Excellent, excellent, excellent!  We must be sensitive and caring, especially to women who are grieving the loss of a child to abortion.  Effective communication occurs in context—and the best public relations strategies need to be employed to build a culture of life. Thanks to Simcha for proclaiming the truth—in a kind, compassionate way.

Thanks for a great article on an important topic. I’ve tried to make some of these arguments to other pro-lifers sometimes - always unsuccessfully. You make it so beautifully clear here.

About desensitization, I always think of a young girl at a Catholic school where I taught.  A gentle old priest was giving the tenth-graders the annual pro-life talk - no graphic images or anything - and this girl had to go be sick in the bathroom because just hearing and thinking about abortion horrified her so much. It’s a beautiful thing that she was still so morally sensitive, and it’s a terrible thing when we pro-lifers are the ones who destroy or coarsen innocence like that.

These are such great points. When I was pro-choice, I was not moved by graphic images, because I had firmly categorized unborn life in my mind as “Not Human.” Therefore, it was like looking at a picture of a doll: kind of gross, but—whew!—at least I wasn’t looking at a real human being or anything. It’s horrific to think about now, but it’s a testament to what people are capable of when they classify another group of human beings as sub-human.
.
Like you said, I think there’s a place for graphic images, but it’s not waving them around in public. I think that having websites where people can *choose* to see those kind of images are much more helpful—and I do think that a lot of pro-choice people would be willing to look at them, if challenged to do so. But being able to opt in makes all the difference in how open they’ll be the truth of what they’re seeing.

I agree with you Simcha.  I know many people who don’t.

A couple of years ago, a group in my hometown began protesting outside of public high schools. You read that right, a public high school. And they displayed graphic images. One mother told local media her son refused to go back to school and was physically ill at the sight and having nightmares. This was a seventeen-year-old boy.

Graphic images have their place and we need to know where that is. It is not outside a public high school and it is NOT at the March for Life, for the exact reasons you stated here.

Yes yes yes. A thousand times yes. To everything, but especially this: “We must never be on the side that hurts mothers, Never.”

I think the images that have had the most impact for good are the ultrasounds expectant mothers see.And that’s likely why Planned Parenthood resists making those available.

I think ultrasounds would be more effective.

I couldn’t agree more. These images at the March are HUGE and often flank the street. It’s very difficult to avoid seeing them & protect the children from. Their use shovel be one on one & after discernment. It’s traumatic for post-abortive women. (I was told as much by someone who was a
Recent “convert” to the Pro Life side; she was blindsided by a display & it set her into a depression for DAYS.)

I really can’t agree. I’ll grant that there’s a time to use the images and a time not to, but what do you think the March for Life is? A big party? A big political move to get our side attention? Or a day of solidarity, marching on the capitol that sanctioned the slaughter of these children? The memorial of the deaths of 50 million people? I think, if we’re going to March, we may as well show why we’re marching. Abortion is not a child-friendly issue. It’s a dark, gruesome, horrific thing. I can’t think of a more appropriate place to show abortion images than at the March for Life.

My husband was converted by graphic images, but he sought them out for himself. I agree with all you’ve said.

Thank you!  Especially for including both the times not to use them and the times to use them.  Those images have a place, but it’s not an indiscriminate place.  I’ve heard people complain about how “disgusting” the ultrasounds and photos (like the baby sucking her thumb) are too, but in that case, the people are just looking for any excuse to not see the truth, even the truth of a lovely living baby.  In other words, just b/c some people complain about an image doesn’t automatically mean we shouldn’t use it, but in the case of the graphic photos, you hit the nail (all of them!) on the head.

If I went to the Washington march, I would get a big poster of my ugly face, and superimpose the meme, “I did it too,” or “Yes, it was me.”

In all my reading on the abortion issue, I’ve seen one or two references to “unindicted co-conspirators.”  Is this deliberate?  “Mass of bloody subhuman tissue” most likely refers to the male parter.

To be fair to the members of mmmy generation, if they’re serving Coke in the cafeteria, I’m not going to be reaching for the moochoo.  Take note, Michelle.  You at least seem to be able to think coherently.

I agree completely. I viewed some graphic abortion pictures in high school, and I’m glad that I did to let the reality sink in, but that was quite enough for me thank you very much. I am a very visual person, and I still remember all the details of those pictures, as well as other gruesome things I’ve seen in movies before I started screening more carefully. The images stick with me forever so I have to be very careful what I expose myself to.
.
I know that they can be a valuable tool, but I think anyone who would potentially be convinced to change heart needs to be ready and willing to see them. If they aren’t ready, they will just reject them anyway. So why risk hurting kids and post-abortive mothers when you’re not likely to get through to anyone? Save the graphic images for a more appropriate venue.
.
Also, Jay, I think “We may as well show why we’re marching” is a poor argument. We can remember the victims by showing some respect, both to the babies’ mutilated bodies AND to the broken mothers who regret their decision. Ultrasound pictures just as easily show why we are marching, and anyone can view them safely.

No doubt this reply will draw out all sorts of negative comments.  Maybe you will say I am demented or a moron…but here it goes.

Personally, I never attended a life march for many years.  The rhetoric bothered me more than the pictures.  Their chants were so demeaning but also, equally degraded the speakers. 

It is my experience that graphic pictures have always been used in demonstrations.  The Vietnam protest marches and the international news coverage gave us images of death every night but eventually people changed their minds.  The images of human beings in WWII death camps in Poland, of students on the side walks at Kent State, and videos of Benghazi have all been effective. 

It was the people who participated in their deaths or who silently lived nearby didn’t want the concentration camp pictures published and many continue to deny the reality that it ever happened. 

I vividly recall as a child seeing the pictures of those children my age standing by the Auschwitz barbed wire fence. Pictures of saints being martyred told me more about the political situation in Mexico than anything else possibly could have. 

None of us can claim to know how the unborn child feels about this?

Agreed, I’ve been saying this for years! Graphic images can become dehumanizing when used in the public and political sphere. These are children, dismembered and separated from life. And like adoption, which too represents a major surgery, the separation of child from mother, should only be used in personal one-on-one encounters and as last resorts, a terrible weapon, or rather a terrible “appeal”. In any other measure and we fall victim to knee-jerk reactionary measures that corrupt the core of what it means to be pro-life: to respect the inviolable dignity of each person, to life and communion with other.

Thank you Simcha!  Well said.

I only use these photos and/or slides when I lecture in a private speakiong engagement. That is the proper place for them. There are no children under 18 there period.

I see where you are coming from, HOWEVER: A few years ago I was at the March for Life. For a while, my group was standing near the large posters of aborted babies. As I was walking around waiting for things to get moving, I saw a visibly pregnant woman crying. She fumbled for her phone, dialed a number, and then spoke to “Johnny” (name changed) saying “We can’t go through with this! I’m calling and cancelling right now. I don’t know what we’ll do… but we CANNOT have it aborted!” She continued and described one of the pictures to him, and eventually walked out of earshot of me. My point: Those pictures saved a child’s life that day. They may also have offended some people or freaked out some kids… but a life is worth far more than anyone’s comfort level. A note about the kids: Parents should and I think they do know what they are getting into. They choose, by taking kids to the MFL, to expose them to that. It’s their problem.

“These images are like a terrible weapon which should be used with fear and trembling, and only as a last resort.”

Serious question: how many more babies have to die before this last resort is an acceptable resort?  We’re not making any progress in this fight, please don’t kid yourselves that we are.

Well written and thank you!  I saw photos and video of aborted persons as a 14-year-old and they saved my daughter’s life a few years later because I knew the truth.  But that was enough.  I don’t need to see those images again.  Now that I’m a grandmother, I agree we should share graphic images of these poor murdered souls only as needed.  We must respect the dead no matter when or how they died.  Simcha, your examples of when TO share were very helpful.  Thank you again.

I would add another (albeit less important) reason: it’s preaching to the choir. The people on the March for Life are already pro-life. Most of those who are adults have seen the images before. Those who are children should NOT see them. What is the logic behind bombastically displaying these images to people who already agree with you?

I didn’t agree with your point until I spent some time with the young adults of the Crossroads walk a few years ago. They were adamant against using these types of images publicly and I tried to argue that they were wrong. But one walker said it so perfectly: “You don’t fight fire with fire. You don’t fight death with death.” That really stuck with me. And this march is about fighting death with LIFE. Great article Simcha!

As a mental health therapist who has worked with a lot of people regarding trauma, i agree wholeheartedly. Passing pain onto others does not create more love in the world.

I agree. Thank you for the post.

>>> Motherhood makes a woman’s heart tender. <<<< THIS!!

Thank you, thank you for writing this article. It’s so true, especially the above statement.  I grew up with video games and movies, and violence never really bothered me so much. That is, until I had a son and then later miscarried twins. I am astonished at how tender my heart has become. Not only can I not emotionally handle images of aborted babies, but I can barely stand to listen to or read stories of murdered children, women and children under attack from intruders, etc.  I can’t look at any person (even images of criminals in the news) without thinking, “that was someone’s precious little baby”.  So, I cringe at the thought of going to a march for life and seeing those graphic images. I’m already pro-life. So I guess I’ll just do my part. Stay at home, have more babies and raise them to be pro-life.

I could not agree with you more. Thanks, as always, for your thoughtful insight.

I haven’t read all the comments yet, but I wanted to make the point that times have really changed.  Twenty years ago we didn’t have the internet.  If a woman clicks on Google images to see what her ten week old “fetus” looks like, she will get a whole eye full of pictures of living ones and mangled dead ones, even if she didn’t want to see the aborted ones.  I can’t believe the Planned Parenthood types haven’t shut that down, because a picture does speak a thousand words.  The truth hurts—sometimes unbearably.  If it doesn’t, then there’s something wrong with you.

I agree. On top of all of your other reasons, I think that the experience of seeing graphic images is psychologically akin to being assaulted. And what do people do when they are under attack? They shut down emotionally and intellectually, the way humans do in order to deal with aggression or trauma. Not exactly the goal when what we most need is to open hearts and open minds.

Ultrasound pictures and pictures of children in utero are much more apt to open hearts. The image of clear, sane, normal people calmly and with gravity standing up for unborn children and their mothers? That’s the best image of all.

Honestly, I can’t remember the last time I encountered a pro-choice person who was in favor of legal abortion because they thought the fetus was non-human or ‘just a mass of tissue’. That’s old rhetoric from an earlier era.  What I encounter now are people who honestly believe that it is better that a child die before they are self-aware, than that they live to be unwanted and resented. The lie we need to counter is the slippery lie that some lives are not worth living. And we can do that best by demonstrating that every life is precious and worthwhile!

Very well-written and sensitive article, Simcha.  I don’t know…what would Jesus do, I wonder?  e.

Great points! Ultrasounds are much better—I had a friend whose mom was pregnant, and they took an ultrasound and somehow it was of the baby’s outstretched hand. It was perfectly clear and looked fake. They used it to make a sign that said “STOP” on it. It was amazing.

The Blessed Mother at Fatima showed the 3 children HELL ITSELF…if showing such horror was deemed appropriate by the very Mother of Jesus, then the murderous images of aborted babies should also be shown….Our Lady of Fatima could never be wrong.

Agree. Thank you for writing about this.

When I was in nursing school back in the early 90’s I did my OB term paper on abortion.  I did a great deal of research on the various methods and even reading about them sent chills up my spine. When I worked in a OB/Gyn office the doctors, even the ones who were non-Catholic refused to do abortions and referred women who requested abortions to the local abortion clinic. One doc told me that most abortionists are quacks who lost alot of their patients due to very poor medical practice and sometimes referred to them as pure sleaze bags. I can tell you that listening to the heart beat of a baby at 6 weeks of gestation is the most beautiful thing and the mom is so thrilled to hear it.  And Yes I am Pro-Life.

Of course Our Lady wasn’t wrong….she showed 3 chosen children!

The truth is the truth. No more sugar-coated lies. These mothers know what happened and they regret it. They are there because they now know the truth. They want to stand up for the truth about abortion and to change others hearts and minds. There will be no more disturbing pictures when abortion is no more. That will happen when we, as an individual, chooses life not death. This is a war and these images will only help to end it. If you fear the truth pray for courage to see the truth when you look at the truth. We are speaking for these babies for they cannot.

I always find the most beautiful photos of the unborn I can find. I’m aiming to awake compassion, not disgust.

I agree- beautiful photos of live in utero babies are a good ‘compromise’

I agree. Though I will not be taking part in the March for Life, I plan to pray special prayers on that day not only for an end to abortion but also for an end to euthanasia.

I BEG for an end to the use of these graphic images.  I would go so far as to say that those who are using these tactics are motivated by pride or something else - I believe they are misled. This will make people mad for me to say, but I feel that it is evil in our midst.  The media seizes upon these images and the whole pro life movement looks like a group of bloodthirsty zealots, easily discredited.  This is not of Christ. We must speak up and discourage these tactics!

Do you let your kids watch gruesome war movies or slasher films?

Poor analogy.  The obscenity of slasher films is not in the straightforward display of violent images, but in the prurient, gratuitous creation and display of such images as a depraved entertainment. 

Children are pretty durable, and pro-life people of all ages from here on out will have to be plenty durable, because we are heading down a very dark road. 

Holocaust museums bring us face-to-face with some pretty soul-searing images.  They have their place, because nothing conveys the horror more effectively.

The March for Life is never going to be effective by staying within the lines and keeping off the grass.  We are dealing with spiritual enemies here.  They are not going to be persuaded by earnestness and sweet reason.

My husband protects me from graphic images, because I seriously can’t handle them. Although even as he recognizes my sensitivity to them, the debate of whether or not they should be used has for year been lively in this house. He has been the guy standing on wall holding the images as the president’s motorcade passed when he was in town, etc. (And I have not been present at these events.) I will say, that at one point, when I did lay my eyes on a carefully crafted horrific image super-imposed on an American flag that took awhile for my brain to translate, I started reeling. And it was rather life-changing. My dearest said, “Kristine, if you respond so profoundly emotionally to the horror, don’t you think God is challenging you to do something? To take action and use your gifts to defend the unborn and not just be horrified?” And I have. We all have. I still don’t ever want to see the graphic images - nor do I want my small children to. So I agree with your points. And at the March for Life - it’s sort of like preaching to the choir - folks attending are on the same page. We’re marching for the first time this year. With four of our children. The youngest are 3 and 6.

Great article.  And the suggestion posted above re ultrasounds is on target.  It seems much more helpful to challenge pro-choicers to recognize the humanity of a living unborn child than to point out what a dead one looks like.

I appreciate and agree with this post overall. At the risk of nitpicking, though, two things stopped me. First:

“So when should you use graphic images?  When a teenager shrugs and says, ‘My health teacher says it’s not a person until 25 weeks.’” 

I frankly don’t see how an image makes the point about when person-hood is conveyed one way or the other. Catholics believe a fertilized egg is a ‘person’, morally equivalent to any other, yet showing an image of a newly fertilized egg would only undermine that argument. That’s why you don’t see photos of fertilized eggs at pro-life rallies. In a way, showing an image of a fetus (aborted or otherwise) in answer to a question about person-hood actually suggests tacit rejection of the argument that person-hood begins at conception. The question of when human “person-hood” is conveyed is ultimately a spiritual one. You can’t answer it with a photograph unless you have a photo of a human soul.

(A health teacher has no business discussing person-hood, either. They should stick to teaching fetal development, and leave the metaphysical at home.)

Second:
“When someone who works at a clinic says she’s doing a gentle, compassionate work of mercy.”

Are we talking about the non-clincal staff? Billing clerks? It’s a little peculiar for someone working in “the office” of a medical clinic (even one that’s just an ordinary medical practice) thinking of herself as doing a “work of mercy” when all she’s doing is scheduling or billing. Yet medical staff will already have seen what you’re showing them, live, and has made their peace with it. So, it’s not clear what the point is of showing them your images.

Do you let your kids watch gruesome war movies or slasher films?

Poor analogy.  The obscenity of slasher films is not in the display of violent images, but in their creation and display as a depraved entertainment.

Children are pretty durable.  Pro-life people of all ages will have to become plenty durable, as we are heading down a very dark road.

Holocaust museums bring us face to face with innumerable soul-searing images, and must, because nothing more effectively conveys the full horror.

The March for Life is not going to be effective by politely confining itself within the lines and keeping off the grass.  Our struggle is a spiritual one, calling for weapons stronger than earnest sincerity and sweet reason.

You missed 1 of the important reasons:
  We are seeking the causes of abortion and how to reduce them.
Usually ( in many cases ) graphic images will make it harder to find and reduce the CAUSES of abortion.
  The sharpest tools we have shouuld be used the most cautiously.
Otherwise we might be increasing the causes of abortion , instead of eliminating and reducing them.
  Thanks for continuing to orient our crusade against the causes of abortion, and keeping it from getting sidetracked.
Ken D

@Romulus: My younger brother is very sensitive to gruesome images. He once saw a graphic poster for a museum exhibit and was afraid to go to bed for days, if not weeks. I know he is not alone. Please realize that these images could scar little children and make women who have repented their sins suffer all over again. Stronger than “sweet reason”? What will you use if not reason? The passions? Rage? Terror? These things will backfire on you even if they works sometimes, and they make us pro-lifers look like crazy emotional manipulators to the mainstream media, turning people off our message before they even know what it is, despite our good intentions and our love for the unborn.
As for the person who claimed that Our Lady must think these images are OK because she showed the children Hell, someone else answered it well when she said that they were *chosen* children. Besides, our Lord knows when people should or should not see terrible things when he shows Hell to them. We don’t.

A++, great article. All of these are great reasons, but #4 is the only one that really matters.

These photos are the reason I do not take my young children to the MFL in DC.  I live about 30 miles from DC and attended annually until the kids came.  The first couple years it was cold and/or rainy and I didn’t want to take an infant out.  As I thought more about it, I can’t, in good conscience, take my 4 or 6 year olds to see those photos.  They don’t need that image of the world yet.

I think it should be up to the individual person attending the rally.

Thanks for these excellent insights and points, Simcha. Of course the struggle against abortion needs passion and fortitude; but mixed with prudence and savvy. And most importantly love and prayer.

It seems to me that the arguments by supporters of graphic imagery are often of the “there’s no more time left to be civil” or “we haven’t made any progress” or “how many more have to die before we get tough” lines of thinking. These arguments demonstrate a dangerous kind of consequentialism - that inevitably leave God out of the strategic “how does change happen, and what is my/our role” formula.

Re: “Our struggle is a spiritual one, calling for weapons stronger than earnest sincerity and sweet reason” - I appreciate this sentiment, but I think that sincerity and reason are important parts of the spiritual weapons package - they are the weapons of the saints.

There is a time and place for graphic images.  Bishop Aquila of Denver on how he became pro-life: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/denver-archbishop-i-became-pro-life-after-i-stumbled-on-the-baby-of-an-abor

Remember the display at US Berkeley a few years ago?  It was pushing the envelope, but I think it may have changed some minds.  http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2009/10/gap_takes_abort.html

I’ve been arguing this for some time ... and here’s another reason, that may actually be a sub-reason for one that Simcha listed. Logic is not my strength these days, since I’m a few weeks away from childbirth.

