion.
This is because federal law forces television stations to air ads for federal candidates uncensored.
It is unlikely Terry will reach his goal. He only began fundraising in earnest a week ago, and this came 2-1/2 months after NBC Sports announced Super Bowl ads, at $3.5 million for a 30-second pop, were almost sold out. At that time only five slots remained, according to USA Today.
Nevertheless, the question can be asked: Which do you think would be the most persuasive Super Bowl ad, a graphic spot like Terry’s or a nongraphic spot like Tim Tebow’s in 2010?
To clarify, the question is not which ad do you like better. It’s which sort of ad do you think will persuade more people against abortion.
I’m also asking this as a poll question, on the lower right side of my home page.
To refresh, here was the Tebow ad, sponsored by Focus on the Family…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqReTDJSdhE[/youtube]
And here are three ad options Terry is proposing to run…

I’d like to see an ad that isn’t graphic in the sense of showing corpses, but that is more hard-hitting than the Tebow ad, which I found to be fluffy and shallow. Let’s have a 30-second lesson on prenatal development, with images of live unborn children. Or let’s tell millions of people the truth about how few women died from illegal abortions prior to Roe v. Wade and knock out the “back-alley abortion” myth that allows so many people to mistakenly support abortion with a clear conscience.
I love the idea. There will be those who get all huffy that we showed something graphic while ignoring the reality that its what made those graphic images in the first place that they should be upset about. But really I think people need to be confronted with the truth of what abortion is. Too many people tolerate it and refuse to do anything to end it because they haven’t been confronted with what abortion really IS.
I am STILL getting the “it’s not a human being”, “it’s not a baby”, “it’s not alive” bull$h!t non-stop. I’m sick of it. It’s time to show reality deniers what they’re denying.
What about a “happy medium” so to speak. Why not show the videos of LIVE babies at different stages of development..you know the ones that show them and their tiny BEATING HEARTS with graphics that tell how far along they are?
You know..SHOW a baby at “four weeks gestation” and SHOW his/her little heart beating.
I think if people are watching the Super Bowl, and they see an add showing aborted babies, they’ll just turn the channel until the commercial is over. Whereas, if they see a LIVE baby and a BEATING HEART, they might just watch…and LEARN something.
This reminds me of the definition of insanity popularly (if dubiously) attributed to Einstein: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Randall Terry, et al., have been marching around with these stupid pictures for decades now, apparently laboring under the expectation that one day they will magically turn everybody against abortion and it will suddenly end. Hasn’t happened yet, but hey, maybe if they show them in between ads for beer and video games during the Super Bowl, finally something will just click with the millions of people who have been rightly ignoring the Randall Terry’s of the world as fringe nutjobs, and victory will be at hand! So just send 3.5 million dollars to Randall Terry, please.
I like the idea of non-graphic images of live babies in utero. I see graphic images being a distraction, people arguing over kids seeing it instead of the message.
And I cannot stand Randall Terry, I think there is something seriously wrong with the dude.
Pamela, that actually is a really great idea. Like those videos from http://www.ehd.org
So I guess you’re admitting your side is insane Joan? Don’t they keep droning on and on that abortion would solve the issue of unwanted and abused children? And that birth control would eradicate the need for abortion?
Yet we’re so awash in birth control pills our environment and wildlife has been poisoned and yet abortion and child abuse rates continue to rise. Hmmmm… CRAZY!
Hope the spots get filled up so it’s not even an issue. Pretty crappy way to exploit that law about presidential election ads.
Pretty crappy that defenseless human beings are dismembered in our “civilized” country and people like you don’t care, Duck.
Pretty crappy lots of things happen in our “civilized” country Sydney. But alas, you and I will always disagree about abortion.
I hope not Duck. I hope someday you will see the humanity of the unborn.
Hope all you want Sydney, I am, and will always be pro-choice. Because the world is not black and white, and the thousands of reasons that impact a woman’s decision with her body are irregardless of the fact that it’s not my decision to make.
I will hope Duck. I’ve met other pro-choicers who have seen the truth finally. The world isn’t black and white, that is true but issues like killing children are.
Sigh, again, child equals born. And just because you’ve converted pro-choicers doesn’t mean that your worldview is “the truth”. It just means you’ve gotten others to change their worldviews.
