“Protect” people from photos of aborted babies?
This is the height of insanity. College pro-life activists wanted simply to display photos of preborn babies being slaughtered, and school officials are now suing them to “protect” people from seeing the atrocity? Right. Let’s use the law to “protect” people from viewing legally unprotected babies being torn limb from limb. What’s more, as the photo above shows, the activists warned people what was ahead to give them the “choice” whether or not to view the human atrocities.
From the Calgary Herald, February 2…
A group of pro-life student activists are heading to court this month after the University of Calgary charged them with trespassing.
Campus Pro-Life and university administrators have been locked in an ongoing dispute over a controversial anti-abortion display called the Genocide Awareness Project, which puts images of dead fetuses next to Holocaust or Rwanda genocide victims.
On November 26, the student group went ahead with plans to erect the display against the university’s requests to turn the graphic images inward to protect those who didn’t wish to see them.
More than 2 months later, some of the students behind the project have been charged with trespassing and received summonses to court on Feb 27.
Contrast this free speech suffocation with the fact that at least twice the U of C has allowed exhibits of the Chinese government’s torture of Falun Gong followers, in March 2007 and November 2008. The latter display was erected “[a] bare 30 metres from the [very] pro-life display” that is now the target of the lawsuit, according to a Calgary Herald editorial today decrying the university’s legal action against pro-life students.
Ironically, the 2007 Falun Gong display included a “touching” painting of a born baby being killed, according to U of C’s student newspaper, The Gaunlet:
Throughout the day, the gallery drew crowds of onlookers who were silenced by the graphic paintings of Falun Gong being tortured for their beliefs.
“The painting is very touching with the baby by the mother’s side,” commented a visiting physics professor… on a painting of a Falun Gong mother and her baby who were beaten to death. “If this happens, I mean, really, this baby had nothing to do with the Falun Gong. Either the government is exaggerating or the painting is exaggerating because it’s impossible to kill a baby of seven months.”
The good professor is pathetically naive. I just viewed photos and paintings of Falun Gong torture and almost couldn’t stand what I saw. Blogger Andy Carvin described a similar Falun Gong display he viewed in Boston:
… a woman in a blood-spattered blouse hangs from two ropes as a baton-wielding thug stands behind her. To her left, an old woman sits on the ground, her right hand pressed onto a small table, as two men pull out her fingernails. Another woman is bound inside an animal cage….
I can’t even bring myself to post any of the Falun Gong torture photos. Yet U of C officials found them acceptable and abortion photos not. Below is a photo of a GAP display at the University of Cincinnati. See more here.
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.
Man, those signs are HUGE!
This is the big myth about abortion – that it’s about choice.
In fact, it’s never been about choice. It’s been about women’s rights being based entirely on the vague concept of “reproductive freedom”.
There is no choice in abortion. The opposite is true – women who have abortions feel they have NO choice. That’s why they abort. Given real “choices” they would probably not abort.
What proaborts need to ask themselves: Why is it that they do NOT want people to view these pictures?
The higher schools of ignorance. I read the sign where the “school” says they have not granted permission nor endorsed the speech. Last time I checked free speech is when speech does not require permission and endorsement. Censorship is what I think of. Like the first post says. Having an option is part of choice. Having zero options presented doesn’t creat for freedom of choice.
I blogged about a somewhat similar incident, though not on this scale, recently.
http://ranchomiller.wordpress.com/2009/01/22/anger-over-graphic-abortion-sign/
Academic institutions are controlled by the abortionists for more than forty years now. The same is true of the media, Hollywood, arts and entertainment, the medical profession, the legal profession, the various foundations, the upper class and the counter culture.
We cannot receive a fair hearing or get any sympathy at all in these segments of society.
This is why Darfur or Falun Gong or torturing animals in medical laboratories or the Nazi Holocaust is not a problem for the administration of these univeresities, but our message will always be resisted. They cannot stand it, they loathe it and they feel very threatened by it. They do not feel threatened by the other displays, only ours.