Tt’s very hard for people to understand PTSD, if they’ve never had to work through it. Some post-abortive women do have PTSD, and the number may be greater than we can imagine. Graphic images confronting these women on their way to and from work, school, social activities, etc., are not likely to help them soften their hearts. They are more likely to become angry with those who bear the signs, and to blame protesters for marching with a trigger that re-traumatizes these women.

Please understand that post-abortive women are more likely to go in for repeat abortions if they are not able to heal properly and to truly understand what has happened and what their role was in their child’s murder. Re-traumatizing the women is not likely to protect future babies.

Simcha… you have clearly explained what has been quietly confusing me for years.  My conscience has always nagged me about the use of these images.  I pray some of the major pro-life influences speak as clearly as you have.  Fr Pavone’s quote is constantly used as justification, but the images are wielded like indiscriminate landmines instead of the precision that they require.

Thank you!  This is why, after attending 12 Marches for Life in a row (beginning as a teenager), I will be staying home this year.  I now have a morally sensitive young toddler who is naturally compassionate and is unable to rest until troubling situations like a baby having his toys taken away by another toddler, or a crying child, are resolved.  She notices passersby on crutches and worries that their leg hurts and wants to help.  I can only imagine how she, who has never seen even pretend gore, would be affected by giant placards of butchered babies.  I think that to experiment with that would be wrong.

15+ Of my brothers and sisters, before and after my birth, have been aborted by my parents. When I see the chopped hands of aborted children I look at mine and I say to myself: “I will use my hands to show the REAL face of abortion!” My brothers and sister were not able to defend themselves or to speak about their death. Now they have only my voice to speak up trying to defend other unborn babies and to help parents they have no reasons to be afraid of LIFE, of INNOCENT and BEAUTIFUL unborn children, THEIR OWN CHILDREN. My brothers and my sisters are living in my heart and I am extremely grateful to those people who WILL SHOW the pictures of the victims of the abortion holocaust. I did it myself and I will do it again, despite all the disagreement.  Do you not agree that I have good reasons? The Communists where giving unmarked graves to their victims, the Nazzies where incinerating their victims. By denying the reality of abortion we are becoming complices. I agree fully only with “Public image matters”: yes, Simcha it did matter for candidate Obama to dine with His Emminence Cardinal Dolan. And how many Catholics did vote for the candidate Obama?

Thank you for mentioning women who have lost babies and children through miscarriage or stillbirth. I often feel completely forgotten by the church and pro-life movement.

If people want to save unborn children’s lives, find those who are pregnant and can’t keep the child.  Give them money, a place to stay, support, anything.  Call them. Be involved.  Yes the pictures help to some degree, but as a 37 year old woman had an abortion at the age of 17, the pictures did NOT help.  It only made me want to run into the abortion clinic faster to get away from them.  I’m sure that’s not everyone’s expeirence. But time and place, please for the love of God.  I’m having my sixth child in April now, and still..even now…they are nothing but a source of pain and grief all over again.  Even after knowing I’ve been forgiven by God and received the grace of absolution in the Sacrament of confession.  I have to ask, not to be disrespectful, but could a personal agenda outweigh our ability to be compassionate and open to the possibility of saving a child’s life in a less graphic and horrific way? Just asking.

There were some pro-life picketers outside their Protestant church, which sits by the side of the main thoroughfare in my city. My car was stopped at a stop light and my two daughters, then aged seven and nine, were in the car with me, mere feet away from people with enormous signs depicting bloody, dismembered babies. I said to my children, “Shut your eyes and keep them closed until I say to open the back up” and we sat there through the traffic light cycle with those idiots waving signs right next to the car. When I got home, I called the pastor of that church and gave him an earful I hope he never, ever forgets for allowing innocent children—mine and other people’s—to be subjected to such gruesomeness. It’s not right to destroy the innocence of born children to make your point about the innocence of unborn children. That was about five years ago, and as far as I know, that church has never done such a despicable thing again.

Excellent and thought provoking post, Simcha!  I just blogged about how seeing one of these pictures turned me from being apathetic to being strongly pro-life. I think, like you, that there are times when they should be used, but they shouldn’t displayed publicly. Since it was so effective when it came to my own conversion, I can’t rule out their use. I’m just not sure where to draw the line.

Ana, what about your brothers and sisters in Christ who are STILL here and suffering??  I commend you for your commitment to life, but there are the mothers of those aborted children suffering and living in hell who need us.  Those babies want to be reunited with their mothers in heaven, a good priest once told me. Just throwing that out there.  (and yet another reason why I stayed far away from the pro life movement even when I came back into the Church. It’s hard to explain yourself without being told to basically deal with it because your pain doesn’t matter or is not important enough to be recognized or dealt with).

Thank you for an excellent article. Like another commenter above, I want especially thank you!! for speaking for those of us who have miscarried. Women who mourn their sons and daughters lost before birth are rarely shown such sensitivity, in my experience; mourning the unborn in general being unwelcome to those see abortion as acceptable, and there being little awareness of miscarriage even in some Catholic and pro-life circles. (I lost my only (thus far) child to miscarriage, and I’m putting on my kevlar (and anonymity) even to post even in the Register’s combox.)
I keep all those whose children have died before birth in my prayers and I pray for an end to abortion and for the conversion of our country away from a mindset that sees abortion as a solution or a “right.”

Brilliant essay.  Its all about speaking the truth in love, and you give multiple reasons why no graphic images is the loving response here…and doesn’t hurt the truth.  My husband recently went to a prolife march with my 5-11 yr old kids (I was home with baby) and got pointed comments that “your placards are too soft” (placards like “Love the woman, love the child,” “Adoption is a real option” etc.).  Puh-leese.  We are our own worst enemy.

Thank you for posting this article. Every time I see one of those it is like a physical assault.

I would also point out that there are a number of people who are undecided, and would look at said images and decide that they will not side with people who would use images of real children that way.

For a long time, I maintained a quasi-pro"choice” stance to keep my mother happy, but my father’s quiet disagreement always made me uneasy. But when they started using those images in the late 80’s and early 90’s I was appalled and did not want to side with people who would use pictures of the youngest dead for shock value.  I was also a somewhat rebellious visual artist, ironically enough.

My father’s argument ultimately won my conscience when I realized that the child inside was my father’s grandchild, no matter the circumstances, no matter what else happened.

Your article sounds politically correct…but I do not agree !
I think 55 million Babies deserve the true picture. I would imagine some thought the pictures of the Nazi death camps too graphic also. The Troth is the Truth !

Thank you Simcha, thank you, thank you.  I will be there Friday and there is a long stretch with tractor trailer size billboards and a graphic video that runs on a loop.  Last year I tried my best to direct my efforts at getting the kids to not look.  No one I was with knew what was really going on with me. The amount of energy it takes to get rid of those images from my mind is immeasurable.

Are you going to the March for Life on Friday, either in DC or in your state?  If so, are you planning to display or wear graphic representations of a crucified man?

If you are, I’m begging you to reconsider.  Most Catholics understand that Americans are tragically ignorant about what crucifixion really is—what it really did to people.  Many of us remember seeing those bloody images for the first time, and can recall being shaken out of a vague, fuzzy mentality into the realization that this is a life-and-death struggle—real life, and real death.

But a public place is not the place to use these images—ever, I’m
convinced.  These images are like a terrible weapon which should be used
with fear and trembling, and only as a last resort.  Why?

That was a real man. Catholics are almost alone in affirming the dignity of the human person.  Catholics, especially, understand that the human body is mortal, but still worthy of respect.  When we use graphics of a tortured man as a tactic or a tool, we are in danger of forgetting that all men have an immortal soul, and who have a name that only their Heavenly Father knows.  Let us treat his poor body with respect.

Public image matters.  Some people’s only contact with obvious Catholics is with people who shout and condemn and terrify.  It’s just basic psychology:  if you want people to listen to you and have sympathy for your cause, don’t come across as a lunatic.  You’re not a lunatic—but to people who don’t already agree with you, you sure look that way.  Yes, your cause is worthy.  No, you’re not helping it.

They sometimes push people into atheism.  Does a graphic of a crucified man change hearts sometimes?  It sure does.  But I’ve heard Catholic activists tell stories of people who saw these horrible images of crucifixion for the first time and decided on the spot that no way could they be any part of that. 

Desensitization is a real danger—even among Catholics.  It’s just how
humans are made:  see something too often, and you stop really seeing it.
I thank and bless those who work so tirelessly for the pro-life cause.
But I beg them to stop and consider that, like policemen or like
soldiers, they are human, and are in danger of becoming hardened out of
self-preservation. People who have become hardened must never be the
public face of the Catholic Church.  If you, as a Catholic activist, see a
bloody image and you don’t flinch, then it’s time to take a break—move
into a different religion, one that emphasizes prayer and reparation.

I am glad you have the soapbox to say this. As a prolife activist for 40 years, and a minister to the post-abortive, I heartily agree.  I have always said this, and have been accused by pro-lifers of not being pro-life.  If a post-abortive woman sees the pictures, they often cause her to go further into denial, and, yes, the pictures cause abortion.

One reason you left out:  that is not a picture of a child; it is a picture of the remains of a child. To propagate these pictures is to not only desensitize people, but to condition people to view the child in the womb as a horror.  Graphic pictures create distance from and rejection of the child in the womb (especially in the young).

Simcha made some very good points here, I will admit. But I don’t agree with all of them. Use of graphic images should be used with discretion and the utmost care and respect for the audience. However, we live in a cruel world filled with many horrors that we can’t all guard against. When I see such graphic images, I think of the numerous images of Nazi holocaust victims in textbooks and tv documentaries. I think of images of war and lives being lost all over the world. There’s a reason people say, “war is hell”. I think of the many people who’ve suffered traumatic physical injury and have been horrifyingly disfigured and how they must feel going out in public in full view of others including children. If a person were injured in a car wreck to where their entire face were burned away, would it be appropriate to avoid that person because of their scars, to shelter children in the presence of that person? Use of these images can be powerful, and like anything powerful, they should be used with great thought, care, and respect for the children portrayed. Those images are the loudest voice those children have.

I strongly disagree with you, Simcha. I am probably responsible for as many abortions with different women as you have had children. If I had seen the graphic truth of abortion over 40 years ago, the first abortion never would have happened. My sole advice came from the abortion provider/counselor. “The procedure simply involves the vacuuming out of mucous material.” Graphic photos show not just the ‘mucous material’ but the body parts of our aborted children. I have spoken with many post-abortive men, in particular, and I am certain that they would also agree with my position. The GRAPHIC PHOTOS show the GRAPHIC TRUTH OF ABORTION!
God bless! Ned Dougherty www.endtimesdaily.com

@ Posted by anna lisa on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 1:49 PM (EDT): The truth hurts—sometimes unbearably.  If it doesn’t, then there’s something wrong with you.

anna lisa you really are a funny person.  I think if we were all being attacked by a grizzly bear, you would find a way to charm and soothe it.

I absolutely agree that we need to be careful about how we use these pictures. I think people should know what they’re seeing before they do and that the March is not a good place for these. I think it’s especially important for parents to choose when to show their young children and I don’t think it does anything to help the rabid protesters on the other side at the March.

However, I feel like many pro-lifers are almost afraid of these pictures. They are gross and bloody, but they are the truth. Warn people before you take them out. Be sensitive to what they’ve experienced. Recognize that the picture is of a real person. But also know that those children continue to be ripped apart every day we do not stop it from happening. Never, ever be afraid to show the truth.

P.S. I love using beautiful in-utero pictures of babies. I think those are sometimes even more powerful then the picture of aborted babies.

Ana, of COURSE you have good reason to speak up and fight for LIFE. No one is saying otherwise. In fact, many of Simcha’s arguments against graphic pictures *in this particular setting* are for the sake of furthering the cause of LIFE. Nwiether Simcha or any of the commenters are saying we should stop fighting for LIFE or that we should stop telling the truth, they are saying that it is not prudent to display such images in this particular setting.  Are you really not worried about the people who will be pushed *towards* an abortion because of the indiscriminate portrayal of these images? It really does happen, there are babies that are killed every year *because* their mothers saw these graphic images. These images are powerful tools and so need to be used with care and prudence, with great power comes great responsibility.

Ana is personally identifying with the children, for good reason, and reacting as she thinks they would want her to.  But those children want their mothers and fathers to come to peace and reconciliation with them in this life, and reunion in the next.  If those children could express themselves, they would express themselves as rescued by God, as whole and healed and interceding.  To depict them only as remains is to continue the dehumanization and make people recoil from them.  Ana, you too are post-abortive and deserve recovery.  The suffering of sibling victims is often overlooked, and their anger deserves a hearing.  Come to a Project Rachel program!

@Therese:“Are you really not worried about the people who will be pushed *towards* an abortion because of the indiscriminate portrayal of these images? “
REALLY?
It is the FIRST time I am confronted with this argument! During a war would soldiers run into a, say enemy tank, only because they saw the corpses of their cammarades and would like to be wounded/killed as well? Don’t think this is the rule!
And here we are: pro-lifers accusing other pro-lifers of pushing women to abortion! REALLY?
There is a war out there: a spiritual one and the victims’ BODIES are ignored, not even offered a decent burial.
WHY?  Even at March for Life?!?
Only the truth makes you free.
The whole truth. Not just 99,99% of the truth.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/simcha-fisher/eight-reasons-not-to-use-graphic-abortion-images-at-the-march-for-life#ixzz2IkGHwyva

Well, I’m sure not everyone will agree, but I think that this non-graphic picture:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/humanity/

garners a lot more tears and prayers than a picture of the corpse of the person after the “procedure” would garner.

So I have to agree with Simcha.

The innocence of my children is #1. I am not going to sacrifice it for the cause. I do not bring them anywhere where they might be brutalized by graphically violent images, so that includes pro-life marches. I do not even talk to my children about abortion until they are teenagers. I am damn well going to protect my children’s innocence tooth and nail as long as a can. Children should have happy, secure and peaceful lives, not be warriors in the abortion war. My children pray for “all unborn children” and are testimonies of children loved and wanted unconditionally.

And I really question the effectiveness (even if the end did justify the means, which I don’t think it does). I mean abortion photos have been used   since the beginnings of the pro-life movement and here we still have abortion legal and not-rare 40 years later. In fact, during that time we’ve had the grisly partial birth abortion introduced as a protected procedure. The violent video game addiction and the shootings that it breeds would seem to argue against the idea of showing dead bodies as a cure for killing.

I am saddened by the nummber of well-intentioned people who are happy to treat women wounded by abortion or miscarriage as collateral damage, victims of friendly fire. Where is the love or compassion in that?

http://www.rcrc.org/perspectives/catholic.cfm

Father Pavone said America needs to see abortion in order to reject it. We must not shink from the truth.
Right on CHRIS COBB!!!!!!!!!!!

I couldn’t disagree with you more. My husband is a pro-life speaker and my son-in-law works for Created Equal, a pro-life organization. Both use graphic images and they are crucial in lifting the casket on abortion along with reasonable conversation.. Most Americans do not know what abortion does to a baby. The church won’t show it, the media won’t show it, schools-neither public nor private—will show them. And where my husband or son-in-law have spoken, people are angered that they’ve never been told the truth about what abortion does. In two days traveling with my husband no one was angry at being shown the photos, but rather, one woman said she’d never have had 2 abortions had she seen the photos and an elderly woman told us, “Everyone needs to see these.” Ephesians 5:11 says, ” Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” It’s out of obedience that these photos are shown, not a desire to injure, but to stop a killing.

I was unfortunate enough to take part in a march in front of Obama’s headquarters here in our town.  There were only four of us.  There should have been more.  Our signs read “A vote for Obama is a vote for dead children.”  While I completely agreed with the sign I was disturbed at the graphic image on the sign.  I didn’t know about the image when I agreed to do the march.  If I had it to do over again, I would’ve said no—for all the reasons you stated in your excellent article.  I knew it was wrong.  It felt wrong to my spirit, and I am indwelled by the Holy Spirit.  There is something wrong with these pictures.  I feel like in showing them, the innocent babies have been violated and mistreated twice, once in the abortion and once again when their images are splashed on a poster board.  It is true what you say, some will harden their hearts and continue to believe it’s okay (even when they know it isn’t) just to spite those holding the signs.  If someone jumps out of a tall building, do we not cover his body with a sheet or towel to respect him AND to protect those who are walking by from the horrific image of his demise?  Are these babies really people or are they not?  If they are and they ARE, then their bodies should be respected, just as someone who is murdered on the street is protected from those who walk by to gawk at him.

I agree that they are human babies, but isn’t that the point of showing these pictures? To show that indeed, they are not a cluster of cells, or just medical waste, they are human beings. In saying that, I agree that there is a time and place for this, and it their should be warnings around the pictures that there will be graphic images.

The image is necessary.  It moves us to the reality and the gravity of what is being done.  The images must be displayed.  Those who see will either come closer to the light or fall further away.  But these images explain the truth of what is happening.  If a ardent pro-choice sees one he will detract a bit next time he fights for an abortion.  The images are necessary.

Just to let you know the images don’t always sway
the pro choice heart.  There are actually many
liberal forums who, right now, are gearing up for the
March, and they continually state that the signs don’t
move them to compassion. The opposite. Right now they are
following Twitter and Instagram feeds and basically laughing. They don’t care.
Maybe some are moved by the graphic signs. But given the fact that
things haven’t changes much and its still going on after 40 years. And that
people are basically fighting with one another over whose way is better than
the other…well, it just sucks.  Pretty much.  Have fun with that.  It’s been a horrible
day watching all this go down.  It’s why I’ve stayed out of the proliferation
movement.  I hope one day it won’t be like this.

While I agree with most of what you are saying here, and really I could go either way when it comes to the graphic images. I do take issue with one of your arguments: “And sometimes they cause lives to be lost.” Images of abortion do not and cannot cause lives to be lost, it is still the woman choosing to end the life of her child despite the reality she has seen.

Simcha, you are an amazing writer. Thank you for this piece. You have expressed the inchoate emotion I feel about displaying these images in clear, logical, graceful terms. Thank you.

I agree whole-heartedly with Fr Pavone when he says, “America will not end abortion until it sees abortion.”  The pictures are horrible and distressing; they’re supposed to be, for the reality is even more horrible and distressing.  If we want the pictures to go away, we need to make the reality end.  SOmeone said earlier that those who use the pictures treat post-abortive women “like collateral damage”.  Not so.  We seek not to open old wounds, but please be advised that there are greater considerations than feelings, that is, the very lives of babies.  Graphics do save lives; I’ve seen it happen several times now.  While the pictures may bring old pain to memory, isn’t the life of another baby worth at least that?

The two things that really get me about those images are 1) the way they treat the murdered children like a tool; nameless they are just an image to be used as a bludgeon against the “enemy” in a “war.”  Holocaust images ARE, in my opinion, largely ineffective at this point when strewn about in high school textbooks and such.  The images are desensitizing, **all exposure to violence leads to desensitization** and therefore we must limit the exposure to its images for fear it will become less real to us.  Thin about it: those emaciated figures are nothing but a symbol to us now, aren’t they?  Unless we force ourselves, we have an entirely emotional response to the horror of it, but one that forgets that each person was an individual with a name and a soul. Rejected as nothing by their own parents, we continue the tradition by using their precious bodies for
“a good reason.”

