Harvard fetusphobia: Pro-aborts destroy Elena posters
Most interesting about the controversy surrounding Harvard Right to Life’s preborn poster campaign is what pro-abort students are saying about its “Elena” poster series. This educational effort has resulted in repeated vandalism….
From the Oh Harvard blog, February 16:
I think I have a right to not see that crap on my way to breakfast, lunch, and dinner….Ethically charged posters like that have no place in common spaces. Quite simply, if one is pro-choice, they make you uncomfortable and annoyed…. Some things aren’t suited to cute posters with girly fonts and doodles. Some things don’t serve a real purpose….
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
From an article entitled, “Pro-Life Posters Spark Debate: Students rip down controversial pro-life posters in protest,” in the Harvard Crimson, March 6:
“I personally find the image disgusting and don’t want to walk past it everyday,”” said Nichele M. McClendon ’06, who said she did not tear down any posters. “It doesn’t have to do with abortion as an issue or free speeh; it’s about being decent and not being disgusting.”
Jamie R. Smith ’08… said in a phone interview that she felt the combination of a shocking picture and controversial message made the posters disagreeable to students. However, she felt that groups have the freedom to poster about causes that are important to them.
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
From an editorial entitled, “The Right To Reason: Recent campus abortion posters are purposeless,” by Harvard Crimson staff writer Alexandra Atiya, March 10:
The “Elena posters” are the newest tactic of Harvard Right to Life. They feature a little fetus saying, “Oh, HI! I was just celebrating all my organs and me being 56 days alive!” I am not a fan….
They seek to cause anger, not excitement. In doing so, they reveal their antagonistic purpose, implicitly admitting that their primary function is to irritate pro-choice supporters on campus.
This kind of purposeless aggression is a hurtful and unproductive way of expressing opinions….
[I]t is simply a statement of anger to express your ideas in the way of the “Elena Posters”…. [I]t’s unnecessarily divisive…. [T]his deliberately flattens an intensely painful and complicated issue. It also happens to misrepresent the pro-choice members of this campus as bloodthirsty baby killers.
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
I’m reminded by this story of the recent flak created when a newspaper considered ultrasound photo ads “too graphic” to run.
The pro-life movement has apparently discovered something infuriating to pro-aborts: ultrasound photos of preborn humans.
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.
Good! Ya think they are irritated now just think of them before the throne of judgement. Irritated is only a word not a sentence.
Pro-aborts complain
Please don’t let reality intrude on us…
Yeah, like the pro-choice groups on college campuses never put up offensive posters. maybe if these posters showed bloody dead fetuses, I could understand maybe a little bit about people being offended, but these pictures are just normal biology textbook pictures.
I’ve made other posts about this issue in the blog for a very specific reason. My post, the part that you decided to quote is meant to be taken with some humor, is not about the quality or message of the pro-life movement. Rather, knowing the college community, I was aware from the very beginning that this sort of poster campaign would not go over well with the general student body. I was right.
It’s not that the pictures are too graphic. The students quoted were quoted because they had extreme viewpoints and make an interesting story. Most people are not disgusted by a picture of an embryo or developing fetus. It’s a matter of people’s personal beliefs being subject to criticism. People also don’t want religious messages scrawled in public spaces for similar reasons. The vandalism is one thing, but the general feelings are not particularly out of line. Just because people don’t want to have a debate about abortion on their domitory walls doesn’t mean people are trying to hide from a scientific reality. It’s a gross oversimplification.
ben, where’s the debate about abortion? The posters don’t even mention abortion. They’re just pictures of embryos and a fetus. It’s only the fact that some people on campus want to kill embryos and fetuses that makes the issue come up at all. Anne Geddes (sp?) pictures of babies in flower suits are just pictures of babies in flower suits, because nobody is plugging infanticide of healthy babies.
If you don’t want to kill them, the pictures have no power over you.
I really enjoyed watching National Geographic’s In The Womb last night. All the exact same images and more. I agree with you Jill, it’s only the desperate desire to keep abortion legal that makes these posters “offensive.”
just think maybe the fetus wont grow up to be a race car drive . maybe they will grow up to be a serial rapist or drunken vicodin swilling trophy wife. i mean if we are going to start postulating about the future of these embryos lets keep it real. every serial killer and homeless crack addict had a mom too.
I don’t see anything “religous”, offensive, or argumentative about any of these posters. Simple biology. I remember, not long after loosing my first baby when I was 16 weeks pregnant, being terribly sad when I had to walk past the fetuses in a jar display in the biology lab on my way to class, that showed their developement, mainly because there was a baby the same size as my Jessica that I had lost only a month or so prior. It broke my heart to think that these babies may have been aborted when I would have given anything to have my child with me instead of buried in the graveyard.
How can we have a debate on the subject if only one side is allowed to openly express their opinion? We hear plenty from the abortion lobby, so why are they so afraid of people seeing this type of innocent picture of these precious miracles?
Terri,They are afraid because the TRUTH hurts.It’s the same reason people dont want to acknowledge God because that would mean they are accountable at the end.With knowledge comes responsibility and responsibility -accountability-.
They dont want to see a fetus as a living growing human being.They would rather belive him/her to be simply tissue that can be easily disposed of for any “social” reason.
For God sakes planned parenthood referred to the use of ultrasound machines at pro-life organizations as a “weapon”.
Why?I think like 90% decide to keep their baby after having one(at least at crisis preg. centers)
That means they lose money.ALL BECAUSE THE WOMEN SAW THE TRUTH.It’s a powerful thing and it really can “set you free”…if you let it.
Standing up for whats right is never easy and there will ALWAYS be critisizm.I’m glad Martin Luther King didn’t give up.Likewise persecution and all we must all take our part in stopping this genocide.Whether helping at crisis pregnancy centers, posters, or most simple and powerful..prayer.
