Pro-life video of the day: Abortion advocate assaults pro-lifer at protest
by LauraLoo
WARNING: Strong vulgarity.
Abortion supporter Kenrick Bradley stopped his car to assault Andrew St. Hilaire, Anti-Choice Project co-founder, during a pro-lifeprotest in front of Olympic College in Bremerton, WA.
Bradley began cursing and hitting St. Hilaire, while trying to destroy his sign and video camera, simply for displaying what happens to babies when they are impacted by abortion.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0SdRfVVlz8[/youtube]
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
[HT: Randi]
Jul.02, 2012 12:00 pm |
Video of the day |
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.
He was not upset by the fact that abortion was being protested, he stated quite clearly that his girlfriend had just lost her baby and was reacting out of what can be percieved as grief at seeing the graphic images while driving down the street. I am not saying he was right in what he did, just that he seemed to be acting out of grief rather than trying to silence protest. I am not sure further publisizing this incident does anything to further your cause.
What do photos of children murdered via abortion have to do with women grieving miscarriage? Unless of course it wasn’t miscarriage but abortion.
Also any man who calls her child a fu***** baby is hardly showing kindess and compassion towards his girlfriend!!
Methinks there is an abortion in his past.
Cue CC.
That’s (sort of) the same point I made about the viral video “Leave Britney Alone!” by that “cry-baby” Chris what’s-his-name. In the video he says “She’s had two f****** kids!” umm….NO..she’s had two KIDS (children)…no such thing as f****** kids and f****** babies…..sheesh!
And I agree, Carla. Since babies are not “chopped up” in a miscarriage as they are in abortion, that reaction is pretty over the top!
Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
I am not sure further publisizing this incident does anything to further your cause.
It does if your cause is promoting the narrative that abortion protestors are persecuted victims.
Pamela, well, unfortunately, especially in current cultures, there are such things as “f”ing children and babies. Fortunately most people still see this as unethical and in most cases illegal…(sad humor)
I can see how abortion pictures could trigger deep grief in a miscarriage mom, these babies were willingly butchered by the people who should have been protecting them while her beloved baby was cruelly stolen despite the protection. Just like any murder can trigger grief and rage at a remembered ‘natural’ death. But the proper response to that grief isn’t to vent on the person bringing light to such murders but rather at the murderers themselves.
Something doesn’t quite add up with the scenario that these pictures would spur rage in someone that experienced a miscarriage.
Sadly, it looks like pro-abortion violence to me.
For LisaC, here’s yet another example:
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/07/02/pro-life-activists-home-vandalized-by-abortion-backers/
Jespren, I’m aware that people do that (have sex with children/babies), but of course, Carla and I are talking about REFERRING to children/babies as f****** babies/children.
I’ve had MULTIPLE miscarriages (I just suffered a 7th one recently). I see pictures of aborted babies all the time (unfortunately), but it’s “apples and oranges”…although BOTH involve the death of a baby..it’s just two separate things. I personally would never take it out on someone just holding a sign. That person had nothing to do with his girlfriend’s miscarriage. My own miscarriages make me all that MORE determined to do whatever I can to (help) put a STOP to abortion…because ALL babies deserve LIFE.
The pro-life movement recognizes the fact that a mother who has miscarried lost a very real son or daughter, confirming her right to grieve when so many around her may be minimizing the loss. This is unlike the pro-abort movement which insists it is not a child. If the pro-aborts are correct and you did simply lose a “clump of cells” or “products of conception”, you truly are a nutjob for mourning a miscarriage. Unlike hardcore pro-abort activists, most people are not able to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to claim it is a precious child if you want it, and a clump of cells if you do not.
This man’s reaction is extremely odd. If I lost a toddler to cancer, I would not scream at people trying to save abused toddlers from being murdered by their parents. Even if seeing aborted children did make his girlfriend upset over a miscarriage, they have no right to verbally abuse people trying to save children just like theirs.
For LisaC, here’s yet another example:
Quoting myself from a different blog:
Vandalism and violence have no place in political debates, and I hope that whoever is responsible is caught and punished appropriately.
Furthermore, I hope that the post giving the Masons’ address was flagged and removed from the Daily Beast’s comment section promptly. Even if the poster intended only to encourage people to send letters to the Masons or picket their home, such an invasion of privacy should be abhorrent to any responsible person.
Violence has no place in prenatal care.
Pamela, I’m sorry to learn of your recent miscarriage. LL
Ummm…what does this video prove? It proves that there are completely unreasonable individuals on both side of the issue. The person standing on the sidewalk with ridiculous pictures and the person who lets it get to him. Seems like a draw to me.
LisaC:
Whether the Daily Beast removed the post with the Mason’s home address is irrelevant now. Their home was vandalized.
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/07/02/pro-life-activists-home-vandalized-by-abortion-backers/
But of course, this article was published in an “anti-choice” website and has no credibility among the “my bodily autonomy is more important than the life of my child” crowd. Except that the Daily Beast also published an article on it.
No condemnation of the violence by the Daily Beast, Planned Parenthood or NARAL Pro-choice.
My theory – these acts of violence are being perpetrated by fathers of aborted children who have not found an appropriate outlet for their grief – or these acts could be committed by mothers.
The person holding the ridiculous pictures has not committed acts of violence. The acts are not even close to being comparable.