(2) Is that prolifers claim the right to inundate my children with those images, against my will.  I once witnessed an exchange about that very thing in which one activist told another she was an irresponsible parent for *NOT* allowing her kids to “see the truth.”  Well that did NOT go over with the other woman!  Her point was that she is the parent, and knows when her children can handle “truth” and how much. 
It really makes me sick, actually, when people talk about children seeing the truth of this violence, with no thought to individual children and their personal needs wrt innocence and understanding.  Who would claim that, in order to warn children about sexual abuse we explain graphically what someone might do to them?

Never have used graphic signs because my main focus is to touch the hearts of women, gently reminding them they are a mother, and I am there to support them in making a good choice, one they can live with!

On the other hand I would never counsel another pro-lifer not to use them.  I witnessed a turn around by a pro-lifer who confronted two women on the way into the clinic with a graphic picture of the head of a pre-born child.  The two women hit the ground, on their knees and stayed there for 20 minutes.  They both turned around, hopped in their car and drove away.

I disagree with Fr. Pavone. Graphic pictures are not a magic bullet, although they can be helpful sometimes. There are no magic bullets, as a matter of fact. I know from personal experience that graphic images do not appreciably motivate pro-life people. After arranging for an hour or two presentation hosted by CBR (Center for Bio-ethical Reform) which was attended by about 100 people at a local church, my contingent of demonstrators outside the abortion facility down the street went from about 6 to about 6. Everyone who saw the pictures was fired up about the pictures, though. I think they must have thought that the pictures were the means and being fired up was the ultimate goal. (I’m sure they didn’t stay fired up for more than 48 hours.)

I can’t agree. People need to lose sleep over these images. If people are offended, so be it. We can’t continue to sugar coat what really happens in an abortion or we become just like the pro-aborts.

Simcha, I have mixed feelings about the pictures as well, mostly because of the heartache they could cause to a woman who has had an abortion. If there was a time they should be used though (and I’m not sure they should), we are already there. With hundreds of millions of children already aborted, we have reached “last resort” stage.  It occurred to me that we can’t elect an orthodox Christian to public office because every year hundreds of thousands of men and women participate in abortions - that’s millions of voters over the last forty years.  By crossing that line, they have moved farther from God, and are less likely to vote for a platform that calls abortion wrong or holds people accountable for their actions.  Even if they think it was wrong to have an abortion, they are more likely to feel hypocritical for opposing them.  So it is no surprise that our President refuses to defund Planned Parenthood.  We are now a nation of walking wounded. Healing begins with acknowledging our sin and repenting.  The secret is leading people to that place. Christ would probably have those placards filled with pictures of living infants growing in the womb. (Hate to see them called “fetuses” even if it is medically correct - seems to separate them from their humanity.)

Might as well not carry a crucifix then because that is the most graphic reminder of the God-man scourged and nailed to a tree for all of our sins.

Thank you for the article. I wish more could be swayed to stop showing those horrific images.

I grew up in the ‘70s in a very pro-choice area. And seeing those signs just made me think Pro-life folks were nuts. 

Even then I knew I could never have an abortion but, I didn’t think it was up to me to tell others what to do. My daughters changed my mind. My daughter was very curious and when she decided to learn more she looked at both pro-life and so called pro-choice websites. She found that most women have abortions because they felt that they had no other choice.  So, when they were younger I told them we should focus on supporting the moms so they would feel that they had a choice, and could choose life for their baby. That’s what pro-life really is- pro-choice: adoption or having help to keep the baby. Not abortion- that is the “no choice” or hopeless option. 

And hope and support like the “Sisters for Life” is what will change a heart.

Shrill screaming and horrific images make people look a bit crazy.

@Marty: So women who have had abortions need to lose sleep over these images as well? Children who don’t understand also need to lose sleep over these images? Women who have miscarried need to lose sleep over these images?
No. I could never show a picture of an aborted baby to any mother or child.
Chris Cobb rewrites this article to make it about Jesus. So Chris, would you shove the movie The Passion of the Christ in people’s faces? Would you be OK with a 7 year old child being forced to watch this violent R-rated movie? Yes, Jesus did suffer like that (perhaps even worse than that!), but that doesn’t mean that we should expose this violence to every unsuspecting person we see on the streets. That doesn’t convert people. It makes us look like a bunch of manipulative maniacs who photoshop disturbing images just to push a political agenda blinded by religious fanaticism. Obviously, that is not what the March for Life is about. We are not religious fanatics who shove violent images in people’s faces. We are kind, compassionate people who seek to end the unjust murder of millions of babies every year, and to end this terrible violence against women. I agree that people need to know what abortion is, but there are other ways for them to find out. Don’t act as if the only way to convert people to the pro-life side is to shove violent images in their faces. It’s not.

I don’t necessarily agree with your points here.

However, I would actually like to call your attention to an error in your article:

“When the apostles begged the Lord to send the dead to persuade people to repent, He said that if they didn’t listen to the prophets, then they wouldn’t be impressed by the dead coming back to life, either.”

If you want to use Sacred Scripture as a form of proof text for a point you are making, perhaps you ought to get the text reference part accurate. The story I think you are trying to draw from here is from Luke 16 and it is from a parable Jesus was telling in which the rich man from hell begged Father Abraham to send someone back from the dead to warn his kinsmen to be charitable to the poor, like the miserable beggar Lazarus in the story.  And Christ was bringing home the reality that even the testimony of one raised from the dead would not be enough to change hearts. And that became even more painfully clear when the very real and not so poor Lazarus, His friend, was raised after being dead for four days.

Whether or not graphic images will change hearts- that is a point for debate for sure. The reality of those images changed the heart of one Archbishop I read about just today. But changing hearts is not usually the intent of graphic displays, they are intended to shock and offend- in that way, they are like the crucifix- they make it very clear what sin looks like, what selfishness, ignorance, fear, lies, hatred, evil and exploitation look like. This carnage is the fruit of the war between the dragon and the woman with child. This is the doorstep of hell. Do people need to see that willy nilly or would that be better in a more controlled venue? I don’t know.

Maybe we do a better job goofing around with all that reality of evil stuff at Halloween when we poke fun at it all, and so put the devil in his place on his own terms.

But what do I know, I’m a convert and most of my Catholic formation has come through my association with the Legionaries of Christ.

This is an interesting topic for me.  I have been active in the pro life movement for the majority of my life, mostly from the couch nursing for the last 4 years though ;)

I feel conflicted about the public use of graphic images but lean heavily on the side that says it is not necessary or prudent.  Many people who seem to advocate their use, as seem in the combox here are very intense and emotional.  That is not bad, but it’s almost if you are trying to shake someone’s shoulders and make them feel how you feel. Can we MAKE anyone feel anything? Another practical problem with playing the emotion card is that it doesn’t mean it will change ACTIONS. Even if these images may move someone (again, we are talking in the context of an impersonal march, not one on one), that person will not have any foundation to base those emotions on and they may soon pass or give way to the ever popular “well, I wouldn’t do that, but . .  .” when confronted with someone’s sad story or crisis pregnancy.

These intense proposals for these uses often come with phrases like: we’re not winning, we’re not gaining, we HAVE to do something.” This sounds like panic or despair. That in itself makes me uneasy. Those do not fit with faith or hope.  There is a lack of humility there, too, when the person demands these images must be used because that’s the “right way” and demanding they know what will change hearts. 

My parents were active and proudly pro life when I was in elementary school (8 years?) and I collected all sorts of information and pamphlets when I would hand out suckers at the pro life table after mass during coffee and donuts (my first work in the pro life movement ;) ) I probably knew all the details of a suction abortion, saline abortions, and RU-486 when I was 10 or 12.  I even did my 8th grade research paper/oral report to the class on abortion, and included brief descriptions of each procedure.  (I went to a catholic school).  I heart people were still talking about it after school in the parking lot.  I didn’t regret it but it wasn’t salacious either. (mostly on the history of abortion, Roe v Wade, Doe V Bolton, the impact abortion has had on society, etc).

Now as a young mom I would worry about my son seeing something like that. He is a very sensitive young preschooler who gets concerned when he sees a kid crying in the store.  What is the purpose of the march? It is to gather the pro life, to show the country the voice.  It is our unity and presence together that make the impact. THe sheer number.  I don’t think the march itself is going to be the place where heartsw are necessaily changed. I don’t think that’s the point. The point (as I understand it and that it’s in DC of all places) is that the sheer number of people who rally from all over the country will give the message to the lawmakers and the country itself that we are a people who oppose abortion.  We are a people who VOTE.  We are young, old, sisters, marrie dwith kids, bachelors, who oppose the tragedy the ruling of Roe V Wade and the tragedy it has brought on countless women, men, and children, as well as our country as a whole.  Our presence says this. Our numbers say this.  Our peaceful, unified, beautiful march says this. FAMILIES with young ones in tow witness this just by being there.  I think the graphic images hijack that purpose and move eyes from- look, here is a dedicated people that has been showing up here for to commemorate this for X many years to—-> oh, look at that crazy man with that sign.

I think we need to reflect on what the purpose of the march is. (Not what we want to make it) and WHO is our audience.  The media, the lawmakers, or the random person on the street? I believe one of the first commentors in the combox illustrates how far off we’ve gotten with the march. She says it’s the parents own fault for bringing kids. “They know what they’re getting in to.”  Let’s not lose the forest for the trees! We’re making the MFL unfriendly to children?

Ugh. Why do I get the spam filter all the time?
My long, thought out post is now gone.  But my basic thoughts I’ll try to gather:

We are getting off topic. We’re talking specifically about the march for life. I feel like people are getting off on every imaginable scenario.

Marches and Billboards are forms of communication. I think we need to examine WHAT we are trying to say and WHO our audience is. 

Wasn’t the March designed to gather pro lifers from all over the country, every walk of life, to be a symbol of the pro life movement across the world and a sign of our purpose and unity?  THe fact it is held in DC says our audience are the lawmakers, as well as the country as a whole. I believe our presence is the message to the lawmakers; they’re not going to come out and chat with us and see our signs. But our presence says that Roe V Wade was a mistake that brought tragedy. We are voters and we are not OK with abortion.  It says to the country: hey, it’s not true what the media portrays- not everyone supports abortion. And also, hey, look, there are people who want to help you. Of course, bring in the posters of aborted babies. Then the message goes from what was stated above to, oh, hey, look at that weird guy with the crazy picture. sigh. 

I would like to ask the supporters of the graphic images *at the march* who they think their audience is.  What they are trying to communicate. I hear a lot of rhetoric I don’t necessarily agree with, but it doesn’t mean anything to the use of their signs, IMO. 

Lastly, I think when we have gotten to the point that we’re hearing people say, “People have to know what they’ve gotten themselves in to” regarding bringing their children to the march, as one of the first commenters above did, I believe we’ve completely lost sight of why we’re there. When the march for life ceases to be child-friendly, you’ve lost all credibility.

You know who really hate the pictures? The pro-aborts. They know they’re effective!

Thanks, Simcha, I found your post thought-provoking, and I agreed with most of it.  However, your reasoning might be more effective if you double-check some details.  In the section, “People see what they want to see,” you said “the apostles begged the Lord to send the dead to persuade people to repent, He said that if they didn’t listen to the prophets, then they wouldn’t be impressed by the dead coming back to life, either.” You are referring to the Parable of the Rich Man & Lazarus, told by Jesus, in which the Rich Man (not the apostles) was asking Father Abraham (not the Lord) to send Lazarus back from the dead to convince his brothers to repent.

Thank you.
I passed some protesters carrying graphic signs a few months after losing my baby at 16 weeks. I still drive around, planning what I will say to them if I ever see those people again. That is no way to decry violence and claim respect for the unborn human. It makes me weak at the knees.

The graphic stuff didn’t used to bother me too much until I miscarried a baby at 11 weeks. I’d had many babies previously, seen ultrasounds aplenty, but seeing & holding that tiny little body with fingers & ears & mouth… It’s left me permanently changed. I can’t handle the graphic stuff anymore at all. Fetal development stuff is fine, ultrasound images are all good, but the dismembered stuff is a punch straight to the gut.

“Abortion is a souls’ wound.” Thank be to God for having the possibility to participate at a healing weekend offered by Rachel’s Vineyard, next to women who had an abortion or a miscarriage and men or women who lost sibylline like me. It has been a healing experience and I subscribe to every word describing it on their web site:

“Rachel’s Vineyard is a safe place to renew, rebuild and redeem hearts broken by abortion. Weekend retreats offer you a supportive, confidential and non-judgmental environment where women and men can express, release and reconcile painful post-abortive emotions to begin the process of restoration, renewal and healing.

Rachel’s Vineyard can help you find your inner voice. It can help you experience God’s love and compassion on a profound level. It creates a place where men and women can share, often for the first time, their deepest feelings about abortion. You are allowed to dismantle troubling secrets in an environment of emotional and spiritual safety.

Rachel’s Vineyard is therapy for the soul. Participants, who have been trapped in anger toward themselves or others, experience forgiveness. Peace is found. Lives are restored. A sense of hope and meaning for the future is finally re-discovered.”

THANK YOU, Simcha.  Right on.  I agree 100%.

Also agree that Simcha’s post is not saying “Never ever use these images” BUT, “Here is why you not to walk around in a public March waving them on signs at everybody.”
.
Something I always think about with these pictures is the woman-in-a-meat-grinder cartoon that anti-porn activists used to wave around on giant posters in NYC.  At least they had the forethought to flash them, not shove them and invite staring so that people will gawk instead of think about them.
.
Those murdered children are persons; isn’t that what we believe? They deserve better than to become extrapolated out; they deserve better than to be treated like objects. It is objectification and turning them into symbols instead of persons that got them killed in the first place.

I will pray about your arguments.  My gut reaction though is to question them since most of the “pro-Choice” arguments in our local paper this week is to fight for abortion rights so that women will not be harmed if we ensure a safe, antiseptic murder of their off-spring.  In such a calculated and invisible dealing with the tragedy of state-sanctioned killing, we forget what is actually taking place.  Thank you for going to the March for Life and thoughtfully writing for the sanctity of life.  KW

what of the 300 babies killed today? Let the victims be seen. We should hold up the injustice of their death everyday until abortion is no more.

I see anti smoking commercials on tv that are very graphic. Any complaints? If so I do not hear them. As another poster stated the crucifix offends too. Being offended is not the standard of right and wrong.

Good post Jo Fleming.  Emily the NCRegister seems to have come under seige by those who would silence viewpoints that are very orthodox but not to their liking.  I have taken to copying each comment before I post in case it is labelled as spam or get the message that I didn’t enter the code as it appears (which I have entered correctly) or some other message of this type.  Looks like you need to do the same.  At one point I was told by an editor/moderator that they only moderate articles and not the blog, but last night a comment I tried to make on a Mark Shea blog was labelled as spam needing review by a moderator.  Something smells. You know the paper is in trouble when they call Cuomos action in pushing unlimited abortion “Brave”. Or when they publish an article praising the nun who disobeyed Bishops and helped push through Obamacare or when they silence orthodox posters but the radical noise is posted. What they say and what they do are at odds.  Also regarding the topic, and our national need of repentance, I wondered if a graphic artist ever put a picture of a severely scourged and beaten crucified Christ next to a picture of an aborted fetus on a cross?  They are truly one and the same. What we do to the least we do to Him but it would perhaps, as Simcha says, not have the desired effect.

Pam,
It’s often when you copy & paste that it triggers a spam response or some other system glitch.I think it’s more of a technical issue than a conspiracy.

@Pam - yes, Kathleen is right:  copy and paste, and many other things (including some that are mysteries even to our tech guy) sometimes cause the automated spam filter to put comments in moderation.  All the comments in the blogs are viewed by an editor, and I read all the comments on my blog; but they go through the automated system first.  We make an effort to “rescue” all comments that get flagged incorrectly, but we are human, and occasionally miss something.  There is certainly no effort or conspiracy to silence anyone.  My own policy is to remove comments that make death threats, but that’s about it.  Anyone who works with computers ought to understand that they don’t always do what we want them to do.

But I do apologize to Emily and anyone else who’s had a comment flagged unjustly!  (It even happens to me occasionally, when I’m using the same computer and IP address I use to submit posts.)  It’s very frustrating, especially when a conversation moves on quickly.

I absolutely agree with you.  Thanks for posting this.

Thank you so much, we live in DC and there is a pro-life truck that drives around plastered with horrible images of aborted babies and I have had to train my kids to close their eyes at the drop of a hat to stop them from seeing it. We will also be avoiding the March because I can not in good conscience expose my kids old to those images, and it saddens me that I can not be a part.

Thanks, Simcha, for such a true sentiment.

With all due respect she is certainly a coward and I even questioned when I read this if she was even a Catholic. Mind you I didn’t say she wasn’t a nice person but she is a coward for sure.

1st. She misuses Fr. Pavone who is a board member of CBR and insists that everyone should see graphic images of abortion just about everywhere and he backs it up quite well on his website why.

2nd. Children need to see these images at the march. I help put up this “Scary” display annually and I travel around the country about 1/4 of the year at the invitation of pro-life college clubs to set it up on college campuses. Children are no longer innocent in this world and since I can’t trust a parent to instill in their child not to kill their own children someday I need to force them to see this reality. Don’t forget up to 50% or more of abortions are Catholic women so our Church has done a stand up job on this issue. Children don’t get upset at these images unless their parents do. They usually want to know who hurt the baby and why, a parent with a functioning conscience can explain the evils of abortion when they come across our images.

3rd. The most dangerous thing to a pregnant woman is a postabortive woman. Most women getting abortions have had one already and those women will readily tell you they have advised other women, be it family or friends, to have an abortion. CBR has postabortive women working for them. Fr. Pavone, spiritual director of Silent No More, is on the board of CBR who is the number 1 group that shows these images correctly. Until a woman sees what an abortion is after she has killed her child she will not hit the bottom as she spirals downward, this is the best thing that can happen to a post-abortive woman. The proof is on the CBR website forums of quotes from post abortive women.

4th. Mom’s are the ones walking into abortion clinics even ones who marched. Several years ago I came across 2 or 3 quotes from abortive moms who as children marched but then came across these images from CBR and they said that those pictures would have stopped them from killing their child. In fact everywhere we go we eventually get feedback from people who either had an abortion and have started the healing process from seeing our images or from moms that didn’t murder their child after seeing our photos or simply others who said they changed their mind and became prolife. Saying we should not show these photos as Ms. Fisher said would have not saved a single one of these women or babies.

5th. Those are real babies. Apparently Ms. Fisher has never opened a history textbook or been to the Holocaust museum for if she had this down right odd suggestion would not have come to mind. If she is a Catholic she better not look at Jesus on the cross every again because He is bloody and abused. Nothing in this point makes any logical sense.

6th. Image matters? Tell that to every other social reformer that was effective. No one, not a single social reformer from Christ to Wilderborce to Ghandi to Lewis Hine to Susan B. Anthony was ever respect or liked. This idea of being liked which is one of the sad montras of the prolife movement that is at the root of failure and more dead babies is historically proven to be wrong time and time again. If we tickle the ear of prochoicers or those that care nothing of the victim then we will have another 50 million murdered babies.