The reason they feel so desperately threatened is that, deep down inside, they know we are trying to stop an unspeakable crime, a horrible evil. They are not stupid. These are educated, intelligent people. The problem is that they have, I believe, an intense psychological need to support abortion violence and to have it available. These are people who are nonreligious and therefore do not really have a psychological or spiritual barrier (as Christians and other religious people do) to the free expression of their sexuality. So they tend to be sexually liberal, want to have sex, do not want to have children (or only later in life), want to have advanced academic careers. Later in life they may want to have children, but very few (they do not think children are a gift from God, but a burden and require an enormous amount of effort and expense to put through private school, through college and then graduate school, so they can follow in their parents’ footsteps).
They feel that every aspect of their lives, their lifestyles, their life goals and their personal identity and freedom requires virtually unlimited access to criminal abortion. They cannot stand our support for unborn human rights and they think we are ignorant and unenlightened.
We are a threat to them not just because we might take away their precious “right” to “choose” (to kill their children) but even more to the point because we are relentlessly exposing (especially with these college displays) the evil and crime against human beings which they support (and must support given their psychology and their lifestyle). In other words, we expose the horror and inhumanity of their position and expose their lack of human values.This is painful and distressing to people who believe they are “liberal”, “humane”, “humanitarian”, “enlightened” and “progressive”.
This is why the unborn human rights movement will always be treated differently from just about all other movements and will always receive scorn and derision from those in the elite and the counter culture.
What happens to fulon gong can happen too easily here. Once there is no tolerance for free speech and truth, then torture is only a matter of time.
I’m beginning to see what Hell really is, because the knowledge and good and evil is here. That’s choice.
Higher Ed is full of censorship in general. There were protests at my campus last year over censorship, student rights, etc.
“Free speech” zones are set up at various controversial events at colleges, regardless as to whether the speaker is ultraliberal, ultraconservative, whathaveyou.
The censorship isn’t as severe as most high schools, but in all reality college administration is constantly at odds with students all over the country over various events. This is nothing new, nor is it surprising. What college would want those pictures of when prospective students may be applying or beginning to make their choices? They are businesses first and foremost, and anything that may scare away people who may be willing to fork over tens of thousands of dollars a year generally isnt going to be accepted by administration in general.
As a Canadian I cant tell you how ashamed I am of my country when it comes to the abortion issue.
We have no abortion laws whatsoever, which means its perfectly legal to kill unborn babies right up to the ninth month. Granted, this apparently seldom if ever actually happens, but the fact its LEGAL in the first place turns my stomach.
We also have the infamy of awarding the Order of Canada, the highest civilian honor, to a “doctor” who has admitted to killing over 300,000 unborn babies. I wrote a protest letter to my local paper and guess what…. they did not publish it.
And its not just colleges and schools that have that kind of censorship. I was reading recently there was a billboard of a women about 9 months pregnant, fully clothed, and the billboard said abortion was legal right up to delivery (paraphrasing now because I cant find the original article) and the group that put it up was forced to take it down.
And lastly, our “conservative” PM says he will not allow the abortion debate to be opened again. One of his MPs wanted a bill in which it would be considered a double crime if someone killed a pregnant woman. We are so radical in this country that even a bill like that never even made it to vote. After all, we would be considering the baby a “person” by going along with such a law.
I love Canada. Conservative in Canada is like a democrat in the States… except Harper may be more liberal than Obama. It’s funny.
But really, I do love this country. I’m going to start a citizenship countdown one of these days!
Oh man! I didn’t even notice that that was the U of C! That’s like two hours away from me.
Never liked Calgary….
What is particularly interesting here is the same professors and administrators who are imposing the restrictions on the photographs were of the generation that relied on the horrible images of the Vietnam War to turn the tide against the U.S.
University of Calgary officials -> they are good nazis, Adolf would have been proud!
What college would want those pictures of when prospective students may be applying or beginning to make their choices? They are businesses first and foremost, and anything that may scare away people who may be willing to fork over tens of thousands of dollars a year generally isnt going to be accepted by administration in general.