The Tim Tebow ad directed people to a website with a more in depth interview with Tim’s parents. Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7J9eFNu6RY
I believe my worldview because it is truth. My believing it doesn’t make it truth and I never said it did. Truth will always be truth whether I “convert” others to believe it or not. Truth will still be truth even if I change my mind and don’t believe it.
Children do not become children once they descend through a vulva just because you believe it to be so. Truth is always absolute. It does not change based on who believes it and who doesn’t.
Truth is not absolute. That’s the problem and symptom of black and white thinking. Truth is very much not absolute. Little ‘t’ truth is absolute, like for example gravity exists, and our sun is on average 150 milliion km from earth, those are truths. Truth is a term used to try to say that my bias is better than your bias the world be damned. So, again…
truth = facts that can be proven and/or measured
Truth = subjective view that one bias is “more correct” than all other bias.
off·spring
? ?[awf-spring, of-] Show IPA
noun, plural -spring, -springs.
1.
children or young of a particular parent or progenitor.
2.
a child or animal in relation to its parent or parents.
3.
a descendant.
4.
descendants collectively.
The above is the truth, every age, every stage.
Still trying to fight with me about words huh? Oh well, try taking up your new defintions with the courts. Oh wait… … …
Semantics exist for a reason.
There’s a reason for the difference between the following words:
Fetus and Infant
god and God
weather and whether
Child and offspring
truth and Truth
etc.
Learn them, use them. You’d be surprised how many people will stop looking at you funny in debates when you can come together on common language and actually talk about ideas instead of arguing over what a word means. There are different definitions for a reason. Intelligent people have large vocublaries for a reason. Learn them, use them.
Truth is absolute. Opinion is not Duck. Truth will always be truth whether you believe it or not! Whether I say its truth or not truth.
You say fetuses are not people and can be killed. You say this is truth. I say fetuses are people and should not be killed. I say this is truth. Both can’t be truth. One is truth and one is not. It is not subjective. Truth is truth is truth no matter the person, situation, timeline etc…
The earth is round. People used to believe it was flat. Truth didn’t change because people didn’t know any better. Fetuses are either human beings/people or they are not. They will not be non-human beings and then 30 years from now human beings. Truth does not change.
Sydney, please re-read my posts on semantics and the difference between truth and Truth. Then try your argument a second time without the logical errors.
I read it. I just think you don’t understand the concept of truth vs. opinion.
I understand the difference between truth and opinion just fine. You don’t understand the subtlety and the all important difference between Truth and truth. So, go back and read where I defined them both for you, and then re-write your argument with the appropriate terms. Then I’ll actually understand what you’re trying to communicate to me. Semantics are important.
If I say “That dress is ugly!” That doesn’t mean that dress really IS ugly, thats just my opinion. I could say “I swear that dress is ugly.” That still doesn’t make it truth. It makes it my opinion (worldview, whatever you want to call it).
I often say “Liberals are idiots.” That doesn’t mean they really are idiots or uneducated or morons. Thats not truth. Thats my opinion.
If I say “The earth revolves around the sun.” That is truth. Thats not opinion.
Because I believe the unborn are human beings and deserve to be treated as such and you disagree you see it as my opinion and not truth. I get it. I’m just saying you’re wrong. It is truth. You don’t concur. I GOT IT. I still say its truth. It would be truth whether it was my opinion or not. The unborn were human beings even before I was conceived and had an opinion! Truth didn’t change just because I agree with it when I was 8 years old.
I think the use of graphic images is essential to change hearts and minds. However, I don’t think the ads as above are that imaginative. For example the short advet made by Fr Pavone is very effective and uses a graphic image (the baby’s hand) to great effect.
Semantics are word games Duck. Facts are important.
They used to call blacks 3/5 of a person. Did that change the truth that blacks were full human beings? The words we use convey ideas. I got it. I’m actually college educated. I understand words. I just think that FACTS and TRUTH don’t change. No matter how you twist words to try to prove your point.