7th. This idea that images of aborted babies push women into abortion is, excuse my honesty, about as much bullshit as 100 farms can produce in a given year from Pennsylvania. Zero, nothing, nodda evidence supports this claim anywhere. Calling people maniacs who show these pictures is cowardly and false. These people have history on their side. The maniacs are those who look at what has worked to end social injustice and tosses it out the window like this author. If you want another 50-100 million more murdered babies go along with her ridiculous ideas.

8th. CBR has found that the more they show their images that the more effective they are at saving lives, healing postabortive women, and changing hearts and minds to be prolife. Any honest research by this author would have showed her this to the overwhelming point where there would be no arguments for her to speak against these images.

9th. People may see what they want to see but I want you to notice something at the March for Life this year. When the same old tired speeches that accompany this “party” at the March end and people start singing and dancing in the street take a look when they pass the CBR display. It is only then that the focus turns to the murdered children. Heads hang a little lower of everyone, children, included. Sometimes tears are seen but an atmosphere of silent respect for the dead turns on like a light switch.

In conclusion I used to be ignorant like this author and told myself because of how I felt that pictures of dead babies were bad, that children and abortive moms would see them. Then I did some research and I found out the truth. Now I devote about 1/4th of my year traveling around the country with them, I’d rather be somewhere else doing something else but I know from real research that nothing less than forcing these images on people will end abortion because no amount of prayers can ever be enough, no words are ever enough, and if we look at history showing the reality is enough after enough time always has and always will end injustice.

This writer is a coward because she had an obligation to seek out the truth and not just put her irrational emotions on paper. If you stand with her false arguments you might as well have paid for an abortion because you are doing the opposite of ending abortion which is what much of the failed pro-life cause has been about over the last 40 years. People like her spend more energy and time hiding the truth about abortion than saving babies, see the Devil in that?

Here is a short video that completely destroy this author’s arguments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cbMG07b0M4

Ir is hard to face the truth. Turning away is easier.

I think it is clear that the arguments against using graphic images in public places leave many pro-lifers unconvinced that they should leave their posters at home. I suggest that the March for Life enunciate a clear objective: is it meant to provide evidence of how many people don’t like abortion? Is it meant to gather the widest spectrum possible of voices who protest abortion, from those who want to prove it victimizes women to those who believe it is a grave sin against justice, both for individuals and for society as a whole? Is it a principally political protest, making all rhetorical tools welcome, or a social gathering, making marginal positions and ill-mannered behaviours unacceptable? Once we know what we are trying to achieve, we can all pull together.

@anon: it’s hard to disagree. Doing so with a pithy statement while posting under “anon” so no one knows who you are is passive aggressive.

thank you, Simcha!
As a mother who is taking a young child to the March, I appreciate this article.

My child is far too young to appropriately comphrehend such images. In time, when she’s older, I allow her to see these things and explain it to her. The folks who display such things in front of our children are doing us all a disservice.

I would be upset if my child’s preschool showed them Schindler’s List, why would this be any different?

I can’t go to the MFL because I would cry the whole time (I’m crying at my desk just reading some of the comments here), but if I thought I could, it would have to be graphic-image-free or we would be back to square one.

As an FYI, I have never had an abortion, however, 20 years ago my son, Scott, unexpectedly died as a newborn baby and within a month of his passing my (15 y/o) sister-in-law had an abortion - even after I pleaded to take the baby as my own if she decided not to keep him. 

Before that I could handle watching “slasher movies” and the like, since then I can’t handle those images at all.  I cry at the thought of those lost to abortion, and have even been known to cry at the “Mother & Daughter Tea” when they hand out the 10 week old plastic fetus dolls in support of life.

I am praying for all those making the pilgrimage to the MFL, especially my youngest daughter - she plans on handing out roses again this year… which I’d say that is a pretty awesome testament to her faith and devotion for the Pro-Life movement.

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Jan 23, 2013 12:08 PM (EDT):

@anon: it’s hard to disagree. Doing so with a pithy statement while posting under “anon” so no one knows who you are is passive aggressive.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You agree it is true. The rest of your statement is just an attack.

I agree with Ms Fisher that a Christian can do more harm than good with such displays. There is also counsel from God’s word to guide us. In Rom 14:13, 1 Cor 8:9 and 2 Cor 6:3 Paul warns us against putting a “stumbling block” in another’s way. “Giving no offence to any man, that our ministry be not blamed”, he tells the Corinthians. Jesus also addressed the issue of proper address: “Salt [is] good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?” Lu 14:34; also Mr 9:49 ff. Paul again: “Let your speech [be] alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.” Col 4:6. Peter also was aware that the Christian walks a tightrope through the world. “Wherein [unbelievers] think it strange that you run not with them into the same confusion of riotousness: speaking evil of [us]” [because we do good!] 1Pet 4:4

Simcha,

Thank you for your compassionate heart and insight.  We will say that we completely agree with you.  However, because of our place in the pro-life movment, we can take it even a step further:

For us, at Abortion Recovery InterNational…in addition to all the reasons mentioned in the article:

We receive the calls of those wishing to commit suicide for their “sin” of abortion that was SHOWN to them at the local mall by the “pro-lifers”! We answer the phone to screams of horror from the young girls who’s high schools are visited by the 12x12 graphic images (usually without parent consent)! We get the calls from women who have witnessed a “truth truck” drive by… and had to explain it to their pre-teens.

We spend hours talking these people out of ending their own lives, because the pain of abortion, for them, is so deep.

At Abortion Recovery InterNational, our mission is to help HEAL those hurting from the pain of abortion…. not further traumatize them.

We believe that technology has advanced us past Malachi in the jar… to 4D ultrasound. We choose to show “life” not death!

All the pro-lifers who believe that the TRUTH needs to be shared, don’t always realize that 1 in 3 have already chose abortion. Can you ask them that before you show them pictures, so that you can be sensitive to their past?! Probably not. I personally wish we could… I wish we could give WARNINGS before showing any pictures that might hurt our beloved families impacted by abortion… but often we can’t!

Instead we choose to show these pictures and then leave these poor souls standing there…. alone! Just like we did the women who walked in the clinic. How many sidewalk counselors stand on the exit side of the clinic. I DO! I stand with a big sign that gives them our website (http://abortionrecovery.org) so they can get help after their abortion. IMMEDIATE HELP!

(see a sample of that sign in our store: http://arinstore.org)

We’re missing the mark people… we’ve been showing images for 40 years… first Malachi in the jar and now images that aren’t always medically accurate (another pet-peeve of Abortion Recovery InterNational). If you’re going to show pics, have them medically accurate, cited with source, date, where and who took the pic. Only then can the pro-choice people not debunk our imagery.

Those who choose to disagree with me are many. That’s fine… but if you learn ONE THING from this old woman who serves those already impacted by choice….

For God’s sake… OFFER HER/HIM/THEM HELP!

Get our ARIN brochures, “Through A Ripple Effect” or “I Wish Someone Had Told Me” and hand them out wherever you show graphic images. Have them in your purse, leave them and our DROP cards (also in the ARIN store) on the table after you eat out… in the bathrooms, wherever! 1 in 3 people in your community are aching from abortion… if we could HEAL THEM ALL… Roe would be overturned in one day of voting.

And prayerfully consider NOT SHOWING ANY MORE IMAGES ... unless you can also offer HOPE AND HEALING to those you may have further traumatized. After all they won’t always tell you that they’ve had an abortion…

“If you, as a pro-life activist, see a bloody image and you don’t flinch, then it’s time to take a break—move into a different segment of the ministry, one that emphasizes prayer and reparation.”

So that is your solution?  QUIT!?  How is quitting, because you “don’t flinch” going to help others?.  There are enough passive, complacent “pro-lifers” who won’t get their hands dirty in spreading the truth.  Speak the truth in boldness.  People have accepted abortion, because it has been concealed too long.  The Walk isn’t a place for children, as one person commended.  This should be a place to embolden the indifferent to act and make a difference.  The unborn are counting on it.  ABOLISH HUMAN ABORTION!  A//A!  www.abolishhumanabortion.com

The purpose of the prolife March is not to change the minds of the children whose parents decide to bring them to the March. It is to change the minds of adults who are leading our country and parents who are considering abortion.

I think we all know that parents including myself who decide to bring their children to the March and local prayer vigils as a witness to the parent’s pro-life beliefs.  While this seems noble, could we also be seen as ‘using’ these children? After all, do I bring my children to every movie that I see?  Something to think about….

Many people ask us,
“Why do you show those sickening, bloody pictures?”
Let us briefly explain our purpopse for displaying the photographs:

Ending Censorship

We display these photographs because the media has censored the preborn child from the “abortion debate.” The American press refuses to show the American people what these babies look like who are dying in the womb. We are simply attempting to bypass that media blackout by going to the streets and displaying these photographs.

Now the American people can see for themselves exactly what a preborn child looks like after he or she has been in the hands of an abortionist. Most believe the myth that abortion is just the removal of some benign tissue. These photographs expose just how mythical such thinking is.

The displaying of these photographs reveals to this nation that a great holocaust is going on in our midst, that our indifference towards it must cease, and that we must act on behalf of those who are oppressed.

Faithful to Christ

We also display these photographs to inform our nation that it has violated God’s Law, and to therefore call it’s people to repentance. Our photographs stand as a haunting indictment upon our nation.

Some say our photos are disgusting and hurt our Christian witness. Our response: have you ever seen a pretty picture of a murder? Murder is disgusting; abortion is murder; therefore, our pictures are disgusting. Beyond that, what hurts our Christian witness more - being silent while our neighbor is unjustly killed or exposing the atrocities being committed against our neighbor (Ephesians 5:11)? We think the former.

What a pathetic people we are if we want to tolerate the oppression of an entire people group, but then become outraged at someone who displays the suffering of that people group.

Jesus taught, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If we were in the position of our preborn neighbor threatened with an unjust death, we would hope someone would speak up for us, so we speak up for them.

It is important to note that the displaying of these photographs has saved many preborn babies from death by abortion and have spared many women and men the grief of having aborted their own son or daughter.

Historical Precedent

There are many historical precedents for displaying such photographs. Just as we have seen photographs of lynched black men, Jewish corpses, and lifeless Vietnamese children, so we need to look at the frozen, horrid images of preborn babies torn from their mother’s wombs.

At the end of WW II, our American soldiers marched the citizens of Germany past the remains of those who died in the death camps. They marched men, women, and children past the remains of those who died in the death camps.

Why did they do it? Because those citizens all stood guilty for having tolerated the atrocities that went on in their midst. So it is in America today, we all stand guilty for being silent while this atrocity goes on in our nation.

Matthew Brady, the famed Civil War photographer, took and displayed many photographs of the war dead. In 1862, the New York Times wrote the following about Brady’s photographs:

“The dead of the battlefield come up to us very rarely, even in dreams. We see the list in the morning paper at breakfast, but dismiss its recollection with the coffee. We recognize the battlefield as reality, but it stands as a remote one. It is like a funeral next door. It attracts your attention, but it does not enlist your sympathy. But it is very different when the hearse stops at your own door and the corpse is carried over your own threshold. Mr. Brady has done something to bring us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war. If he has not brought bodies and laid them in our dooryards and along our streets, he has done something very like it.”

So our photos have brought you “the terrible reality and earnestness” of abortion.

Our prayer is that people would be moved with compassion for the helpless preborn when they see these photographs and act to see this bloodshed outlawed. Otherwise, God will use His sword of justice and bring retribution upon a nation of people whose hands are covered with blood.

When something is so horrifying we can’t stand to look at it, perhaps we shouldn’t be tolerating it.

Agreed!

And apropos of the “parents shouldn’t take their kids to the March if their kids can’t deal with the pictures” argument, the March should be filled with families with small children—mothers and fathers saying that choosing life is a real option, and you don’t turn into a crazy by choosing it. We need to keep the March a child-safe place. :)

Kristen Walker Hatten had a good article about this topic:
http://liveactionnews.org/a-graphic-image-converted-me-to-pro-life-now-heres-why-im-against-graphic-images/

“These images are like a terrible weapon which should be used with fear and trembling, and only as a last resort.”
Serious question: how many more babies have to die before this last resort is an acceptable resort?  We’re not making any progress in this fight, please don’t kid yourselves that we are.

I agree with Kat, Jay and others.

The pro-abortion side hijacked this argument decades ago when they took LIFE out of their side of the issue completely and made it an issue of individual rights. Women’s rights. And as we know, in this country, an individual’s rights—especially women’s rights—trump all and must not be questioned or opposed in any way.  Our efforts since then have been an “apples to oranges” effort.  We are at FORTY YEARS and 55,000,000 human lives!  When *should* we decide that showing the true horror of abortion is appropriate? And as for the “not in front of children” argument—I disagree. Children are not as fragile as we portray them to be, but they are sponges. If they know the blackness that is abortion growing up, they will know it as an adult and will, with the support and guidance of their parents, grow up to be pro-life adults.

A little rose on your lapel isn’t going to end abortion. Tiny feet pinned to your collar won’t end abortion.

The time is now. The place is everywhere.

I understand all the compassionate and intellectual considerations found here which may be valid reasons for not displaying these graphic images.  At the same time, however, I’m also reminded of the scandalous and graphic image of our Savior’s Corpus hanging on the Cross displayed in each of the sanctuaries of all our Churches throughout the world.  I then wonder if these reasons are truly valid and what this reasoning might mean for the image of our Savior’s Cruxification depicted in all our Churches?  This image is certainly not used in our Churches as first, a weapon; or second, as a last resort.
.
I’m truly conflicted on this issue and not at all convinced graphic images should any longer be confined to the sanctuaries of our Churches.

Usually read your column when I need a laugh. No laughs today, but great wisdom. There is a time—and a place—for everything. Your reasons are more charitable than mine. If I thought that using graphic images in this way would stop abortions, I would do it. However, I know that no one is going to be ‘converted’ to the pro life cause by the March for Life. That isn’t its purpose. However, the sheer number of ‘ordinary’ people bearing witness to the truth may will sway people to think again or consider adopting a different position and, by the grace of God, little by little we can end this evil.

Thanks so much for writing this.

@Patty who lost Scott

I am praying for you today!

I agree completely with this article. The one reason I will not support priests for life is because of Fr. Pavone’s support of using those images. This is not the mercy or compassion of Christ. There are amazing photos of children within the womb. Let us wake up the world with the truth, not pummel it with horror.

Jan. 23rd:  I agree…it’s better to show pictures of a baby just after birth with a question about what if his life had been terminated in the womb.  Those bloody pictures often look inhuman or like something from a horror movie and they repulse people; they don’t cause pity or sadness. In fact, they do look like pictures from bloody horror movies or crime films. I worked in Haiti for many years and when I would return to the States to get help for my people, the Monsignor at the Propagation for the Faith who helped me many times, advised not to use pictures that were too graphic…rather, of children hungry and handicapped, but who were appealing and would evoke sympathy…I didn’t understand at the time but I do now…so I hope people who intend to bring those bloody pictures which look inhuman, will reconsider and choose other photos ...

My take.
http://kiwords.blogs.com/kiwords/2012/06/an-open-letter-to-the-anti-abortion-protesters-i-passed-this-afternoon.html

I agree in that these images should never be used in a public venue, where innocent children would be exposed to them, unnecessarily. However, I would suggest an analogy.  How many adults were really made “aware” perhaps for the first time in their lives, of just how brutally Jesus was treated until they saw “The Passion of the Christ”?

There is a time and a place for everything. These abortion images, included. Pray for the wisdom of knowing when and where to use them effectively.

Coming from a post-abortive aspect, these pictures would be very upseting. And from experience I know that many pro-life activists are postabortive so there will be a lot of them at the site. Believe me I want to get the truth about abortion out there, but I think there are better ways of doing it. After 23 yrs. I am still tortured by the choice I made at 17. People that are “pro-choice” will not be converted by these pictures it will only inflame their rage. I would like to see TV ads that tell about abortion and the effect it has on everyone involved. It is not just tissue!It doesn’t make all your problems go away, it adds many more.

The murder of the Holy Innocents has been graphically depicted in art for centuries.  The more I think about this the more I find invalid the reasons cited in this article for not remembering and honoring the martyred holy innocence of our day with their graphic images.

I was so excited to see my blog linked up to this article by the fantastic Simcha Fisher, and I am still excited, but I need to not visit this combox any more. I’m not an apologist or a theologian or whatever you need to be to be able to defend yourself around “here.”  I will stay in my little bubble from now until the March on Friday and try to choose to believe that we are all of like minds on that day. Some of these comments are why I will fall apart that day, on the inside.

@Bryan M McKinney…

“3rd. The most dangerous thing to a pregnant woman is a postabortive woman. Most women getting abortions have had one already and those women will readily tell you they have advised other women, be it family or friends, to have an abortion. CBR has postabortive women working for them. Fr. Pavone, spiritual director of Silent No More, is on the board of CBR who is the number 1 group that shows these images correctly. Until a woman sees what an abortion is after she has killed her child she will not hit the bottom as she spirals downward, this is the best thing that can happen to a post-abortive woman. The proof is on the CBR website forums of quotes from post abortive women.

Really Mr. McKinney? “Most postabortive women…”  Really?  Have you met us all? Do you really think you can lay claim to what moved those of us who are postabortive to seek out His mercy, love, and forgiveness?  My journey had nothing to do with the ugly pictures and everything to do with He who calls me His beloved and He who is well pleased with me. Quotes on the CBR website are only a sampling, a minute sampling, of the millions of postabortive women out here.  55 million babies lost to abortion means just about 55 million walking wounded - are you laying claim that “most” of those 55 million owe their healing and forgiveness to what you claim to be the magic bullet? 

How dare you assert that I am the “most dangerous thing to a pregnant woman.” Do you claim to contradict Blessed JPII who has called me, me, Mr. McKinney, one of the “most eloquent defenders of everyone’s right to life?”  If anything, I’m their best ally, the best ally for the child they carry because if given the chance I would do everything I could to keep them from aborting.  Maybe not 20 years ago, maybe not 10 years ago, but today, this day, I would and that’s what matters and it has nothing to do with the ugly pictures.

On Friday, when you see among the crowd a women with her head down trying to avert her eyes and attention to what she already knows full well - that’s me.  Or if you see a woman staring blankly at your images that you are so proud of, who you think you’ve now sent on their downward spiral that is the only trigger for their healing and you lay claim to lighting the fire, that may be me to.  And after I shake it off and hopefully am reminded of who I am and Who is responsible for my healing, I’ll walk on. 

Signed, “decades-long cycles of self-loathing and despair.” www.postabortionwalk.blogspot.com

jan. 23th: Dear Infinite Grace, don’t let this get you down.  Those of us who stand and witness to the sacredness of all human life have seen post abortive women standing strong at the March for Life holding their “I regret my abortion” signs…while vicious, frenzied anti-life women have gotten in their faces yelling obscenites, spittle spurting from their evil tongues…but our precious post-abortive women just stood silently, tears running down their cheeks and took it all, just as Jesus did: “And He opened not His mouth.”  Your witness means all the world to us and to those babies in the womb that you defend so eloquently, so courageously…may the Lord bless you, truly bless you, and may you know our gratitude for all you do on behalf of the unborn babies AND their mothers.  You are our heroes!!! and God’s too.