Ridiculous pictures?
Please link to the REAL, AUTENTICATED photos of babies after they have been aborted please.
Thanks.
“What do photos of children murdered via abortion have to do with women grieving miscarriage? Unless of course it wasn’t miscarriage but abortion.”
Inquisitor Carla will get to the bottom of this and suss out the real reason anyone might have an adverse emotional reaction to the “pro-life” movement’s grotesqueries.
joan, it’s pro-life, not “pro-life”. Interesting, if us showing a picture of something is a grotesque, then committing the act shown must be something much worse.
“Interesting, if us showing a picture of something is a grotesque, then committing the act shown must be something much worse.”
Does that include sex? How about going to the bathroom? Some things should be kept private as a simple matter of social decorum and not a reflection of their moral status.
joan,
The grotesesqueries are all done on your side. And you’ll notice that was not in quotes.
I should have “refreshed”, though your comment wouldn’t have been refreshing.
I suppose you would also go along with Planned Parenthood’s enabling of child rapists. “Hush! Hush!” Keep it in private.
Kind of interesting that you defer to the word private (who’s privacy anyways? the babies’ ?) when we are talking about posting someone’s home address on the internet.
I have actually held one of these signs, alongside of Andrew. I have lost a baby to a miscarriage and also a baby to an abortion.
When I lost my first baby in September of 1969, the nurses and doctors were very solicitous of the loss of my baby. When my son was lost to abortion in April of 1970, there were no such condolences.
There is a HUGE difference in both of these child losses … two children were lost but the causes of their deaths totally different.
In no way was Andrew or any other person holding these signs in the wrong. The world needs to stop abortion … and if they never know what an aborted baby looks like they will continue to turn a blind eye to a woman’s “choice” (to kill her baby)
Joan,
Still not making any sense.
I have had an abortion and two miscarriages.
Been there.
Joan,
But please continue on with stating how WRONG the assault was. Some crazy assaulting a man for holding a sign depicting the truth? Yeah. Your team is nuts.
joan of arcania says: July 2, 2012 at 11:57 pm “Does that include sex? How about going to the bathroom? Some things should be kept private as a simple matter of social decorum and not a reflection of their moral status.”
If freedom of speech means anything it means the freedom to offend and be offended.
Where is all the sensitivitiy to ‘cultural differences’?
Just because you are offended [or fein offense] at natural bodily functions, does not mean everyone else does.
But then there is the little distinction between normal, natural biological occurrences and the not so ‘natural’, man made disaster, of elective abortion/pre-natal homicide.
But you get your ‘selective’ indignance on and strut it around like Al Sharpton at a self promoting race rally.
We will all laugh in derision at your transparent hypocrisy.
Don’t look now, but your baring your bodacious biass for all to see.
LisaC:
Whether the Daily Beast removed the post with the Mason’s home address is irrelevant now. Their home was vandalized.
I am aware that the home was vandalized. Assuming the vandal got the address from the Daily Beast, which seems plausible, there are two possibilities: The Daily Beast has a policy against allowing addresses to be published but did not catch the violation of the Masons’ privacy in time, or the Daily Beast does not have such a policy. I was merely expressing the hope that it was the former, because I believe that any responsible organization should have a zero-tolerance policy
on either participating in or facilitating harassment at someone’s home, because we all know that there are crazy people out there.
The person holding the ridiculous pictures has not committed acts of violence. The acts are not even close to being comparable.
No, they are not comparable, nor did I say they were. Someone earlier in the thread made the comparison in response to one of my posts, and I answered them.
Grotesqueries? Is that a word?
Joan, we are all waiting for you to post the REAL pictures, since “ours” are faked. Why do you always dodge that? Are you afraid that your “real” pictures are going to look just like “our fake” ones??????? Chicken, bawk bawk!
Ninek, yes, “grotesqueries” is a real word, just archaic (and, ironically *almost* appropriate, although not quite). A grotesquery was was type of what later came to be called ‘freak shows’ but one that was specifically showing the grossly (as in ‘great’ or ‘extreme’) malformed, disfigured, or exibiting examples of extreme acts that were wholly unacceptable to society at large. Most places outlawed them as exploitive or unwholesome during the middle of the 1900’s. More mild versions exist today as side show attractions like the bearded lady or strongman. But at one point in time a traveling grotesquery might have shown ‘elephant’ men, hunchbacks, people with extensive scars, or deformed children. Some also would have displayed things like taxidermy perserved human skins, shrunken heads, or graphic pictures of autopsies, battle fields, surgeries, or torture. Their purpose was to shock and horrify while ‘entertaining’. So while a picture of an aborted baby, or even the preserved corpse of an aborted baby actually would qualify as a grotesquery attraction, the showing of an abortion picture by an activist is no more part of a grotesquery than a Holocaust museum showing death camp photos is.
Yeah, that dude’s a textbook case. Abortion Hurst Everyone.
I’m sorry if this offends anyone but pro lifers need to start fighting back..
Bottom line is a lot of men make the women get abortions. She drives by sees the picture, gets angry at him, in turn he gets angry because she may have not realized or it hurts because she didnt want to do it. Plus, he said his girlfriend saw the sign, well if its the person driving the car, from the looks of it they couldnt have a child anyway. It was another male. Just someone trying to be stuff and stop those troublesome babies.