I was a biology major. In all my science classes facts were facts. They didn’t change because of word games. Things ARE black and white in most areas of life Duck. And truth is unchangeable. I am not talking about Truth. Whatever silly stupid little word games you want to play. Lets talk about FACTS Duck. But already I know you can’t do that. You couldn’t explain WHY birth makes a potential human being an actual human being. Instead you dumbly tried to explain what birth IS.
Semantics are dumb. They’re for people who have no facts to back up their opinions.
I say we need to get the clip of the baby boy moving in the pan after being aborted. That poor baby’s death has to be for something.
Human being is a human being is a human being, regardless of age, stage of development, or whether or not Daffy Duck thinks they are. That is Truth.
Sydney, here’s FACTS for you. I’m glad you can at least admit, that the problem with debates is people must speak words they understand together.
Science tells everyone, that a Homo sapien sapien will gestate a Homo sapien sapien. For example, a Homo sapien sapien can not gestate a Homo habilus. Science tells everyone that under normal conception that gestating Homo sapien sapien is the offspring of the Homo sapien sapien carrying it and the Homo sapien sapien who mated with her. Science says a species will gestate the same species.
Your philosophy tells you that the Homo sapien sapien offspring is sacred the rest of the world be damned. My philosophy tells me that the Homo sapien sapien offspring gets it’s personhood and joins the community of the species (yes the word COMMUNITY is important) at birth. Your philosophy says life=personhood. My philosophy says life+birth=personhood.
Semantics aren’t dumb. They help people communicate facts, opinions, and ideas with mutual intelligibility.
Xalisae, again, my name is Duck. Daffy is a warner brothers trademarked cartoon character. Quit being a bully. Grow up.
You’re a daffy duck, Duck. Especially since you don’t see the irony of calling ME a bully when you support the legality of 3,500+ children a day being bullied to death by doctors and their parents.
Xalisae is using semantics isn’t she, Duck? Let her be! Haha!
Randall Terry for President?
Someone turn off the lights.
I don’t know Duck. This isn’t one of our usual more interesting and fun arguments. Maybe I’m just b****y and hormonal tonight.
I’ll regroup and maybe try again tomorrow.
Duck says:
November 26, 2011 at 7:19 pm
Get over yourself. You’re a bully, and Jill is an admitted terrorist. You two are made for each other. Enjoy being her brute strength on her blog. I don’t talk to bullies.
Then..WHY exactly are you here, Duck?
Jill an “admitted” terrorist? REALLY? I’ve been coming to her blog for about two years now (at least) and NEVER have I read Jill admitting to being a “terrorist”. I think you subscribe to the same brand of “reality” as “Reality” (the commenter). You’re both in your own little world, Duck.
Happy medium, 180 movie proves America is uneducated about abortion.
Sydney, true, our back and forth wasn’t as productive today.
Pamela, I’m refering specifically to my interview with her to which she admitted to behavior that is defined as terrorism, and when called out as such did not deny it. I did not pull that term out of thin air. It really did happen in my interview with her. She knows I view her as such ever since then.
the first one is not that bad. The other two are terrible. he sounds like an insane fanatic spouting off about god and judgement. Why do pro-lifers always think they have to bring god into it?
“They used to call blacks 3/5 of a person.” No, they didn’t. This was a percentage used, by the Founders at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which ”3/5 of the enumerated population of slaves would be counted for representation purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the US House of Reprsentatives.” That actual people were considered in a fractional manner is just not historically correct as the number refers to the percentage of the population and not the individual. The debates about slavery centered around property rights for slave holders and citizenship rights for freed slaves and those who wished to purchase their freedom. (Dred Scott) It was never about “personhood” in the sense that the pro-life movement claims.
And re Randall Terry’s graphic ads. I say go for it. Viewers will be reminded of Terry’s ”pro-life” radicalism and associate it with the pro-life movement. As such, it will further alienate those who are pro-life from the more pro-choice and ambivalent mainstream – the kind of people who are turned off by the street theater and harassment of women outside abortion clinics. C’mon gang, send your money to Terry. It’s worth it, eh?
“Pamela, I’m refering specifically to my interview with her to which she admitted to behavior that is defined as terrorism, and when called out as such did not deny it.”
Indeed, the criminal domestic terrorism of Randall Terry and Operation Rescue seems to be supported by Ms. Stanek.