To Kathleen and Simcha,  The copy and paste habit came AFTER the flagging.  It was not the cause. It has actually saved alot of posts.  Agreed glitches happen, but even posts addressed to the moderator aren’t moving things along all the time.  Twice I had to contact the editors to get a comment posted. Also you can try to label it as “conspiracy” or “political” or whatever (I didn’t), but it is a noticeable trend that has exceded occasional mess up status. Haven’t had that issue on Simcha’s blog ever.  Do have it on Mark Shea’s right now.

  They are the one and only argument that can penetrate the fog of double-speak. Those pictures.  You can talk till you are blue in the face but they did it for this guy - once and for all… many years ago. I looked and said NO this is not right, this is evil.

Did anyone hear Dr. Miller speak on Catholic Radio today? A caller mentioned this column and was upset at the lack of support or possible division this could cause to pro life. Dr. Miller said many things but two seemed very important.  First she said the children are the victims and our government has made them invisible, robbing them of personhood and a face. (paraphrased).  She said it is THEIR march and they need to be seen, not kept invisible! We need to display their humanity.  Her second important point was, it matters how the picture is taken.  There will always be blood because it is part of the reality of the harm that is done, but it doesn’t have to be sensational.  It should always bring out the childs humanity.  She strongly believes the RIGHT pictures should always be there.  The host mentioned one of Dr. Millers pictures that showed simply a tiny hand and arm, but got the point across that a child has lost its life.

@Pam - oh, I see.  Well, the different bloggers have different standards about which comments to delete—so if you had a comment go up and then it disappeared, you could assume the blogger got rid of it.  But if it never went up, you’re just going to have to take my word for it that it’s certainly a software glitch.  I don’t think any of the bloggers have the time to regularly check the spam file, unless someone specifically asks us to.  You’re saying it’s a “noticeable trend that has exceeded occasional mess up status”—i.e., someone’s doing it to you on purpose.  I don’t know what to tell you.  All of the bloggers here are pretty busy,and have a full life and other jobs.  Chasing particular commenters out of the comment box is not really high up on our lists.

Bryan, you come off as a zealot and you do not appear to understand God’s mercy or compassion.  I do not believe that Jesus Christ would condone these graphic images, which are of human beings. They are violent and violence begets violence.  To have no mercy for living children or post abortive women who have not yet dealt with their pain, or fathers who had no decision in the murder of their child, is not of God. It is an individual choice wrapped up in good intentions. The end justifies the means? Rarely. Everyone who supports these images needs to seriously take this to prayer.

LifeSiteNews.com published yesterday this testimony: “One mother’s journey to forgiveness in Christ after abortion. A Rachel’s Vineyard story.” by BRICE GRIFFIN.
Healing is possible!
For me as a child and adolescent the most difficult has been to see how abortion affected my mother and many other women. A child is very sensitive to the sadness of his/her mother, even if we had the first discussion about what an abortion is when I was 11 years. Surviving all my siblings was also not easy and I agree with
Bryan M McKinney: hitting the bottom as we are spiraling downwards is the starting point. Even for a survivors’ healing.  Healing is a painful process, but absolutely necessary if you believe in a life free or regrets and painful memories, if you wish a new beginning. With Our Lord it is possible to do this journey. HE knows everything about pain, HE knows best our hearts and HE is the HEALER.

I favor images of living babies in the womb such as those taken with ultrasound. Many pregnant women and abortin assistants at clinics have been converted when viewing detailed ultrasounds. They’re not gross, and they instill the message that we have a live human being here—not a frog, a toy doll, or a “clump of cells.” May I remind those who think it’s okay to kill something not human, that they protect animals precisely because they’re not human. Not to extend that same courtesy to a fetus is irrational and inhumane.

This post is a deception. Evil. If we had comericials on TV of dead babies every night abortion would be illegal.

another example of ewtn going down the tubes.

Ana, you’re really missing the point of what I am saying. I *am* advocating for the whole truth to be given, but at the appropriate time and place. You don’t talk to your 5 year olds about the duties that come along with marriage because it isn’t the appropriate time to do so. Simcha above argued, not that we should hide 1 % of the truth, but rather that we should be careful to express this truth at the appropriate time and place. I agree with her argument entirely and if you can’t see the distinction between arguing that a piece of information shold be hidden and that it should be shared at the appropriate time and place then we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

Simcha, I love your writing but I thought this article in particular was superb. Keep up the good work!

Jan. 23rd…I think those on both sides are sincere, want to stop the killing of unborn babies but differ on the methods.  I’ve have seen images like this in horror movies and they nauseate me, but that’s me.  Someone suggested that pictures of these aborted babies need to be shown but perhaps in a less bloody way..yes, there are Crucifixes of Jesus, as in the Passion of the Christ, that give an image of what He suffered but those Crucifixes are rare…it’s not that we don’t want to show the ‘horror’ of what is being done but perhaps we just need to show images that will evoke pity, compassion…let’s just pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance in this because as we go forward, we need to be united in defense of the unborn…

Jan. 23…who are you to call this post ‘evil’ Jasper?  Say you disagree, that you would do things your way…but don’t call a sincerely written post ‘evil’...come out from the shadows, please.

Yes, yes yes!  Thank you for putting into words what I knew in my heart.  The images have a place, absolutely, but not in front of my 2- and 3.5-year-olds. The pro-life movement needs to always act first out of LOVE.  Simcha hit this perfectly.

I’d like to respond to each of the objections Simcha Fisher makes about displaying abortion pictures in her article. I believe this question needs to be settled because it is so critically important to the success of our pro-life activism.

First, I find it remarkable—perplexing even—that Ms. Fisher opens by stating:

“Many of us remember seeing those bloody images for the first time, and can recall being shaken out of a vague, fuzzy support for the
pro-life cause into the realization that this is a life-and-death struggle—real life, and real death.”

She’s absolutely right, of course. Most of us can remember the first time we saw the pictures. Twenty years later, I can still remember vividly the moment in my life when I first saw them: I was at home, in the 8th grade (13 years old) when my dad showed them to me. I could not believe that what I was seeing was perfectly legal in America.

If, as Simcha Fisher notes, the pictures are what shook many [all?] of us out of a “vague, fuzzy support for the pro-life cause” into the full realization and appreciation for what was at stake, and the effort which would be required to stop it, then she has just torpedoed every subsequent argument for hiding the truth and covering up
abortion images.

“But a public place is not the place to use these images—ever, I’m convinced.”

Ok, let’s examine her reasons why.

“There will be children at the march.  Do you let your kids watch gruesome war movies or slasher films?  No?  Well, those movies show actors with fake blood, pretending to be tortured and killed.  Why would you let them see the real thing?  The pro-life cause is about protecting innocent life, and that includes protecting the innocence of young children.  Studies show that violent images stay with us for a lifetime, and damage us.”

We know that wherever these pictures are seen minds are changed, and ultimately lives are saved. The author already admitted so herself. So when it comes to children seeing the pictures, we have to decide which matters more: the lives of the unborn children saved by those who see the images, or the feelings born children who will see them? We
believe lives trump feelings, so we use the pictures.

As a practicing Catholic, I have to wonder if Simcha Fisher only attends Mass at Catholic churches where the walls are barren, or where all crucifixes have been stripped down and replaced with the Risen Christ. After all, we must “protect the innocence of young children,” and “studies show that violent images [like a man tortured to death on
a cross] stay with us for a lifetime, and damage us.”

Next objection.

“There will be post-abortive women at the march.  Imagine their courage in being there at all.  Then imagine what it does to them to see, once again, the dark thing that keeps them from sleeping at night—the thing that often keeps them in decades-long cycles of self-loathing and despair.  We don’t ask victims of rape to look at videos of rape in progress.  We don’t ask holocaust victims to look at
huge banners showing the piles of emaciated bodies.  As pro-lifers, we must remember that every abortion has two victims:  the child and the
mother.  We must never be on the side that hurts mothers.  Never.”

No, we don’t ask rape victims to look at videos of rape. And we don’t ask holocaust victims to look at holocaust images. But then, raping a woman is not protected by the law, and killing a (born) Jewish person is likewise illegal.

Yet, imagine if this were not the case—something not particularly hard to do since in Germany it was once perfectly legal to starve and incinerate millions of Jews. If we were living in Nazi Germany and you obtained photos taken from inside Dachau and Auschwitz, would you not send the photographic evidence of what was happening to every newspaper in the modern world? And supposing the press refused to run the images, would you not blow the pictures up yourself, mount them on some hard backing, and stand with them in the public square to show as many people as possible what the Nazis were doing to innocent Jews?

Or, perhaps for the sake of painful memories you know the images would inflict upon Nazi concentration camp defectors, you would hide the
photos in a shoebox beneath your bed.

Yes, in every abortion there are two victims. But we must never forget that the primary victim is the baby, tortured to death against her will. If we mistake the mother as the primary victim, and build our campaign of social reform around the sensibilities of post-abortive women rather than slaughtered babies, abortion will not end. As Joe
Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League has said, “The truth hurts. But the lie hurts so much more.”

Objection #3 from the article:

“Mothers will be there.  Thousands of the women at the March are mothers—mothers who have already given birth, mothers who are pregnant as they march, and mothers who have miscarried, delivered dead babies.  For many of them, the grief over a miscarriage never goes away entirely.  Many women stay away from any public march for
fear of being subjected to these images so similar to the thing that caused them so much pain.  Motherhood makes a woman’s heart tender. The pro-life movement should be a shelter that protects that tenderness—because the world needs it desperately.”

Stephanie Gray, a professional, full-time pro-life activist and founder of the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform, answers this objection soundly in her piece published at LifeSiteNews.com titled,
“A March for the victims—that excludes the victims.” She writes:

“Any effective social reform movement realizes it does not conform its campaign to the participants, or the public, but rather challenges the participants and the public to conform their lives to truth and
justice.  It’s not a movement’s fault that some people refuse to be in the presence of victims.  The movement which stands for truth and justice must not be blamed for the cowardice of those who facilitate the cover up. Lovers of truth unite.  Lovers of comfort divide. Things eventually get uncomfortable, and if the idea of comfort reigns
supreme, lovers of comfort will leave when comfort does as well.  But the pro-life message isn’t about making born people comfortable.  It’s about enabling pre-born people to keep living.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/a-march-for-the-victims-that-excludes-the-victims

Ms. Fisher continues:

“Those are real babies.  Christians are almost alone in affirming the dignity of the human person.  Catholics, especially, understand that the human body is mortal, but still worthy of respect.  When we use pictures of real babies as a tactic or a tool, we are in danger of forgetting that these are children with an immortal soul, and who have
a name that only their Heavenly Father knows.  They have already been killed.  Let us treat their poor bodies with respect.”

Many images of atrocities are used without a victim’s permission because of the very circumstances surrounding his or her death. We
print all sorts of images of the dead in our Christian history textbooks. Many famous paintings depicting dead bodies hang on public display in our museums. Native Americans killed at the hands of European settlers. Civil war battlefields strewn with corpses. Blacks hung from trees by the KKK. Mass graves from the Jewish holocaust, and more.

In our Catholic churches we erect larger-than-life crucifixes, and sculpt statues of Catholic martyrs, still in the agony and throes of a torturous death.

Does Ms. Fisher propose all of these morbid depictions be likewise jettisoned, out of respect for the dead? Or may we continue to use them as an educational tool?

The greatest respect one can pay the dead is in preventing future deaths like theirs. In other words, showing the images, not hiding them, reveres their memory. It creates awareness of an injustice with
the expectation that there will be fewer victims in the future because society knows about the victims of the past.

As abortion images have proved to save lives, what greater respect could be granted to the victim than to allow their unjust death to play a role in saving the life of another innocent person?

Back to her article:

“Public image matters.  Some people’s only contact with obvious pro-lifers is with people who shout and condemn and terrify.  It’s just basic psychology:  if you want people to listen to you and have sympathy for your cause, don’t come across as a lunatic.  You’re not a lunatic—but to people who don’t already agree with you, you sure look that way.  Yes, your cause is worthy.  No, you’re not helping it.”

Straw man argument. Is this an article against obnoxious shouting and holier-than-thou condemning, or is it an article against using graphic
images?

Silently holding a picture of an aborted baby is not an act of lunacy. Rather, it reveals the lunacy of a society which would accept such an injustice, even condone it as a “constitutionally protected right.”

People always want to attack the messenger when confronted with a message they do not like. But we should not care what people think about us; we should care what they think about abortion. And nothing is so effective at convincing someone abortion kills children, and should therefore be illegal, as a photograph of it.

So long as we continue stating—rather than *proving*—the conclusions we want our society to make, we will be working in vain. It’s been 40 straight years of 1+ million abortions; 55 million whose deaths are protested largely with once-a-year marches, text-only signs, bumper stickers, lapel pins, and red roses. Those are all good
things. But is it any wonder we have made such little progress?

Father Pavone explained it this way:

“When you want people to act to reform deeply embedded trends in society, it is not enough simply to know that the trends are wrong. One must be profoundly disturbed so as to be stirred to action. One must perceive the difference between evil and absolute evil, between tolerable evil and intolerable evil. One must be made angry enough to be willing to sacrifice to end injustice—and in this sense, the very reason some say pictures don’t work because they make people mad are really hitting upon the reason why they do work.”
http://www.priestsforlife.org/articles/2815-the-use-of-graphic-images-re-thinking-pro-life-strategy

Simcha Fisher continues:

“They sometimes push women into abortion.  Do these images change hearts sometimes?  They sure do.  I’ve heard pro-life activists tell stories of women who saw these horrible images for the first time and decided on the spot that no way could they be any part of that.  They kept their babies.
And I’ve heard pro-life activists tell stories of women who were pregnant, scared, and undecided—and when they were confronted with
bloody images, they freaked out and rushed into the clinic as fast as they could, to get away from those maniacs with the signs. So, yes, sometimes they save lives.  And sometimes they cause lives to
be lost.  We don’t do things just because they work sometimes.”

I have never seen anyone look at an abortion picture and then decide—because of what they saw in the picture—to have an abortion. So
I do not for a moment accept the premise of this argument. (A woman might choose abortion *in spite* of seeing an ultrasound image of her healthy baby, or *in spite* of seeing an aborted baby. But you will have a hard time convincing me that she will choose abortion *as a result* of seeing an ultrasound or an image of an aborted baby.)

But let’s set rational conclusions aside and assume that it is true: Sometimes lives are saved when you hide the truth. Ms. Fisher’s conclusion is, “We don’t do things just because they work sometimes.”
Well, that conclusion works just as well in the reverse. We don’t do things [i.e., cover up abortion pictures] just because it works sometimes.

Point #7 from Ms. Fisher:

“Desensitization is a real danger—even among pro-lifers.  It’s just how humans are made:  see something too often, and you stop really seeing it.  I thank and bless those who work so tirelessly for the pro-life cause.  But I beg them to stop and consider that, like policemen or like soldiers, they are human, and are in danger of becoming hardened out of self-preservation. People who have become hardened must never be the public face of the pro-life cause.  If you, as a pro-life activist, see a bloody image and you don’t flinch, then it’s time to take a break—move into a different segment of the ministry, one that emphasizes prayer and reparation.”

Does this reasoning work anywhere else? I don’t flinch when I see a crucifix. Should it come off my wall? No doubt there are driving instructors who don’t flinch when they show drunk-driving accident
scenes. Should they stop including these pictures in their classes?

Final point:

“People see what they want to see.  When the apostles begged the Lord to send the dead to persuade people to repent, He said that if they
didn’t listen to the prophets, then they wouldn’t be impressed by the dead coming back to life, either.  Many pro-choicers speak as if everyone knows that pro-lifers use photoshopped images—that the
tiny, mutilated feet and hands and heads are a hoax that’s been thoroughly debunked.  It’s a lie, of course.  But people believe it all the same, because they want to (and pro-lifers don’t help their
cause by being sloppy about things like identifying gestational age on photos).”

So we shouldn’t show pictures of abortion because of those pro-aborts who live in a constant state of denial, and for whom no amount of evidence will persuade? Should we close down all Holocaust museums for the sake of Holocaust deniers? Exactly what sort of logic is this, and how did it get published in such a reputable Catholic newspaper?

There are a million reasons why we should not display graphic abortion photos in public, or at our marches. But they are all trumped by the one reason which Simcha Fisher began her piece with: They work.

The pictures galvanize the pro-life movement as a whole. They make abortion impossible to ignore or trivialize. They convert abortion doctors like Dr. Bernard Nathanson, and Planned Parenthood clinic
workers like Abby Johnson. They convince the undecided. They compel the indifferent. They convict the nominally pro-life into a life of activism, like Lila Rose, who at the age of 9 stumbled upon them:

“On the bottom shelf of a bookcase, I found something called the Handbook on abortion by Dr. and Mrs. J.C. Willke. Curious, I opened it. And there they were: pictures. In shock, I quickly shut the book and pushed it away. And then I opened it slowly and looked again. I was looking directly at the picture of a tiny child, maybe ten weeks old, with tiny arms and legs, who had been the victim of an abortion. Right then I knew it was ugly and wrong. But over the next decade I grew in my understanding of the gravity and urgency of this holocaust of unborn children, of our duty to protect them, and of my desire to help. When I was thirteen I wrote in my journal, “God, it’s time I
actually do something about abortion.””
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/09/fighting-for-life

How many more Abby Johnsons and Dr. Nathansons would we have today if pro-lifers would hold up abortion pictures during their prayer
protests at Planned Parenthood clinics?

How many more Lila Roses would we have today if pro-lifers would hold up abortion pictures during our rallies and marches?

Ms. Fisher’s conclusion:

“I believe that everyone should see an image of an aborted baby once in their lifetime.  And I believe that, like any traumatic image, it will stay with you.  Once or twice in a lifetime is enough.”

And how, pray tell, is everyone in America supposed to see an image of an aborted baby if pro-lifers must never display them in public?
Injustices which are covered up have no hope of ending.

3,500 more babies will be tortured to death today. That’s another September 11th every single day in America. Except Osama bin Laden isn’t killing our children, we are.

Planned Parenthood cannot believe it’s good fortune in a pro-life movement which would actively work with them in covering up the evidence that abortion is an act of violence against a baby. Until the pro-life movement studies the history of effective social reform—from the abolition of slavery to the modern anti-war movements—we
will never win this battle.

At the height of the slave trade, English abolitionist William Wilberforce would aquire and then make public displays of the various torture instruments being used on slaves. And he would say to those
passing by, “You may choose to look the other way, but you may never again say that you did not know.”

Baby killing will continue until people are bothered enough by abortion to do something about it. And nothing bothers them like a picture of a mutilated child.

Dr. Martin Luther King was exactly right:

“Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.”

I have young children, they go picketing with my husband and I they know the babies on the sign died because of a terrible sin. They know they are safe themselves but they do feel bad for the poor little baby. I feel bad that they have to see this, i would prefer that we lived in a perfect world where every child was loved. They pray for the babies they know we are doing everything we can to stop abortion.
CHILDREN CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH! Don’t hide behind your kids.

There is nobody else but Christ on that cross. Not nameless, faceless children by the pile.  Even so, Christians take that image for granted *every day*.
.
As someone who was shaped and changed by graphic images I implore people to conside the cost to children who view these things by accident without the development necessary. Those who believe that above all, no matter what parents say, “children need “the truth” have already turned those murdered children into an intellectual abstraction. You are willing to use them for an idea. Put your own body, your own life on that poster, not the borrowed precious body of a child you do not even know.  You don’t own the rights to their martyred bodies, to their images, either.  They are not your tools, not even tools for a good cause.

