Mainstream media runs realistic abortion ad Notre Dame newspaper wouldn’t
Citizens for a Pro-Life Society has taken out an ad that ran in the Washington Times May 9 and are running in the South Bend Tribune May 10-17.
Notre Dame’s student newspaper The Observer refused at the 11th hour to run the add, entitled, “Do it for Jacob,” showing the severed hand and foot of an aborted baby….
The Observer accepted CPS’s ad only when those photos were replaced by a photo of the small coffin that held the remains of Jacob and other preborns found in the dumpster of late-term MI abortionist Alberto Hodari 14 months ago.
Here is the ad, accepted by the MSM, that Notre Dame was too afraid to publish (click to enlarge):
May.11, 2009 10:43 am |
MSM anti-life bias, The Church |
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.
The Observer obviously doesn’t want ND students or faculty to “observe” what abortion really is.
Not much of an “observer”, are they?
Doyle,
As I observe things, “The Observer” isobviously not as observant as you. :)
Have a good day.
Fr. Jenkins should just throw up his hands and exclaim, “Okay, I give up! I’ll just invite him over for coffee instead.”
Carder…now THAT’s dialogue in action…
Great ad, very powerful. Great to hear it will be running for a week.
It should magnify the effectiveness of the Obama Awareness Campaign.
No surprise that a college newspaper wont run it.
They can run whatever they want to run, regardless of their faith, stance on abortion, campus, etc.
Their not running it isnt all that controversial. It’s a college newspaper, not like it really hits that many students. Many college newspapers don’t have all that high a readership.
Regardless, if they think it would offend someone, or make them sick (seeing as how most students read these newspapers while eating or having a coffee) they have every right not to print it.
Same thing goes on my campus, no matter how biased the paper may seem *grumbles about biases against the student government*
“They can run whatever they want to run, regardless of their faith, stance on abortion, campus, etc.”
This is a Catholic college were talking about.
“Regardless, if they think it would offend someone, or make them sick (seeing as how most students read these newspapers while eating or having a coffee) they have every right not to print it.”
——————————————-
hey Dan..I’m offended by all the crime and brutality the MSM dishes out every night onscreen and on-paper…but STILL they do it.
Those ads were approved and paid for already and was pulled at the 11th hour…so what gives?
RSD, they decided not to run the ad. It’s a free country.
but it’s a (supposedly) Roman Catholic university.
“RSD, they decided not to run the ad. It’s a free country.
Posted by: Hal at May 11, 2009 11:05 PM”
========================================
No Hal, somebody has to pay the piper…
RSD, I don’t know what you mean by that.
RSD’s probably got a lot on his mind. And it’s not LSD. He’s a tax-payer, and he’s probably worrying over the president’s shopping sprees (the ones on behalf of the country). Tomorrow RSD has to get up to work.
Well, if RSD’s a worker, the president will tell his boss what to do. No worries there. But if RSD’s a manager, the president will tell him what to do. And as RSD’s probably fond of saying: there’s no such thing as a free lunch. He knows on which side his bread is buttered. No sense being bitter–he had better butter up the president.
RSD might be a returning soldier. Maybe he’s a veteran worried about his pension. Maybe he’s just simply observing the very costly price of freedom, shed blood.
But if RSD’s not a worker or a manager or a soldier, then maybe’s he’s retired or unemployed. But he’s not likely retired because his retirement investments have lost a great deal of their value–and will lose even more when inflation skyrockets. He has to go to work again. And he’s not likely unemployed, because a good deal of the literate unemployed people are MSM journalists, and I highly doubt they would come to this website in the first place. They might go to Notre Dame.
Maybe RSD’s just a common extremist. But like you, Hal, I’m also not sure what RSD meant. I’m guessing that he misjudged the antecedent of your they. He maybe though that you were referring to the ad sponsors.
Actually, upon further reflection, I think that RSD was simply saying that our actions have consequences. As a nation, we cannot sin with impunity. Somebody will have to pay the piper, and the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children. In the case of induced abortion, the visitation is obvious: a child dies. But even the children left behind get caught up in the culture of death, a vicious cycle of violence.
Those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind.
Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.
Those who sow to their own flesh (sinful desires) shall from the flesh reap corruption.
As God made clear to Ezekiel (chapter 18), the children cannot claim victimhood. He holds them individually responsible for their lives, their response, their religion.