I think an effective add would be showing videos of people who survived abortions. Something like “THIS is who abortion tries to “terminate”.” and then showing people like Gianna Jessen, or the baby from Germany, who now have to live with disabilities due to the abortion procedure. You know, putting a real face to abortion. Little baby fetuses are one thing, and dead ones are even worse, but showing people that are grown up would stop anyone from claiming that the victims of abortion are not human “persons”. A friend of mine’s girlfriend almost died from an abortion, but her mother couldn’t find an abortionist in time to perform the procedure (where she lived there was a limit on when you could get an abortion). She knows how close she came to death, and so does her boyfriend. Neither of them are pro-choice – I mean, how could they be? And every time my friend brings up her situation in conversations with our pro-choice friends, they never know how to answer her. They just shut down the argument because they end up being so uncomfortable.
CC,
You’re quite right about the “3/5 clause”. Stick with history, and I’ll agree with you more. :)
I believe ads have to use words to truly persuade. And live images as the exclamation point.
Gosh CC, did you go to Wikipedia and plagiarize word for word? You are correct that the “3/5 compromise” was for representative persons but really, do I have to spell the rest of it out for you? They didn’t want blacks to have the same rights as whites BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONSIDER BLACKS FULL PEOPLE LIKE WHITES. They didn’t want blacks to have any representation or be able to vote or to be exempt from slavery. Why did they feel this way? Because they saw that blacks were human beings and thus people? No. Because they were a bunch of CC’s, Joans and Ducks who said “Well sure those blacks have arms and legs like me and beating hearts… but they don’t have emotions like you and I or dreams and hopes like you and I. They’re not PEOPLE like you and I.”
The same stupidity you flagrantly spew on the internet about the unborn was the same stupid logic used by the white slave owners. They couldn’t deny the humanity of the black population so they simply argued that they weren’t people. They weren’t like whites and thus had no rights.
Interesting quotes from “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” showing how whites thought blacks couldn’t feel the way whites did. Didn’t love their children the way whites did and were just poor “critters.” Same dehumanizing rationalization that pro-aborts use towards the unborn. Well, clearly we know human life begins at conception. And in a short month the baby has arms and legs. We can’t deny that heart that starts beating at 21 days. All these things show a living human being.. but the baby doesn’t FEEL and hope and dream the way we born people do….
Amazing CC will probably deny the correlation. Dense. Dense. Dense. Its exactly the same condescending, evil attitude the white slave owners had.
http://www.shmoop.com/uncle-toms-cabin/race-quotes.html
I believe the proaborts would absolutely hate if graphic photos were shown. We need to do what makes them scared and I think showing graphic pictures to the nation would.
joan would have us believe that everyone has been exposed to these sad pictures. I disagree. I’ve shown the Fr. Pavone Raise Your Hand photo to teens for several years now. None of them had been exposed to abortion photos before.
Few of the people I know would even know who Randall Terry is but almost all of the people I know will be watching the Super Bowl.
The proaborts are most likely voting on the poll as well so we need to take this into consideration.
Gosh CC, did you go to Wikipedia and plagiarize word for word?
If you bothered to notice, I had quotes around the 3/5 notation but I forgot to link. That doesn’t mean that the Wiki entry about 3/5 compromise was false. Again, it wasn’t personhood, it was the franchise and slavery. Did you know that long before the 3/5 compromise compromise, there were free blacks in my state who were “people” who just didn’t have the same rights as other people. The analogy of fetuses to slavery, as Ta Nehisi Coates points out, is totally off the mark. Check out “The Unbearable Whiteness of Pro-Lifers and Pundits.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-unbearable-whiteness-of-pro-lifers-and-pundits/70002/
So Sydney, you might want to revisit your American history.
And BTW, slaves weren’t fetuses and fetuses aren’t slaves. If pro-lifers want to say that women are enslaving their fetuses, go for it. The argument is quite inane and as offensive to blacks as your comparison of the Shoah to abortion.
“Few of the people I know would even know who Randall Terry is but almost all of the people I know will be watching the Super Bowl.”
But before and after the ad, there will be a plethora of information about Terry whose record isn’t spotless – oh, I forgot, he’s a Catholic baby saving hero, right?