I have brought the pictures down to the march (along with my 6 children) and down to clinics (with those children).  I have seen the pictures save lives (at the clinics) and change peoples’s minds elsewhere.  We bring them to the march, not with the goal of preaching to the choir about abortion, but with the goal of convincing more people to use the pictures.  Too many pro-life people avoid using the pictures at all costs and miss opportunities to convince others of the horrors of abortion.  One woman I know used to support pro-abortion organizations, saw one 8-month (aborted) baby and changed her mind.  I’ve never seen a “bad” reaction from little children from our photos, but I have seen scores of bad reactions from adults.  My 11-year-old decided she could not give the ugly pictures out to adults unless she looked closely at them first.  We said OK.  She cried even though she had seen them for YEARS.  I apologized for hurting her.  She said, “No, it will make me work harder.”  Abortion is just a word to too many.  The pictures make it real.  Love isn’t hiding the truth when it will make a positive difference.  Parents can tell their kids to look away if they choose.  This fight is about life and death, not being pleasant.  Peace, Bob

Further more-
How was this a productive article? How does it further the prolife movement to have nitpicking going on between us?
The ” hard nosed, crazies” (us) don’t go around telling the “pray-it-away-hurrays” (you) to stop being paper tigers and get out on the sidewalk.
We know, as Saint Paul says that everyone has a part in the body of Christ.
HOW ABOUT A LITTLE COMPASSION FOR THE CRAZIES?!!!!!

I had written a long response to this article which was simply becoming far too long and verbose. So i erased it. No one would have read the whole thing. Suffice it to say I disagree with your article and even think it a shame that it is posted on a catholic website which implies an endorsement of this view.

The reason why the fight for life is so hard is because it is not seen in the public sphere. All the victims of the other civil rights movements were seen in the public sphere, and on a daily basis too. We have a march for life once a year. Thats it. 1/365 days. That is not going to cut it. We have to bring abortion to the public sphere because otherwise it is not seen or heard. The media ignores it. The pro-choice side is happy to let us have our one day of the year where we publicly protest and get ignored by the media. That will never do anything. High schools and colleges are probably the two most important places for people to see these images. This is where public opinion is being formed in our country among the youth, those who will be first and second time voters. These images should have a place in forming public opinion about abortion.

Jan. 23..I could not get through all of Tom Herrings’ pompous article…why does he feel he has to criticize a woman who states her opinion which many others share?  And he then has to make snide remarks about what kind of a Church she goes to?  Many have been turned off by those images feeling that those innocent babies were being exploited…some few may have been converted to the pro life cause but many more were drawn to the defense of life who have never seen those images…they were drawn by the kindness and compassion of those who stood in witness to life…Herring’s self serving diatrabe against Simcha would convert no one…he sounds like an angry, righteous individual who thinks sarcasm and attacking someone who disagrees with him makes him important, and his rambling on and on and on and on convinces no one of his sincerity or his compassion…I volunteer in a pregnancy resource center and believe me, we would never accept someone like Herring as a volunteer…he would turn people off with his self righteous attitude…you serve only yourself sir…Simcha said what many others feel…she did not attack anyone, she was not sarcastic or self righteous…she simply wrote about how she felt…if people differ, that’s their right…but do so without being so pompous and self righteous…shame on you Herring…shame!  I’ve been with groups praying in silent witness in front of abortion facilities where we had someone like Herring show up and aggressively confront women going in for an abortion…they shamed us all and frightened the women who might have chosen to let their babies live if he had not been so confrontational and arrogant. He was finally asked to leave…Simcha, write what is in your heart…I don’t doubt that there have been some who have come to a realization of the horror of abortion after seeing photos that Herring promotes, but I do not believe there are many - many more have been turned from anti-life to pro-life by the kindness and compassion of pro life workers, many after having seen the unborn in a sonogram…many who we have shown DVDs of unborn babies in the womb…the gruesome pictures do depict the absolute horror of abortion, but they are not for everyone so Herring, you do things your way but don’t insist that everyone do the same…you showed no respect for what Simcha wrote…your way or no way…sorry, that’s not Christ’s way…

I am moved by so many parents talking of their children who care so much for unborn babies.  Today my children, my husband and I carried my mother-in-law by car to be cremated. The children all came, they made cards to put in the box, they walked next to the cart as we wheeled it to the front of the cremation machine. One (11 yo) stayed in the care except to get out, touch the box and say, “goodbye.”  One (6 yo) had to be pulled away from his curios stance in front.  The 8 yo accompanied his father on all the trips: hospital morgue, offices for paperwork, and indeed to help place her casket onto the machine and watch as it went in.

All children are different.  Some might say they are appalled I would let my kids do such a thing; that we would talk to them of cremation at all, particularly the younger three. I might feel offended by that.  But I would never say children should be forced to do that; that they should see the “truth” of bodies’ decay, of the funeral pyre, of death.  I know my children were fine with it, at their own level of participation. I can talk to them about it.  I can even show them those images (we talk about abortion)and be there for the aftermath. 

**NOT ALL CHILDREN HAVE PARENTS LIKE YOU** You, the committed prolifers who care about them. The parents of those random passing children might be indifferent, ignorant, or hostile.  And yes, our sins and our guilty consciences often drive us to sin harder, to sprint for that abortion clinic door as it were.  It can certainly drive parents to compound the confusion and terror of seeing dismembered and bloody children, with their own stupidity, anger or malice.

The Ends Don’t Justify The Means.

John O’Neil, I understand your point but the thing is we do not have just the one day a year…we are constantly,constantly out there during the year witnessing to life, either through volunteer work at pregnancy resort centers, writing to our pastors and political leaders, writing to our local newspapers, speaking at meetings, praying all through the year in front of abortion facilities…we speak to young people, we show them videos of the development of the baby in the womb, we show them the DVD ‘Blood Money’ which exposes Planned Parenthood for the evil enterprise it is, we have gotten Priests to speak more from the pulpit…we have local ‘marches for life’...we have shown films of twins in the womb interacting with each other and this really touches the hearts of those who see them, we show videos of the unborn baby at late stages of development and explain what the abortionist does in ‘late term abortion’ and they are horrified and saddened and determined to fight to stop this grotesque evil…and on and on and on…it’s not easy but we will not give up until the killing ends!

Disagree wholeheartedly, this argument is obviously only advanced by those who don’t use the images. The only reason they are used is because they are true and they save lives. Stop making excuses as to why we must perpetuate hiding the simple reality that abortion kills people!

Tom Herring, you are my hero.

“I could not get through all of Tom Herrings’ pompous article…why does he feel he has to criticize a woman who states her opinion which many others share?”

It doesn’t matter how many people share Ms. Fisher’s opinion. It doesn’t matter how many people share my opinion. Only the facts matter.

“And he then has to make snide remarks about what kind of a Church she goes to?”

I’m shining a light on the logical disconnect of a Christian who kneels in prayer before the disturbing image of a man brutally beaten and pinned to a cross, but then demands disturbing images of aborted babies be banned.

“Many have been turned off by those images feeling that those innocent babies were being exploited…”

Turned off of what? The pictures turn people off of abortion. They certainly don’t turn them on to abortion.

“Herring’s self serving diatrabe against Simcha would convert no one…”

Self-serving? What have I to gain by spending so much time giving answers to each of Simcha’s arguments?

“he sounds like an angry, righteous individual who thinks sarcasm and attacking someone who disagrees with him makes him important”

What’s with all the interwebs-psycho-analysis? What do you say we drop the name-calling and just respond to my points?

“and his rambling on and on and on and on convinces no one of his sincerity or his compassion…”

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

“Simcha said what many others feel…”

That’s fine. But how do her points stand up under scrutiny?

“she simply wrote about how she felt…if people differ, that’s their right…but do so without being so pompous and self righteous…shame on you Herring…shame!”

More protesting…How about responding to my points?

“Simcha, write what is in your heart…”

...but don’t let anyone challenge your logic?

“…the gruesome pictures do depict the absolute horror of abortion, but they are not for everyone”

I don’t expect every pro-lifer to hold a graphic image of abortion. I do expect every pro-lifer to study the history of social reform, to take an honest look at the facts and the arguments, and to realize that no injustice was ever ended by covering it up.

“so Herring, you do things your way but don’t insist that everyone do the same…”

Oops. Typo. I think you meant to direct that at Ms. Fisher, who is insisting that everyone do things her way.

Again, I’m not asking every pro-lifer to hold a picture of an aborted baby. I’m asking every pro-lifer to recognize that those of us who are holding graphic images are carrying out the necessary task of exposing injustice so as to end the injustice.

“you showed no respect for what Simcha wrote…your way or no way…sorry, that’s not Christ’s way…”

I have no respect for the failed theory that we can end abortion if only we’d hide the evidence that abortion is an act of violence which kills babies. Too many babies’ lives are on the line for us to be respectful of illogical and failed attempts to reform our culture.

40 years and counting, florin. What do you say? Should we go another 40 down this road?

@Begger, lol! Thanks. Balanced against florin’s opinion, I guess I’m an average dude. ;)

I agree with Simcha.  Graphic images of slaughtered children serve no purpose at the March For Life.  The point is to gather in amazing numbers to get the attention of the world and the government .  It is not a demonstration to educate the public about principals, but to demonstrate how strong our numbers are, and the great solidarity of this movement.  Through our actions and our attendance we should be demonstrating our commitment to the sanctity and dignity of life.  Using imagery unfit for children and creating an atmosphere unwelcome to ALL families detracts from the message and cause.  If through prayer you feel called to carry such imagery, you must do what you feel called to do.

“It is not a demonstration to educate the public about principals, but to demonstrate how strong our numbers are, and the great solidarity of this movement.” -JCD

If you’re ever wondering why for 40 years pro-lifers have wandered in the desert streets of D.C., and why this American holocaust is 10 times worse than Hitler’s, look no further.

Our numbers and our solidarity offer little comfort to a 10-week old baby whose body is being dismembered.

Abortion is a terrible crime but it is not wise to compare it to the Jewish Holocaust. In some places of Eastern Europe an entire culture was wiped out. Citis in Poland with tens of thousands of Jews before the war had only tens of Jews after the war. Entire large extended families were exterminated. Jews, and others, were hunted down and killed. To help a Jew or condemned person could mean death.

My oldest son’s pro-choice friends change their opinion about abortion because they saw pictures. Their response was: “I did not think it was THAT bad”.

The impact of the displaying graphic the images works.

@Tom Herring: thank you for your excellent answer to Simcha Fisher. If you will allow me, I’ll use some of your arguments in confronting those pro-lifers who believe the battle for the unborns’right to life could be won with a Planned Parenthood-like attitude towards abortion: it is about feelings and ignoring the reality of the in utero infanticide.

Let’s remember Pope St. Pius V: “All the evil in the world is due to lukewarm Catholics.”

Last evening I’ve heard on radio Father Frank Pavone explaining that we are not fighting for the victory, but we are fighting from Jesus’ Victory of the Cross. AMEN!

Well said, Simcha. I think your article was excellent.

@Ana Daniela, by all means feel free. I’m only sharing what I have learned from Gregg Cunningham, a great pro-life leader.

“Abortion is a terrible crime but it is not wise to compare it to the Jewish Holocaust.” -Ann

Ann, there are many similarities between abortion and the holocaust. For instance, both atrocities required a campaign of dehumanizing the victims. But there are differences too. For instance, the Jewish Holocaust wiped out about 6 million Jews, whereas we kill more than that many babies every 5 years in America alone. Worldwide, roughly 40 million babies are tortured to death annually, or about 1,300 million since 1980.

So if it is not wise to compare abortion with the Holocaust, that is only because the magnitude of abortion is far, far greater than the Jewish Holocaust.

“I do not believe Jesus Christ would condone these graphic images…” -Deb Brunsberg

Would Jesus use a bloody image to make his point? He already did.

http://www.fletcherarmstrongblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Jesus_A-red.jpg

Perhaps I am an outlier, but….I was pro-life until I watched a graphic anti-abortion film with my religious ed class, and it forced me to realize that I wasn’t really pro-life, and therefore I had better stop calling myself that.
  The horrible photos, shoved in front of my naive 15-year old face (I was, at the time, a virgin who had never even kissed a boy), showed me for the very first time what is really killed in an abortion, and my thinking was this:
1) Abortions are horrible and gross, and I don`t ever want to have one.
2) Horrible and gross as abortions are, I believe I would have one, if I were raped or my life were in danger.
  Everyone told me at the time, “You’ll change your mind someday when you have children of your own,” but in fact, the experience of my pregnancies (3 carried to term, one not) convinced me even more that I was not pro-life. I did a 180-degree turn, and graphic images were the catalyst. It does happen!

“Perhaps I am an outlier…”

Yeah, you could say that.

I don’t see anything of God’s love, mercy or compassion in the images or in those who would use them to further their cause. God is in control of all things, not us. God can put a stop to abortion in a blink of an eye. Instead, he wants us to use what he gave us to bring an end to this evil. I will never believe that he wants the images of these broken bodies, these lives that never came into being, that are due a burial and respect, to be used to make our point, especially when we have the ability to use the beautiful pictures of children in the womb to do that very same thing. Evil is evil, regardless of what ones end goal is. May God have mercy on us all.

After reading all the responses in support of the author’s position I am more in favor of using the images than before. I really wonder how many of us really view abortion as the murdet it is?

For all the people on the “we need graphic images to show people the truth” side of the debate: calm down. Simcha is NOT, repeat, NOT, saying to never use these images. She’s saying that there is a TIME and PLACE to use these images, just not at the March for Life.

The commenter who slandered her faith and claimed that anyone who agreed with her “might as well be paying for an abortion” was way out of line. That comment makes me wonder if SOME (not all) of the people pushing the hardest for using these images aren’t motivated more by pride, anger, or a desire to hurt or take revenge on people whose point of view offends them, than by genuine compassion for the unborn.

For what it’s worth: My husband and I are both pro-life but he will not participate in public pro-life marches and he doesn’t approve of me doing it either. The reason being that before he knew me, he dated a woman who got pregnant and insisted on having an abortion against his wishes. That experience really traumatized him. When we first met we went to a pro-life march together and HE was so disturbed by the graphic sign waving, etc. that he decided he never wanted to participate again. He’s a military veteran, by the way, who has been in a situation where he saw people die in a rather gruesome manner and I suspect PTSD might have something to do with it.

So again, neither I nor Simcha is saying NEVER to use graphic pictures, we are saying think carefully before you do and realize that not every venue is appropriate. 

Jan. 24, I agree with Mr. Herring that abortion can and should be compared to the Holocaust and, in comparison, it is far worse. Ann you say that entire cultures were wiped out during the holocaust but abortion has exterminated generations of human babies of all cultures, races and creeds and, during the Holocaust, it was Hitler who ordered the extermination, in the case of abortion, the babies own mothers order their extermination. “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”  We may disagree on how to stand and witness to the sanctity of all life, but no crime from the beginning of time until now can compare to the horror of the mass and ongoing slaughter of innocent babies.  I worked with Mother Tersea in Calcutta and she used to say that the root cause of all the violence in our societies is abortion, the slaughter of innocent human babies created by God in His image and then she would add: “If we would kill the baby in the womb, what would we not do?”  And we see that this killing mentality, this utter disdain for human life, is spreading and permeating our society.  But pro-lifers stand on the ramparts and watch and go forth at every opportunity to defend, not only the baby in the womb, but the mothers whose lives are destroyed when they realize what they have done. So let’s work together, each under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and honor those who at least are trying to stop the killing of these babies who come from God with a gift and a blessing for all mankind and who are rejected and sent back to Him broken and unwanted.  We have deprived ourselves of so much!  And we have deprived these little ones from ever knowing life and love…

L. says she might be an ‘outlier’ and Tom Herring says ‘yeah you could say that.’ so Tom, that is how Christ would respond?  L, you are dear to God whatever choices you have made. I honestly don’t understand how those pictures could have turned you from being pro-life - they may have frightened you or repulsed you but if you had really understood what it means to stand for the life of a human baby, to defend and protect that life no matter the cost then I think you would have moved more deeply into the defense of life movement.  I pray that you will understand because I believe you want to.  Remember, it is God Himself who creates us and who breathes His life into us and it is Jesus who tells us that whatever we do for or to His little ones, we do to Him…and for Him.

The Jewish Holocaust,abortion,& genocide over the course of history all have things in common.I think it’s enough to note the common denominators without trying to decide which is/was worse.Every life lost is precious.

You know, I usually find just about everything that you write to be snarky, seething, insensitive, politically myopic and contradictory, flagrantly void of critical thought, blatantly biased to the degree of dodging facts so fast it would make St Thomas Aquinas spin in his grave, preachy in an unhelpful way, with a willful neglect of the many harmonious junctures between credible peer-reviewed science and Catholic theology, in favor of watered down and long questionable arguments and tired pseudo-facts. 

However, this was admittedly quite good. You were sensitive, measured, factual, and rational. Well done.

This will be my fourth comment on this post. I guess I feel very strongly about it.

You know, I have always considered people who stand in public venues with those images to be committed pro-lifers. I would never question that; I do question the reasoning behind it.  I think it is well-intentioned, but incorrect, moral reasoning.
.
Inevitably though, I am surprised by how angrily the practice is defended by a few people on here: with attacks on the commitment of others. Some are content to exchange points of view, but just like the rest of the crappy internet culture I see bullying of those who disagree. That is a clue that some of those who are posting in support of the images is not rational,maybe it is more about being defensive that anyone could question their prolife tactics.
.
I understand that, because it makes me angry when someone questions my parenting by insinuating I am not doing a good job because I don’t think all children, everywhere and at any time can be forced to look at them.  Or that I, as an objector to the indiscriminate use of those images, am not a committed prolifer or do not think abortion is actually a violent act against an innocent person (yes, that is murder). 
.
I guess what I would like for those who are posting about other Simcha’s, and others’ prolife cred and their Catholicism and whatever is that they actually read the arguments against using those images publicly in an indiscriminate manner. Respond to those, if you can. Even the long-winded (Red) Herring above tried to do that, even if his responses were so buried that nobody could possibly find them to dig out their weaknesses.

Mr./ Herring, what say you to the argument made here by Simcha and others that we NOT hide the truth of abortion that is shown by those images, but instead use them prudently and with charity when dealing with others?

And how do you answer the objection that those are *real* children with personhood who have been treated as nothing but nameless tissue, and we don’t have the right to wave pictures of their dismembered bodies around as if they are nothing but a moving picture?

I think Simcha needs to speak with Father Pavone and Joe Scheidler, founder of the Pro Life Action League, the grandfather of the pro-life movement.  These two heroes have been on the front lines at abortion clinics for decades, and they well understand the power of graphic images.

I agree with someone above who said, “Would Jesus use a bloody image to make His point? He already did.”

At the D.C. March for Life a couple years ago, a huge group of teenagers in the march were strolling along, chatting and laughing (after all, the March is a big social event for lots of young folks, unfortunately), until they turned the corner and were faced with huge posters of images of aborted children, upon which they all fell silent, seeing, probably for the first time, exactly what abortion is, exactly what it is they are marching for.

Who do you all think wants desperately to hide the graphic truth of abortion, to keep it under wraps, enshrouded in darkness?  Planned Parenthood, a.k.a. Satan.