What Dan says is true, unfortunately. I tend to favour free speech myself in these situations. But comparing abortion to torture may be an issue here as well, and you have to consider intent.
The intent of an abortion is for the woman to not be pregnant; it’s not to torture. I can see how the end result of a fetus being ripped apart could make the intention irrelevant for many.
But this is why you see an uproar from the public when, say, some Alberta teens tortured a cat to death last year. That haunted me hard for days, as did the case of the parents who left their baby in a freezing stairwell here in Toronto, whereas I can’t honestly dredge up any sympathy for a fertilized embryo not implanting, whether the failure is intentional or not.
It’s not the same as intentional cruelty.
BTW, Bethany, I appreciate you sharing the story of your “chemical pregnancy” in the other thread. When I say “no sympathy” I mean for the vast majority of cases where no one even knows the woman has miscarried.
I can deinitely see how you would have felt very sad in your situation.
“What college would want those pictures of when prospective students may be applying or beginning to make their choices? ”
a good college.
I would allow the protest. After a few days it would be gone and everything would return to normal. That’s what free speech is about, the right to make a fuss and the rights of others to ignore you.
The intent of an abortion is to kill the child.
And pro-aborts kill the child in really sickening ways. For your sensitivities Carla I will not describe those ways in detail, but I am glad people hold those signs that show their handiwork.
We also have the infamy of awarding the Order of Canada, the highest civilian honor, to a “doctor” who has admitted to killing over 300,000 unborn babies. I wrote a protest letter to my local paper and guess what…. they did not publish it.
Posted by: Joanne at February 3, 2009 1:17 PM
You got it bad up dear ya hey dear. Down here we got da kinda hosers that elect a pro-abort but we haven’t granted any abortionists the Medal of Honor :
But I wouldn’t doubt the Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the rest of the Obamaniacs trying to push through a Margaret Sanger national holiday as part of their stimulus package..lol
I can’t honestly dredge up any sympathy for a fertilized embryo not implanting, whether the failure is intentional or not.
It’s not the same as intentional cruelty.
Posted by: Terezia at February 3, 2009 8:24 PM
Terezia, are you saying that killing a human embryo isn’t cruel or killing an embryo on birth control isn’t intentional or both?
“I love Canada. Conservative in Canada is like a democrat in the States… except Harper may be more liberal than Obama. It’s funny.
But really, I do love this country. I’m going to start a citizenship countdown one of these days!”
Hey Leah, what is your point? really… You keep on saying you love Canada, every time you post. We know, you already told us.
Actually, “Doctor” Henry Morgentaler, Canada’s “leading” criminal abortionist, has stated that he has killed 100,000 unborn children, not 300,000.
If you are the head of Planned Parenthood in America, you kill about 300,000 unborn children every year, but I don’t think any individual criminal abortionist is capable of killing on that scale.
Bernard Nathanson, the former criminal abortionist turned pro-life activist, claims that he was responsible for about 75,000 killings of unborn children. Most major abortionists get into the tens of thousands, but to get beyond that in a normal lifespan is difficult, if not impossible.
Terezia, are you saying that killing a human embryo isn’t cruel or killing an embryo on birth control isn’t intentional or both?
A lot of woman probably don’t know that the BC pill can cause a fertilized egg to not implant. Some of these women would care, and others would not.
I’m saying killing a human embryo is not intentional cruelty, in the way of torture. The objective of not becoming pregnant is to not be pregnant. It is not to cause pain to a fertilized egg, if they could actually feel pain.
The fact that 40-50% of fertilized eggs don’t implant naturally (using Bethany’s statistics) makes it hard for me to see the loss of one as tragic, unless it is the rare case where the woman knew really early and got her hopes up.