“I’ve shown the Fr. Pavone Raise Your Hand photo to teens for several years now. None of them had been exposed to abortion photos before.”
So you show the photos to your Catholic school students. They’ve already been indoctrinated. But sadly, for you and your coreligionists, there’s a whole lot of kids who weren’t brought up to drink the Kool-Aid and don’t care about the photos.
BTW, what state of fetal development is being shown by the photos? And do we know that the “photos” are real? Photoshop can be so much fun.
I show the photos to Religious Education students, CC. Very few of them ever attend Mass. All of them attend public schools. The youth are looking for the Truth and will not let old, angry feminazis keep them from it.
The youth who choose to come to my class (around 20 this year) take what they’ve learned to their families, friends and the rest of the public school population. There is another woman teaching the same class in a neighboring town whose students also all attend the public school. I recently had one student tell me that the prolife movement is becoming a topic of conversation during lunch period.
Is it so hard for you to admit the younger generation is brighter than yours was?
“I show the photos to Religious Education students, CC. Very few of them ever attend Mass.”
But if they attend “religious education,” they’re still, technically, Catholic. And yeah, the pro-life movement is “becoming a topic of conversation” in the public school. Dream on and keep serving the Kool-Aid.
And regarding my Catholic generation. The smart ones practiced, for the most part, safe sex. (When Planned Parenthood opened, the lobby was full of Catholic high school students, some in their little plaid skirts.) They went on to college and successful careers. The stupid ones, who would never use birth control because it was a sin, got pregnant and didn’t finish high school. (The nuns just wouldn’t allow that).
There does seem to be correlation between teens who live in “pro-life” states (like Mississippi that has the highest rate of teen pregnancy) and teen pregnancy. Those are some mighty smart kids!
praxedes,
Yeah. After clicking on Duck’s link to his FB page and reading some posts, it would appear a favorite pastime of theirs is coming over here and attempting to screw up the polls. Mature!
“ angry feminazis keep them from it”
Awww, you’re a “Rush” fan. So remind me, which marriage is he on now and has his new wife produced any babies yet?
But nice to see that you compare feminists (some of whom, like SCOTUS Judge Robert’s wife, are pro-life) with Nazis. Funny, lots of Catholics had no problem with Nazis. Hitler was a Catholic, too.
But again – Randall Terry for President. He’s Catholic. He’s saving the babies by any means necessary. What’s not to like!
Awww, I’ve never listened to “Rush” so can’t tell you anything about him.
Feminazis is a whole different term than feminists. True feminists are prolife like myself and the other female prolifers on here. We understand we don’t have to kill our children to be equal to men.
Feminazis are women who idolize their right to kill their own children with the false belief that it will bring them equality to men and those all important successful careers.
The Raise Your Hand video would be a great one to show during the Super Bowl. It’s not all bloody and gross but gets the message across. Since it angers a die-hard proabort like CC so much, it would be sure to convert many to the truth of the abortion holocaust.
Praxedes, do you think that anyone who is pro-legal abortion will actually WATCH the graphic advertisement? I don’t. They will most likely flip the channel, as will those of us who are squeamish or who have small children. It won’t even get seen by the people it is intended to reach. A non-graphic ad, however, won’t trigger that knee-jerk response and might actually do some good.
“Praxedes, do you think that anyone who is pro-legal abortion will actually WATCH the graphic advertisement? I don’t.”
No, no. She’s right. People are going to watch this video, switch their party affiliation to Republican, and abortion will end overnight. It’s a brilliant plan, and Randall Terry is a true visionary. I’m sure Praxedes has already sent him a sizable donation for this endeavor.. right, Praxedes?
Jack, We don’t need to worry about the pro-legal abortion fanatics like the ccs, joans and Ducks. They are dying out. They will probably never be converted and they’ve seen all the pics anyway.
We already have the prolifers on our side and they have seen the pictures as well (many became prolife because of the pics including me) and have shown their older children as well. Most of the little kids I’ve ever known don’t like watching the Super Bowl and if their parents feel like you do, they should switch the channel. Have you seen the ads that are on during the Super Bowl? Should little kids be seeing these commercials anyway?
Who we need to reach are the fence sitters.
I believe that “America Will Not Reject Abortion Until America Sees Abortion!”