Ann on Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 4:20: “Abortion is a terrible crime but it is not wise to compare it to the Jewish Holocaust. In some places of Eastern Europe an entire culture was wiped out.”
FWIW some 40 years ag a secular writer on abortion, from a sociological POV, noted that in Japan parents were using technology to abort female fetuses who would be born during a particular year in their animal zodiac. This was because ‘girls born at this time grow up to be bad-tempered and thus hard to marry off’. (Year of Horse, I think.)
The reason for killing doesn’t affect the wrongness of killing, if we consider that we have no right to undo God’s work: Rev 4:11. “You are worthy, O Lord our God, to receive glory and honour and power. Because you have created all things: and for your will they were and have been created.”

Folks, it was once true that the main argument of the pro-choice movement was “A fetus isn’t human; therefore you can kill it.”  This is no longer their argument.  Here is a point of view that people are less and less shy about expressing: 

.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/

.

This article went up yesterday.  The author says,

“I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life. And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.

[...]

[A] fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.”

Do you see?  Science is accessible to everyone today.  Hardly anyone tries to say “It’s just a clump of cells” anymore, because the ultrasounds are all over—it’s clearly a baby, and everyone knows it.  People understand that these babies are human.  They just don’t care. 

““Would Jesus use a bloody image to make His point? He already did.”
That was Jesus’ choice to make.  He gave himself completely, even His image to be used on crucifixes for human history. He did it once and forever, Amen.

Those children aren’t making that choice. None of them is Our Savior. Not even their loved ones have chosen to use the image (like that of Emmet Till, for example), because they were tossed out like nothing, nameless and treated as waste.

I think we have to be very, very careful that we do not perpetuate the objectification and commodification of those children.

Simcha, I agree that this what you posted is a new and rising voice in the pro-choice roar. Older prolifers do not realize that the younger generations are not as shockable as people used to be.  Their life of consuming images, both violence- and porn-related, is almost unfathomable to the over-forty crowd. SHOCK is not as possible on a mass scale.  Very few people have the innocence needed for shocking.  Guess who are the main people we can shock?  Children.  Many of them without the safety nets necessary to help them process the information.  The rest of the world only becomes further jaded.  .
I think teens are the most likely candidates for those images to matter. But they can be reached without taking the rest of society as collateral damage.
The Ends Do Not Justify The Means.

I just hope during tomorrows events, regardless of what signboard you carry, that noone gets gored.  Although certainly welcome and surely to be respected, I also now wonder if a Demonstration/March/Rally is an appropriate place for kids of a certain age?  Certainly, in their regard, other than just graphic signboards, there must be other concerns for their safety and well being?

I was fuzzy pro-choice until I saw one of those images in the late Eighties. It turned me 180 degrees. I have been fervently pro-life ever since. Still, you make some good points, especially that, used over and over, they can desensitize us to the reality.

The pics make people uncomfortable. Just see all the complainers who have posted so far. Keep using the pics . They work. All the forces against them are proof they work.

Tom Herring is dead-on, and I’m absolutely amazed that Simcha is taking the path of “everybody be nice, now.” Everybody “being nice” is why babies are being killed. The apostles weren’t “nice” when told to stop preaching Christ, and Jesus isn’t going to hold us accountable for “how nicely we spread the Gospel.” He’s going to hold us accountable for “when I was being slaughtered in the womb, you thought the reality was too graphic and nasty to show, so you allowed it to be sanitized and made ‘nice’...and it didn’t stop the murderers.”

We can stop the insanity, or we can bend over backwards trying to be mistakenly “compassionate” about it and let the abortion supporters walk all over us into the clinics and keep up the killing. Seems like a clear choice to me, and I am continually baffled by the “Gospel according to ‘feelings’” that I see around me in Catholicism. Get some backbone, people. This is a war. Let’s act like it.

“Although certainly welcome and surely to be respected, I also now wonder if a Demonstration/March/Rally is an appropriate place for kids… there must be other concerns for their safety and well being?”

Indeed there are concerns for their safety and well being.  I worry about safety every time I’ve let one of my children, now teens, go on the MFL.  That doesn’t stop me from letting them go… I am reminded of 1 Sam 1:28 “Therefore I also have lent him to the Lord all the days of his life, he shall be lent to the Lord. And they adored the Lord there. And Anna prayed…”

Totally disagree with this entire article. First, as another pro-lifer said, we have 55 million DEAD CHILDREN. If that doesn’t merit a “last resort” what on earth does???? Secondly, hogwash about the children seeing the photos and being unduly traumatized. I saw a photo of an aborted baby as an 8 year old and ran to my mother who comforted me. The photo had been in a conservative magazine I was flipping through. I didn’t “ask” to see it but see it I did and years later when I had an unplanned pregnancy I never ONCE considered abortion though I probably had a million reasons to do so. That photo made me pro-life and so my son is here today! Graphic photos work. You know who doesn’t want us to use them the most? Abortionists. If you’re agreeing with abortionists or writing articles that make pro-“choice” folks applaud you’re probably in the wrong.

Jan. 24th. to those who have harsh words or attitudes towards women who have had abortions, here is what Pope John Paul said to these women: “I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. To the same Father and his mercy you can with sure hope entrust your child. With the friendly and expert help and advice of other people, and as a result of your own painful experience, you can be among the most eloquent defenders of everyone’s right to life. Through your commitment to life, whether by accepting the birth of other children or by welcoming and caring for those most in need of someone to be close to them, you will become promoters of a new way of looking at human life.”

Herring, please show where Simcha is INSISTING that everyone does things her way.  Simcha is not doing this but you are.  Everyone approaches an issue in a different way; Simcha gently expressed her views and you have been writing on and on and on and on about your way…while criticizing her. If you don’t like her columns, then please create your own website where you can pontificate as much as you want…

Sarah,
I used to take my children to the Right-to-Life Marches & they saw some of the graphic photos of dead babies.The pro-abortion protestors were more frightening really because they were so hostile & were screaming at us.I think I was more worried about that.
I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know ultra-sound photos have made a huge difference in how we understand the developing child & they reveal his or her humanity.But as Simcha says, even accepting that an unborn child is fully human doesn’t keep some people from supporting abortion.Trafficked women are undoubtedly human but that knowledge doesn’t stop the abuse.
God bless you for choosing life for your child.

Jan. 24th: Here is something Pope Benedict said regarding communication in the digital forum: “The social media thus need the commitment of all who are conscious of the value of dialogue, reasoned debate and logical argumentation; of people who strive to cultivate forms of discourse and expression which appeal to the noblest aspirations of those engaged in the communication process. Dialogue and debate can also flourish and grow when we converse with and take seriously people whose ideas are different from our own.”

When I was a child, we had one television which was mostly kept under lock and key in my parents’ room.  I used to sneak in there in the afternoons when the door was open and watch PBS, because we only had one channel.  My Mom knew what I was doing, and would sort of look the other way, or ask me if I had finished my homework.  I still feel guilty for fibbing a couple of times!  One day, after the kiddie show I was watching finished, a very graphic show on starving children in Africa came on.  I had never seen such a thing in my life.  I remember feeling utterly devastated.  That’s when I had the most profound experience of God; probably the most profound I have ever had.  He impressed upon me that I, (a little kid!)shared in the responsibility for those poor people.  Also, that my life would be judged in the measure that I loved my neighbor.  I begged him not to let me waste my life.  I still do.  I’ve pushed that experience into the corners of my memories countless times, but will never forget it.

Wow. Those who truly believe that Jesus Christ approves of flashing photos of murdered babies in front of children, postabortive women and men, need to go and reread the Gospels of Our Lord. You will get the same mercy from out Lord that you give to others. This isn’t about emotion. This is about compassion and mercy and love. Yes, Jesus wants us to fight this evil war against abortion, but when marching on Washington, you are marching with the choir already. Your solidarity and numbers are the point. Graphic photos have no place there. That is the point of this article. Spend some time with Jesus in the Eucharist and ask him what he would have you do.

Could any of these comments be used on a thread about Christian adults killing Christian adults in war? Or am I being naive about the meaning of “pro-life”?

Deb,

Showing the truth is not immoral or contrary to the Gospel.

Re abortion and the Holocaust in Europe, sure there are similarities. There have been more abortions than Jews killed in the Holocaust. Likewise, there have probably been way more chemical abortions than surgical ones too but that was not related to this article. If you are just going by numbers though, surgical abortions probably take a back seat to chemical ones.
Though the Holocaust and abortion may have some things in common, they don’t compare well in many ways. As I said earlier, the Holocaust wiped out whole towns and a culture.
Both abortion and genocide are terrible but would anyone trade the culture you are in now for Poland in 1940?

Simcha, Showing your lest charitable side. You have all the answers.

I was involved in a campaign last summer in Maryland where we displayed graphic abortion images at busy intersections. A pregnant woman stopped her car and came up to me looking very distraught and asked me about the sign I was holding. She asked me how old the baby was. I said maybe 24 weeks. She said “I’m not that far along.” I told her that the woman over there has a second trimester image. She went over and talked to her for 20 minutes. Then I saw her walking back to her car with tears in her eyes. I asked her if the woman helped her. She said “Yes, she gave me the number to the Gabriel Project.” GRAPHIC IMAGES WORK.

Pam, please explain exactly how Simcha is showing her least charitable side - that she has all the answers.  If you don’t agree with her, fine…but don’t claim she is uncharitable because she has a view point different than yours.

Check out my response at FletcherArmstrongBlog.com.  It will appear Friday morning.

“Herring, please show where Simcha is INSISTING that everyone does things her way.” -florin

Sure:

“are you planning to display graphic photos or videos of aborted babies? If you are, I’m begging you to reconsider.” -Simcha

“a public place is not the place to use these images—ever, I’m convinced.” -Simcha

“Folks, it was once true that the main argument of the pro-choice movement was “A fetus isn’t human; therefore you can kill it.” This is no longer their argument. Here is a point of view that people are less and less shy about expressing..” -Simcha

It is true that with ever-improving ultrasound technology it is becoming increasingly difficult to argue the unborn child is not human.

“Do you see? Science is accessible to everyone today. Hardly anyone tries to say “It’s just a clump of cells” anymore…” -Simcha

Well, ‘hardly anyone’ is a bit of a stretch. It’s still a fairly common talking point.

“People understand that these babies are human. They just don’t care.” -Simcha

All the more reason to admit images of healthy babies growing in utero will not be sufficient to convince the public abortion is evil. Ultrasound pictures convey the humanity of the unborn child. Abortion pictures convey the inhumanity of abortion.

Show a pro-abort an ultrasound image: as you point out, they won’t care. Show a pro-abort an aborted baby image: 98% of them will care. A lot.

It is a shame our society cannot make the connection with pictures of living babies. But it is a reality pro-lifers need to acknowlege, or we’ll still be marching in D.C. 40 years from now.

You do not convey the horror of the Jewish Holocaust with pictures of smiling, happy Jews. And you do not convey the horror of abortion with pictures of healthy babies.

Fletcher, please post it here as most people will not visit your blog (sadly).

“Well, hardly anyone is a bit of a stretch”...really Herring…do you go through Simcha’s post just to try to show you are smarter or more compassionate or what? and then make sure Fletcher posts it so others will see your ‘brilliance’ - I’m sorry, I don’t mean to judge you but what comes through to me is incredible arrogance, someone who exploits unborn babies and the pro-life cause to, basically, show-off…get your own website if you are so brilliant…and stop mico-analyzing Simcha’s article…she wrote what she believed - simple as that.

@Tom Herring YES, Gregg Cunningham is a great pro-life leader in this hard battle to save unborn lives. Congratulations for you action in Washington: your displays will inspire me for the March I help to be organized in my city. An illustration for this thoughts:“Abortion is a great battlefield of this war and if there is anything accomplished at all in the annual March for Life it is that the dead are honored, they are remembered.
Hundreds of thousands come to lend credence to the millions that their lives did in fact
matter.” (Michael Voris- Vortex 24th Jan. 2013) A real balsam to my survivors’ heart! Thank you!

@Florin

For you another Voris quotation from yesterday:

“56 million:  more than all the war dead from Europe and the Pacific in World War II.
And evil is never satisfied. It always wants more – more dead, more misery, more
suffering.
And here – so many of us sit – watching, talking, debating, sucking the life out of the
fight by the constant in-fighting and back-biting. Always adding poison to the good.
Where is the resolve among the faithful that evil brings to the battle?”

Thank you for your post.  I agree wholeheartedly.

I noticed some comments about how many children have to die before these images are the last resort.  Statistically, a very very small percentage of the population is converted to pro-life thinking by seeing graphic images. 

In the long run, these images do more harm than good.  Having worked with many post-abortive women,they see prolifers as the enemy, people to be feared.  People who will stone and condemn them.  Is this the message we want to send?  I hope not.

I WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT THE IMAGES OF THE THRONGS OF PRO-LIFERS AT THE MARCH FOR LIFE, WHICH SEEM TO GROW LARGER EVERY YEAR, WOULD CAUSE MORE PEOPLE TO REFLECT ON THEIR OWN UNDERSTANDING OF ABORTION, AND BE CONVERTED TO WARRIORS FOR LIFE!

Good grief, look at the score board!!!!  40 YEARS!! 55 Million lives lost!!! Obama just re-elected!! And you still want to use kid gloves?! You still want to use the same ineffective tactics?!  One abortion every 26 seconds isn’t enough to make you want to take stronger measures?  If you had had photographic evidence of the Holocaust, would you not have shown it in the public square in Nazi Germany because kids or Nazis might see it?!  Get some perspective, please. If you were my lawyer, I’d fire you for withholding the best evidence for my case.  The American public is our jury, is it not? We are in a battle for public opinion, are we not?  I decided to work full-time for the Pro-life movement because I saw the photos and videos - not because I’m Catholic, not because my family is Pro-life.  Covering up an injustice is a LOUSY way to inspire people to fight against it.  Make up and smell the coffee. Study reform history. Look up Emmit Till and what Rosa Parks said about him.

Oy, I’m hardly ever this abrasive, but I’ve so had it with Christians and other Pro-lifers trying to use a teaspoon to excavate a mountain of injustice, and then encouraging others to leave their bull dozers in the garage.  Is this a matter of life and death or not!  Stop getting sucked into “don’t ruffle any feathers” modern mindset.

Okay, I’m done.

“I did a workshop for Heartbeat International’s conference this past March, where we reported the overwhelming success we have showing Hard Truth and Choice Blues [abortion videos] at our pregnancy center.  Of the almost 300 hard saves we had at LAPS, 90% of the women interviewed mentioned “the video” as the most important thing that helped them change their mind about having an abortion.  Our workshop was entitled Effectively Counseling Latinos to choose Life and we had about 40 pregnancy center directors in attendance. It was also recorded. We hope that the pregnancy center movement becomes more open-minded or at least looks at the facts honestly regarding graphic images.[….] You [Center for Bio-Ethical Reform] are doing the most effective work.God bless you!Astrid Bennett-Gutierrez”
[Director of Los Angeles Pregnancy Services]

“..really Herring…do you go through Simcha’s post just to try to show you are smarter or more compassionate or what?” -florin

Well, clearly it’s not to show I’m more compassionate. You can vouch for that, right, florin? ;)

Like I said in a previous post, this has nothing to do with Simcha, and it has nothing to do with me. It’s has everything to do with facts. And, in this particular example, it is simply not a fact that ‘hardly anyone uses the clump of cells argument anymore’.

It’s used quite often—although, when you hold up a picture of a babies’ arm which has been torn off its body, you generally don’t hear the clump of cells argument. In fact, there is little left to argue about at that point, and all you typically get from pro-aborts are a string of explitives, maybe even some spittle sent your direction.

Which is good, of course. It means they’ve lost the argument, and are so bothered by what they see that they lash out against the messenger. People always want to attack the messenger. But the images will not leave them alone, and every time they so much as hear the word “abortion” those images will go off like bombs in their heads. The injustice of it all will always be nagging their conscience, crushing their every argument before it has even been formulated in their minds.

And over time, with God’s grace, they cease lying to themselves and finally admit what they saw with their own eyes: abortion kills children, and is a grave evil.

“and then make sure Fletcher posts it so others will see your ‘brilliance’” -florin

Not sure how many different ways I can say this, but it’s not about me. I never claimed to be brilliant. On the whole, I think I do a pretty lousy job actually of articulating what other pioneers like Joe Scheidler, Father Pavone, Gregg Cunningham, and Stephanie Gray have reasoned on their own.

I haven’t even seen what Fletcher wrote; though I am sure it is very good. I have met the man, and he is a great Christian and a great pro-life activist who has dedicated his entire life to saving babies.

We part-time, pro-life hobbyists could probably stand to learn a thing or two from the full-time, professional activists…wouldn’t you agree?

“get your own website if you are so brilliant” -florin

This seems to be a recurring argument from you, so I will disclose that I already have a website—though it has nothing to do with my supposed “brilliance”. Just Google “anti-choice project” and click the first link.

“stop mico-analyzing Simcha’s article…she wrote what she believed - simple as that.” -florin

Is this comment forum on NCR supposed to be limited only to words of praise for the author?

Florin, the very nature of posting an opinion online in a forum like this implies one is open to criticism. You yourself know and believe this already—just look through the last 4 or 5 posts you’ve made in response to others.

I’m sure Simcha Fisher is a wonderful lady. I typically enjoy reading her columns. What you keep seeing as an attack on her person is just an attack on her ideas. She’s a fallible human being who happens to have drawn a wrong conclusion on this point about graphic images. And the sooner we all realize that the sooner we can end legal abortion.

One reader suggested that I repost my response to Ms. Fisher’s op-ed in full here.  So, here it is:

If Simcha Fisher shows up today for the March for Life in DC, she’ll be sorely disappointed when she passes E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse on Constitution Avenue.  That’s where we will be with our billboard-sized photos of aborted babies.  In her blog at the National Catholic Register, Ms. Fisher advanced “Eight Reasons Not to Use Graphic Abortion Images at the March for Life.“  We beg to differ.  Below, FAB resonds to each of her assertions.

There will be children at the march.  First of all, children as young as nine do become pregnant and they do get abortions (we have press clippings to prove it).  In America, a school nurse can take a pregnant child out of class and to a judge who can certify that this little girl is sufficiently mature to make an abortion decision behind her parents’ backs.  It happens all the time.

Even parents who don’t allow their children to watch violence on television often take them to the grocery store, where check-out lines are flanked with magazine covers depicting dead and dying victims of violence, terrorism, natural disasters, etc., some of them as gruesome as anything we use.  They have been seen by countless children whose clueless parents never even noticed.

We have had countless women tell us that nothing less shocking than our abortion photos would have sufficed to dissuade them from killing their children.  So we have to ask ourselves, “Which is worse, children being upset by a picture of abortion or other children being killed by the act of abortion?”

When Christians complain, we ask “Would Jesus use bloody pictures to show people the result of sin?”  Jesus controlled every aspect of his capture, trial, and execution.  He arranged to have Himself beaten so badly, He didn’t even look human (Isaiah 52:14).  His beard was torn off of his face (Isaiah 50:6).  In this condition, He walked through the most crowed part of Jerusalem on the most crowded day of the year.  His bloody body horrified throngs of Passover pilgrims, including large numbers of young children.