I agree Terezia that most women don’t even realize they are getting pregnant (sperm fertilizing egg) while on birth control. Funny how the drug companies that sell birth control don’t educate about that. There bittom line is to sell the drugs so they deceive women with those 99% effective statistics and don’t bother mentioning the the pregnancies the lives that fail to establish themselves and die because of the birth control. That would drop their “effectiveness” way down and hurt their bottom line so drig marketers and drug pushers like Planned Parenthood don’t inform you about that.
I love Canada. I am moving there in about 4 years or so- but you have no rights to dissent there when it comes to killing babies.
There’s no sidewalk counseling. There’s a national bubble-zone and you can be put in jail and civilly sued for violating it. Although I do…bwahahahaha
Truthseeker, I’m definitely in favour of full disclosure when it comes to medical issues. For some women, it wouldn’t make a difference as long as the overall result is what they want (no pregnancy), but for those would look at it differently, they deserve to have all the info.
Terezia,
It surprised me to actually realize that sexually active women are getting pregnant a few times a year “while taking birth control”. I assume the average person does not even know this. I look at my conversation with Josephine who is a typical college aged girl who has been on hormonal birth control for years and she did not realize this. She was always lead to believe that 99% effective meant 99% effective at preventing pregnancy. I was stunned myself when during my conversations on this blog I suddenly realized that this birth control advertised as 99% effective was actually not 99% effective at preventing pregnancy in any given year. Bethany had mentioned it in the past but not with the kind of detail that made it “click” with me. Creating viable life that lives, grows and divides, even if only for several days is awesome and in my eyes represents my unfailing love and and respect for our union together. I agree that men and women should both be be told that women on birth control are still ovulating and some eggs still make it to fertilization and several days of growth and cell division before making it to their “destination” only to find out that their habitat has been destroyed by the one who should love and nurture them most. Their own parents. Deliver us Oh Lord from this evil.
A zygote finding the lights out at the inn is analogous to the destruction of the penguin or the butterfy habitat. Either way we are called to be stewards of creation.
A zygote finding the lights out at the inn is analogous to the destruction of the penguin or the butterfy habitat. Both have an instinct that draw them on course through their migration and both are finding their habitat destroyed when they get there. Either way we are called to be stewards of creation, and as such we will search and struggle for ways to save it.
I would allow the protest. After a few days it would be gone and everything would return to normal. That’s what free speech is about, the right to make a fuss and the rights of others to ignore you.
Posted by: Hal at February 3, 2009 10:26 PM
unless of course you have a REASON for not hearing the other side!
Now what COULD that reason possibly be? WHY is it so important to these so-called liberal elites that this POV NOT be heard or seen?
I just want to say, it goes the other way around. Private schools (if this is a private school) can do what they want. Being at a catholic school, noone can make a pro-choice protest. Amnesty was almost in danger of not being able to stay on campus. But SFL can do demonstrations all the time, even if it makes other students uncomfortable. We never had gruesome pictures, but once, they posted a sign in front of the cafeteria that compared Jewish deaths in WWII to numbers of abortions. A lot of students found it distasteful, especially in that particular location.
Just, it happens on both sides, ya know?
A zygote finding the lights out at the inn is analogous to the destruction of the penguin or the butterfy habitat. Both have an instinct that draw them on course through their migration and both are finding their habitat destroyed when they get there. Either way we are called to be stewards of creation, and as such we will search and struggle for ways to save it.
Truthseeker, I can appreciate the beauty of what you’re saying here, but I don’t know why I don’t attach the same importance to the zygote quest. Maybe because humans really aren’t endangered as a species?
When I was a student, I spent a lot of time dealing with symbolism, and I still really enjoy it, whether it’s in art, writing or religious studies (which were the majority of courses I took). But I tend to abandon all that when it comes to important life issues now and go “practical.”
I figure God doesn’t even have a lock on bringing zygotes to implantation, let alone term, so why should I care?
Terezia,
Perhaps we are the path to extinction? And we shouldn’t give up on protecting creation just because God allows us the choice to destroy it. In fact, that should be motivation for us because it means what we say and do can actually make a difference.
Perhaps. :)