No, joan, unfortunately, abortion will not end overnight. But legal abortion will end. We have Love and Truth on our side. You have Hate and Death on yours.
CC, you say slaves weren’t fetuses. Um. Yes they were. At one time we ALL were fetuses. My point that you get I think, but refuse to acknowledge is that ALL human beings have basic rights. The right to life is first and foremost. That dehumanizing other people to take away their rights has always been the tactic of aggressors who want to destroy other human beings. Thus the correlation to what the Nazis did to the Jews, what slave owners did to the blacks and what you pro-aborts are doing to the unborn.
Jews, Blacks and the unborn are ALL human beings and ALL people but were dehumanized to justify their annihilation.
Its a just correlation and anyone with half a brain would understand it. I think you understand it you just refuse to acknowledge because you are so steeped in supporting the injustice.
Wow, when Rush (and possible Rush fandom) came up I got all excited, thinking, like, 2112 and stuff.
Anyway.
Okay, then, Praxedes. Again, I ask: how much money have you sent Randall Terry to help him spread “Love and Truth” to the Super Bowl’s viewing audience? Since it’s such a didactic master stroke and all, reaching literally one third of the country’s population at once (the most recent Super Bowl had over 111 million unique viewers). $3.5 million is practically a bargain, really, considering the amount of money that is normally spent on political advertisements during an electoral season where any one message can easily be lost in the fray.
joan, cc , duck all proaborts:
did you watch the videos? Are those not human beings?
Just answer yes or no.
Pssshhh. I have no “religious convictions” to support a pro-life viewpoint, so there goes that strawman. I don’t want women who get abortions to be punished.
1.) depends on how it happens and who does it. If she finds someone else to give her the abortion, she’s hired a hitman to kill her child, and that is the legal road which should be trod. If she procures medication and induces an abortion in herself by herself, she should be held accountable just like any Andrea Yates or Susan Smith-type.
2.) Opposing abortion is not a religious position. One can be completely devoid of any sort of religious leaning or inclination. Recognizing the human rights violation that is abortion has nothing to do with religion. I am a secular pro-lifer.
Jack, It’s not necessarily a strawman to link pro-life and religion. Many, MANY people who are pro-life are religious, who are religious in doctrines that appose abortion. Not all of them are, that is true. But there are a great many who are. :)
It isn’t a strawman to acknowledge that a large amount of pro-lifers are religious, ’tis true. But in a country where 75%+ people identify as Christian, and another 10% identify with other religious traditions that may or may not oppose abortion, it would be hard to find an issue that didn’t have a lot of religious/spiritual folks on both sides. It’s still a strawman to make blanket statements about the religious convictions and/or reasoning behind the entire pro-life argument. It’s like saying all liberals are godless. There are more atheists that identify as liberal than conservative, true, but there is a whole swath of Christians or other religious people who also identify as liberal.
Jack, too true, just wanted to keep your arguments honest. :)
Yeah… I just think that using the “religious conviction” argument is an easy way people use to get out of actually debating the argument. I don’t like it when lifers try to debate that way either. It’s fine to have whatever convictions, but it makes a poor argument when you try to debate with someone else. When people tell me to stop trying to force my religion on them, it is quite amusing, especially when I never have and never will use religion in an abortion debate.
Fair enough Jack. Sometimes however, people like Mr Liberal, might not be talking to ALL pro-lifers and instead could be talking to the ones who do wave their religious flag around to justify why their argument is better.
But that being said, you’re always welcome to continue civilly debating your position.
If abortion does become illegal, what should the punishment be if a woman has an abortion after it has been made illegal?
Five days of counseling with Duck. Worse than a year of hard-time.
This is not scientific fact but is of course, my opinion.
Yes Praxedes, but is it truth or Truth?
I just don’t know anymore, Sydney. I’m so confused. I thought it was my opinion but now I am questioning myself. Is it black or white or is it gray? Theological or Physiological? Cultural or Historical? I give up so just go. Go, go and ask The Almighty Duck. Never fear, she will let you know.
One thing I do know, is that the killing of innocent humans does not line up with the Truth and the Duck has a problem with the truth and The Truth.