Um, the debate goes on in campus dialogue, in classrooms, and in conversations. The posters say “sponsored by Harvard Right to Life.” Innuendo is plenty. A poster doesn’t need to mention abortion to relate to it.
I would add that it’s gross mischaracterization to say that people who call themselves “pro-choice” are people “who want to kill babies.” Many people with this view share the belief that life is sacred, but make exceptions for instances of rape and incest. Those quoted above who find those images “disgusting” are a minority. Most people who passively dislike posters say so not because they are offended, but because they would rather not have a “debate” on the walls of their dormitory. Just because there are two sides to an issue doesn’t mean there aren’t people straddling the middle.
sorry ben, this is NOT an issue, nor is it THE issue, because the word issue conjures-up a debate …. an image of the mind. Abortion is a killing … not an issue. Stop the killing, then lets have a debate … this way only false ideas die … not human beings.
Abortion is murder…pure and simple…
Lifophobes rip down fetus posters at Harvard
Free speech only applies to liberal-left. They teach this at school. The school in this case is Harvard… Harvard being the liberal university notable for its elite intellectuals among its faculty -- well OK a disclaimer is in order…
Lifophobes rip down fetus posters at Harvard
Free speech only applies to liberal-left. They teach this at school. The school in this case is Harvard… Harvard being the liberal university notable for its elite intellectuals among its faculty -- well OK a disclaimer is in order…
My friend Joel at ProudToBeCanadian blogged about the reaction of some students. The posters are very persuasive, especially to those contemplating killing one. A horrible idea and so self-serving. Killing life seems so basically wrong. Take care and thanks for sharing the information and pictures of the posters in question.
nickstalin – yeah, that’s right. Maybe I should go blow up a whole elementary school, since some of those kids will probably grow up to be criminals, right? Or would that be bad?
Wow, Harvard students offended by photos found in any high school biology textbook, Muslims offended by cartoons, and yet as an Italo-American I am supposed to “lighten up” as to the return of The Soprano’s and all the uses of the word “mafia” ad nauseum for everything from priestly homosexual ephebophilia (Lavender Mafia) to Russian thugs (Russian mafia). PUHLEEZ. Grow up Harvard students, take a human development class and stop being so squeamish. Be grateful you live in a country where little Elena can be shown without a teeny black burqua covering her!
Terri, a fetus singing to itself at 8 weeks is far from “simple biology.” It’s personification. The fetus is not talking to us, and yet the maker of those poster boards wants us to feel like what is pictured is more intelligent and aware than it is. Sounds like some heavy use of pathos to me! And until you can find me a biology textbook that uses emotional rhetoric to make its point, I’ll thank you for not pretending that those signs are “simple biology.”
It’s true that a fetus cannot talk to him/herself, but neither can a young baby after s/he is born. The facts presented on the posters are scientifically accurate even though they are in the “voice” of the unborn human who is pictured. In fact you are being dehumanizing and inaccurate by using the word “itself” since an embryo or fetus is already male or female and starts developing male or female organs quite early. The wording is probably meant to counteract such dehumanizing language by putting the info in the child’s voice. No, it’s not neutral, but you aren’t being neutral either. I would be fine with putting the info in the third person: such as “Elena’s heart has started beating” etc. Maybe they should do that for future posters.
I never questioned the accuracy of the facts in the posters. The point I was making was that the posters are not “simple biology” or “normal biology textbook picutres,” as previous commenters had asserted.
I’m not going to argue your point that I’m not neutral. I’m not, and I never said I was. But those making comments were ignoring the blatant innuendo. They are not “just” the pictures. The posters are not benign placards saying “hey, look at this fetus!” There’s an intention, a message, and a spin behind them.
And in regard to the original post, I, as a “pro-abort,” am not “infuriated” by the posters. I would be mildly annoyed if I had to walk past them every day, just as I’m mildly annoyed by the advertisements, pamphlets, and flyers that litter my own college campus. And I’m probably the norm. That wouldn’t make an interesting article for the school newspaper, though.
We will be posting pro-life materials up here at UIS, possibly next month.
Though probably not nearly as bad as Harvard, I wouldn’t be surprised if many of ours get defaced or torn down as well.
Perhaps we should name the fetus Jill…Jane…Kate? Would you like it then?..because I’m married to someone who doesn’t appreciate a fetus who has usurped her name and plastered all over the place where she lives and works and so what if people rip them down. HELLO no poster on a college campus should expect to stay around for more than a couple of days..who the heck names fetuses anyway..?!?!? Why “Elena”? Why give it any name at all? Would you be proud to have a fetus everywhere staring at you, named after you? Is it necessary to make this personal? Is it because nobody is supposed to be named Elena?
Whenever someone brings up the abortion issue, I have to stop and think that they were a fetus once. Imagine if their mom had aborted them? Has anyone who is pro-abortion ever stopped and thought about that? I had someone relate to me an experience he had once: his sister was about to abort a child when he ratted her out to her parents. 3 years later, his sister told him thank you out of the blue. He asked her why and she stated that if he hadn’t ratted her out to their parents, she wouldn’t have a beautiful boy today. We are God’s creation, pure and simple. The reason that pro-abortionists get so huffy and puffy over this issue is because they have to believe in something, and if this is destroyed, then there is nothing left for them but the Truth. In a culture of denial, it is a hard thing to swallow.
It seems that lots of you peoplare are dumb enough to think that this poem was sincere:
http://waffleass.blogspot.com/2006/03/poem-for-terri.html
I didn’t know fetuses could either write or run Paint on Windows…amazing!
Barbra Streisand cancels her Rome gig next month, but denies protests over high ticket prices had any bearing…