“They didn’t want blacks to have the same rights as whites BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONSIDER BLACKS FULL PEOPLE LIKE WHITES. They didn’t want blacks to have any representation or be able to vote or to be exempt from slavery. ”
This is the opposite of what happened. Southern, slave-holding states wanted to count slaves as persons to increase their power in Congress. Northern abolitionist states essentially said “if they don’t have rights, you can’t count them in your population.” To reiterate, it was the slave owners that wanted slaves counted as persons (for representation reasons only), and abolitionists that refused to allow it. The compromise arrived at counting the slave population, multiplying it by 3/5, and and adding that number to the states’ populations.
There is no way to interpret this compromise as either group opining that slaves were 3/5 of a person.
joan, cc , duck all proaborts:did you watch the videos? Are those not human beings?Just answer yes or no
While zygotes, blastocysts, embryos, and fetuses are classified as homo sapiens, sapiens, they are not, I believe (and many others in scientific, legal, and faith communities) “human” in the philosophical and legal sense from which human rights are accrued. As long as they reside in a host womb, they are, I and many others believe, the personal property, like any other body part, of the host.
While your favorite embryology texts reference “human life” beginning at conception, they do not qualify it as worthy of protection. You claim science is on your side; but there is no clamor, from the scientific community, for the banning of abortion. The medical community could be considered to be part of the scientific community. The preponderance of the medical community in Mississippi was opposed to the “personhood” amendment.
“No, joan, unfortunately, abortion will not end overnight. But legal abortion will end. We have Love and Truth on our side. You have Hate and Death on yours.”
Yay, let’s go back to the “good old days” of illegal abortions. Those halcyon days when women with money and connections (like my mother) could get nice, safe “D&C’s” while poor women fared less well. We can quibble about the number of women who died as a result of back alley abortions, but the reality is that emergency rooms treated vast numbers of women who were bleeding to death due to complications from illegal procedures. (My mother knew several). But that’s, I guess, what “love and truth” are all about. If women die or are maimed in illegal abortions, you still love them even though they are collateral damage in the war on abortion. Besides, they’re being punished by a just god for going against their divine mission in life. Right?
Besides, they’re being punished by a just god for going against their divine mission in life. Right?
Yes, that must be why those pregnancy resource centers exist – to aid God in punishing post-abortive women by offering counseling to help them heal along with so many other resources to mothers experiencing unplanned pregnancies (that’s what we prefer to call them as opposed to the loving and respectful term of “host.”).
Jesus Christ took on the justice/wrath of God in our place, and God extends His mercy toward us because of what He did. This was God’s plan.
Life is sometimes good and sometimes bad. Sometimes it’s the result of our own choices and sometimes it’s not. If you want to keep on thinking these things about God’s character, that’s your choice, CC, but that doesn’t make it true.
And “believing” certain humans aren’t really “human enough” to have rights doesn’t necessarily make you on the right side of history.
“Yes, that must be why those pregnancy resource centers exist – to aid God in punishing post-abortive women by offering counseling to help them heal along with so many other resources to mothers experiencing unplanned pregnancies”
So you are saying that CPC’s are religiously based? Do all the women, regardless of their religious beliefs, receive tracts or talks about Jesus?
It is TIME for graphic. A massive graphic campaign might turn this bloody mess around. Pro-lifers shouldn’t let a TV reporter film in the street without a graphic sign in the background. We need to be the mainstream media’s paparazzi and also expect much more from the conservative media. As hard as it might be to believe, people still don’t know the truth. They continue to be shocked at the graphic pictures. That’s hard to understand, too, because everyone seems to know about the life of the unborn through ultrasound, etc. What do they THINK those babies look like dead? They don’t think about it. We need to show them. Expose this holocaust with the TRUTH.
cc-DID YOU WATCH??????????
I think it needs to be graphic to an extent. I am just worried that there will be children watching while this add is on. On know that sometimes we need to shock people and make them face the harsh realities of abortion, but it worries me that some children may be traumatized. I pray that it all works out and that God’s healing can be brought to everyone that needs it through these commercials.
Barbara, children are already being traumatized. To death.
I think it is more traumatizing to grow up in a country knowing that the adults have done nothing to stop the holocaust of people that are close to your age.