He made this disturbing spectacle as public as possible, because he wanted to disturb us with the gravity of our sin (but also bless us with the grace of His forgiveness), despite the fact that many children would be traumatized in the process.  Did He get this wrong?

There will be post-abortive women at the March.  If there are post-abortive women all around us, there are also pre-abortive women around us.  And with as many high-school students as come to the March for Life by the busload, you can bet there are pre-abortive women (and men) in the crowd.  The most compassionate thing we can do for pre-abortive women (and men) is to show them the truth so that abortion is no longer a temptation.

Furthermore, the history of social reform demonstrates that we can never end abortion by covering it up.  So we have to ask ourselves, “Which is worse, women feeling sorrow over past abortions, or the killing never ends?”

Mothers will be there.  Yes, mothers will be at the March for Life with their children.  We will be on the left-hand side of the parade route.  There is ample opportunity for parents to redirect their children’s attention away from the display.  Parents do it all the time.

Other parents don’t try to hide uncomfortable truth from their children.  They use our pictures as a teaching moment, so that their children will know the truth and will not be entrapped by the twin evils of complicity and complacency.

Those are real babies.  At the Holocaust museum and in any book on the Holocaust, you will see pictures of dead people, and those people are very real.  Their bodies are stacked up like chord wood.  Victims of injustice want their plight to be known, and they want injustice to end.  If it is wrong to show pictures of dead victims at the March for Life, it is equally wrong to show pictures of dead victims at the Holocaust Museum.

Public image matters, but changing minds matters even more.  We don’t care what people think about us; we care about what they think about abortion.  Civil rights activists actually wrote Dr. Martin Luther King a letter asking him not to come to Birmingham.  They thought he might undo all the great progress they had made.  They thought his methods were too confrontational.  Maybe they thought his public image was bad for the civil rights movement.

But he went to Birmingham anyway.  He got thrown in jail, and he used his time in jail to write his famous Letter From a Birmingham Jail, perhaps the most important document to emerge out of the Civil Rights Era.  He wrote about the necessity to make people uncomfortable with the status quo.  He said that civil rights moderates were more dangerous to the cause of civil rights than the Ku Klux Klan.

Abortion pictures do not push women into abortion.  We have been told by many, many women that they had decided to abort their babies, but seeing our pictures changed their minds.  We have never heard of any woman who said she had decided not to abort, but seeing our pictures caused her to change her mind and change her mind.

Pictures do not sensitize pro-lifers to the extent that they leave the movement.  Yes, of course we who see the pictures every day don’t react with the same emotion as we used to.  I’m sure that surgeons and emergency room doctors don’t react to blood with the same emotion that they felt when they first entered medical school.  But so what?  Does that make them less effective?  Do they leave the profession?  Are they less committed to saving lives?  Does it make them think that death is not such a big deal?

What people see changes their minds.  To say that pictures don’t force unwilling people to change their minds is simply not supportable by the facts.  When Americans saw pictures of Black men and women being attacked with dogs and water cannons, certainly not all of them changed there minds about racial injustice.  But enough did change their minds to bring about the needed reforms.  When people see abortion photos, certainly not all of them change their minds.  But many do.  Ms. Fisher’s argument is not with us; her argument is with these — women who didn’t abort, people whose minds were changed, people who became more motivated to stand against abortion — and many others who have said that abortion pictures changed their minds.

Last resort?  If people need to see the truth, as Ms. Fisher says, then why should we limit their exposure to once or twice per lifetime?  Why?  Did they broadcast video and publish photos of racial injustice only once or twice?

Finally, Ms. Fisher asserts that we should show abortion pictures only as a last resort.  With more than 50 million dead in this country over 40 years, we have to ask, “If not now, then when?”  I don’t know about Ms. Fisher, but if I am ever kidnapped and my captors are planning my execution, I hope that those who know of my plight won’t wait until I am dead before they decide it’s OK to use every tool in their toolbox to rescue me from death and save my life.

Regarding the “clump of cells” comments, I can assure you that many, many college students believe that the preborn child is “just a clump of cells.”  They line up in droves to tell us so.

It gets even worse behind closed doors.  Perhaps no trained pro-abortion debater would be stupid enough to say such a thing in an open debate, when there is opportunity for rebuttal, but an abortion salespersons make this claim to scared teenagers all the time.  There is money at stake and they know they will never be held to account for their deceit.

One commenter requested that I post my response to this op-ed in its entirety.  So, here it is:

If Simcha Fisher shows up today for the March for Life in DC, she’ll be sorely disappointed when she passes E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse on Constitution Avenue.  That’s where we will be with our billboard-sized photos of aborted babies.  In her blog at the National Catholic Register, Ms. Fisher advanced “Eight Reasons Not to Use Graphic Abortion Images at the March for Life.“  We beg to differ.  Below, FAB resonds to each of her assertions.

There will be children at the march.  First of all, children as young as nine do become pregnant and they do get abortions (we have press clippings to prove it).  In America, a school nurse can take a pregnant child out of class and to a judge who can certify that this little girl is sufficiently mature to make an abortion decision behind her parents’ backs.  It happens all the time.

Even parents who don’t allow their children to watch violence on television often take them to the grocery store, where check-out lines are flanked with magazine covers depicting dead and dying victims of violence, terrorism, natural disasters, etc., some of them as gruesome as anything we use.  They have been seen by countless children whose clueless parents never even noticed.

We have had countless women tell us that nothing less shocking than our abortion photos would have sufficed to dissuade them from killing their children.  So we have to ask ourselves, “Which is worse, children being upset by a picture of abortion or other children being killed by the act of abortion?”

When Christians complain, we ask “Would Jesus use bloody pictures to show people the result of sin?”  Jesus controlled every aspect of his capture, trial, and execution.  He arranged to have Himself beaten so badly, He didn’t even look human (Isaiah 52:14).  His beard was torn off of his face (Isaiah 50:6).  In this condition, He walked through the most crowed part of Jerusalem on the most crowded day of the year.  His bloody body horrified throngs of Passover pilgrims, including large numbers of young children.

He made this disturbing spectacle as public as possible, because he wanted to disturb us with the gravity of our sin (but also bless us with the grace of His forgiveness), despite the fact that many children would be traumatized in the process.  Did He get this wrong?

There will be post-abortive women at the March.  If there are post-abortive women all around us, there are also pre-abortive women around us.  And with as many high-school students as come to the March for Life by the busload, you can bet there are pre-abortive women (and men) in the crowd.  The most compassionate thing we can do for pre-abortive women (and men) is to show them the truth so that abortion is no longer a temptation.

Furthermore, the history of social reform demonstrates that we can never end abortion by covering it up.  So we have to ask ourselves, “Which is worse, women feeling sorrow over past abortions, or the killing never ends?”

Mothers will be there.  Yes, mothers will be at the March for Life with their children.  We will be on the left-hand side of the parade route.  There is ample opportunity for parents to redirect their children’s attention away from the display.  Parents do it all the time.

Other parents don’t try to hide uncomfortable truth from their children.  They use our pictures as a teaching moment, so that their children will know the truth and will not be entrapped by the twin evils of complicity and complacency.

Those are real babies.  At the Holocaust museum and in any book on the Holocaust, you will see pictures of dead people, and those people are very real.  Their bodies are stacked up like chord wood.  Victims of injustice want their plight to be known, and they want injustice to end.  If it is wrong to show pictures of dead victims at the March for Life, it is equally wrong to show pictures of dead victims at the Holocaust Museum.

Public image matters, but changing minds matters even more.  We don’t care what people think about us; we care about what they think about abortion.  Civil rights activists actually wrote Dr. Martin Luther King a letter asking him not to come to Birmingham.  They thought he might undo all the great progress they had made.  They thought his methods were too confrontational.  Maybe they thought his public image was bad for the civil rights movement.

But he went to Birmingham anyway.  He got thrown in jail, and he used his time in jail to write his famous Letter From a Birmingham Jail, perhaps the most important document to emerge out of the Civil Rights Era.  He wrote about the necessity to make people uncomfortable with the status quo.  He said that civil rights moderates were more dangerous to the cause of civil rights than the Ku Klux Klan.

Abortion pictures do not push women into abortion.  We have been told by many, many women that they had decided to abort their babies, but seeing our pictures changed their minds.  We have never heard of any woman who said she had decided not to abort, but seeing our pictures caused her to change her mind and change her mind.

Pictures do not sensitize pro-lifers to the extent that they leave the movement.  Yes, of course we who see the pictures every day don’t react with the same emotion as we used to.  I’m sure that surgeons and emergency room doctors don’t react to blood with the same emotion that they felt when they first entered medical school.  But so what?  Does that make them less effective?  Do they leave the profession?  Are they less committed to saving lives?  Does it make them think that death is not such a big deal?

What people see changes their minds.  To say that pictures don’t force unwilling people to change their minds is simply not supportable by the facts.  When Americans saw pictures of Black men and women being attacked with dogs and water cannons, certainly not all of them changed there minds about racial injustice.  But enough did change their minds to bring about the needed reforms.  When people see abortion photos, certainly not all of them change their minds.  But many do.  Ms. Fisher’s argument is not with us; her argument is with these — women who didn’t abort, people whose minds were changed, people who became more motivated to stand against abortion — and many others who have said that abortion pictures changed their minds.

Last resort?  If people need to see the truth, as Ms. Fisher says, then why should we limit their exposure to once or twice per lifetime?  Why?  Did they broadcast video and publish photos of racial injustice only once or twice?

Finally, Ms. Fisher asserts that we should show abortion pictures only as a last resort.  With more than 50 million dead in this country over 40 years, we have to ask, “If not now, then when?”  I don’t know about Ms. Fisher, but if I am ever kidnapped and my captors are planning my execution, I hope that those who know of my plight won’t wait until I am dead before they decide it’s OK to use every tool in their toolbox to rescue me from death and save my life.

I am a post abortive woman. I also speak out with Silent No More Awareness. When I speak, there are children in the crowd - their parents have made the decision to bring them to the March for Life.

Part of my talk is “I had a saline abortion; my child was burned alive in my womb. He was sixteen weeks gestation. I had cramping. vomiting and diarrhea all day and finally, mercifully, that night, I was knocked out and his broken, burned body was removed from me.”

According to your theory, I should not speak those words because a child or a sensitive person may be injured by them.

I understand your desire that no one would ever see gruesome images - or hear the horrible details of an abortion, however, abortion is real, it is ugly and if I am silent, who will speak up?

If we do not carry the signs which show the product of abortion, who will?

I am not injured by the graphic images. I pray for the souls of all babies who die before drawing their first breath.

It is not my pride that has me speak out - as I also say in my talk “My son, Matthew Dean, is the reason I am here today. I was not a good mother, but he is a perfect son.”

If I keep silent about his death, more will die. If I am able to share my story, pray God a woman or man will hear that abortion is not the way to go.

If I show (yes, I do hold graphic signs) only signs with lovely children on them, then what am I protesting? Think about that - I am certainly not protesting babies? I am protesting what abortion does to babies.

Sorry to have rambled on - DON’T tell me or millions of others mothers like me who have aborted babies, not to carry graphic signs.

Quite frankly - I think the tide has turned - we have had abortions, we are healing, we will not be silent! I will NOT be politically correct for when I am silent, satan wins.

“According to your theory, I should not speak those words because a child or a sensitive person may be injured by them.”

Simcha was writing about images. There are overlaps but images and words are fundamentally different. They use different brain pathways.  Images have a more direct and unadulterated impact on the mind; that is why one image can be instantly devastating in a way that one word or sentence cannot.  It is why I feel comfortable talking with my younger children about abortion and other violent acts but I am much more careful about what kinds of pictures of those acts they see.

I don’t get why this is complicated and hard.

Corita - I disagree with you that words do not have impact. We take time to speak, write and listen. One word, one phrase can devastate a person. It matters not that there are “different pathways”. 

As a parent, you have every right to take your child to any event. If you do not deem the event to be acceptable and safe, by all means, keep your child away. Our sons went to the March for Life from the time they were young. They are fine,upstanding, pro-life men. They have not been scarred by the graphic images - far from it - they know the horror that abortion does.

Please, however, do not tell me, a post abortive woman, 42 years now, what signs to carry. I do not know, but one of the graphic signs could well be my own child. Would I not have the right to carry a picture of my child?

Maybe one analogy to bringing children to a rally against an abortion would be…it’s like bringing children to a gay pride parade. If you support same-sex marriage & the gay agenda, and are raising your children to think that it’s “okay to be gay,” and if you happen to live in a city with a significant gay population that has a well-attended annual event, then it makes sense to take your kids to see it. They will likely see lots and lots of pretty rainbow-colored balloons, cool parade floats, hundreds of two mommy/two daddy marchers (many of them pushing strollers)....but also, they MIGHT see someone who is inappropriately attired (a drag queen revealing too much, a guy wearing a leather vest and not much else, etc.), or who is carrying a sign with a graphic image of something to which you might not necessarily object, but which isn’t age appropriate. The rally/parade participants have their own individual reasons for taking part, and these reasons are very different. So it’s the parents’ responsibility to either turn their younger children away, or turn the image into a “teaching moment” for older children.
I think the post-abortive commenter above has explained very clearly why she is doing what she is doing, with good intentions. Simcha’s opinions about thinking twice before using graphic images are more general, and are equally valid. 
An aside, to the commenter who said above, “Show a pro-abort an aborted baby image: 98% of them will care. A lot.” I strongly disagree: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/

Bringing children to a rally against an abortion is…... a lot like bringing children to a gay pride parade. If you happen to support same-sex marriage & the gay agenda, and are raising your children to think that it’s “okay to be gay,” and if you happen to live in a city with a significant gay population that has a well-attended annual event, then it makes sense to take your kids to see it.
There, they will likely see lots and lots of pretty rainbow-colored balloons, cool parade floats, hundreds of two mommy/two daddy marchers (many of them pushing strollers)....but also, they MIGHT see someone who is inappropriately attired (a drag queen revealing too much, a guy wearing a leather vest and not much else, etc.), or who is carrying a sign with a graphic image of something to which you might not necessarily object, but which isn’t age appropriate. The rally/parade participants have their own individual reasons for taking part, and these reasons are very different. So it’s the parents’ responsibility to either turn their younger children away, or turn the image into a “teaching moment” for older children.
I think the post-abortive commenter above has explained very clearly why she is doing what she is doing, with good intentions. Simcha’s opinions about thinking twice before using graphic images are more general, and are equally valid. 
(An aside, to the commenter who said above, “Show a pro-abort an aborted baby image: 98% of them will care. A lot.” I strongly disagree. The vast majority have seen the pictures.)

“As an aside, to the commenter who said above, “Show a pro-abort an aborted baby image: 98% of them will care. A lot.” I strongly disagree. The vast majority have seen the pictures.” -L.

Not true. The vast majority of Americans have no idea what abortion looks like. I know because we have been displaying these pictures in public places for 8 years, and we still get a constant stream of people who’ve never seen them.

Even those who have seen us (and our pictures) before react strongly at the sight. Everyone is disgusted by them.

Good. Abortion is disgusting…and angering. But the question we ask of those who are disgusted and angry with us is: “If abortion is too terrible to look at, why are we tolerating it?”

“Everyone is disgusted by them.”—> You are wrong. “Disgusted” is the wrong word entirely. I look at them and think, what a waste, and I wish the woman hadn’t gotten pregnant in the first place.
Why are we “tolerating” it, or in my case, hoping it remains legal? Because we think sometimes, in some situations, it’s the least undesirable alternative. Abortion is like war—it’s bloody, and to some, “disgusting,” and (this part is key), BEST TO AVOID THE SITUATIONS IN WHICH ONE FACES THE POSSIBILITY OF IT, but some of us don’t want to remove it as an option.
But hey, I’m a “pro-abort,” so I don’t expect anyone here to care what I think. I’m just saying, most (not all, but most) “pro-aborts” know it’s not a “clump of cells,” and that doesn’t make any difference.
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/
That’s a pretty good summary.

One question—what is the purpose of the “March for Life?” It would seem to me that tens of thousands of like-minded people are getting together to show their strength in numbers and encourage each other to continue fighting for their cause, and together, make a statement that their opinion matters. This is the purpose of any rally. Is some people’s purpose to change hearts/minds of those whose opinions differ? Then perhaps they would be more effective if they went to where the “pro-aborts” hang out, and I daresay it’s not likely to be among tens of thousands of “pro-life” people. So maybe graphic images have their place at demonstrations in front of abortion clinics, but not necessarily at a rally of like-minded pro-lifers?

“I look at them and think…I wish the woman hadn’t gotten pregnant in the first place.” -L.

Why? What’s wrong with getting an abortion?

“Abortion is like war” -L.

In some respects, yes. In both abortion and war innocent people wind up dead. But there is a non-trivial difference between them too. In war the innocent are never targeted (or, at least as all civilized societies acknowledge, ought never be). But every abortion targets a helpless baby for decapitation and dismemberment.

“most ‘pro-aborts’ know it’s not a ‘clump of cells,’ and that doesn’t make any difference.” -L.

In other words, who cares if they are innocent human beings? The defenseless child’s right to not be harmed is trumped by my right to live as I wish.

It’s a disturbing inversion of Christ’s words: “This is my body, which is given up for you.” The pro-abort says, “This is MY body. And you will give your life up for me!”

I VERY much appreciate this blog post and will post a link to it on my Facebook page.  Several of my friends are active in the anti-abortion movement and think that the ends justify the means.  Personally, I feel that the most important consideration is that, if we know that a human being is killed in an abortion, we should treat the deceased as one would treat a beloved deceased person.  You wouldn’t display your poor old grandma like that, in an effort to catch her killer.  We should respect those innocent little lives LIKE WE SAY WE DO.

This is great! Is it possible to share this on facebook? I only see a “Like” option.

@Lee-
“I disagree with you that words do not have impact.”

See, I didn’t write that.  I was just trying to distinguish between the types and seriousness (including speed) of impact, words vs. images.
.

“As a parent, you have every right to take your child to any event. If you do not deem the event to be acceptable and safe, by all means, keep your child away.”

I will do all of those things, thanks! But my talk of impact on children is not about my children, and not even the ones who are at the March. I brought them up because I find the random sidewalk displays to be more dangerous than good: they can hurt passing children whose parents *don’t* care and/or don’t know how to talk with them about what they have seen.
.
“Please, however, do not tell me, a post abortive woman, 42 years now, what signs to carry. I do not know, but one of the graphic signs could well be my own child. Would I not have the right to carry a picture of my child?”

I don’t think my words implied telling people what to do. I think it is a morally unsound argument to say that ***indiscriminate*** use of those signs is just fine because the ends justify the means. Further, my main objection to the use of those images is that they appropriate a real child’s remains and slap them on a sign, to remain nameless and generalized for the rest of the world.  I DO believe that the loved ones of the dead have a better claim on the images of their beloved dead, including making the decision to publish that visual record of violence—like the wife of Emmett Till did—so in my opinion, you would have more of a right to carry a sign like that if your own child is on it, in the service of showing the truth of his or her death to the world.

I hope that clears up my tone and meaning, Lee.  I just want to say that I think it is very brave for post-abortive women to be open in the pro-life movement. I personally think that parts of it are actually quite hostile to women, especially those who have had abortions.  And as a teacher I think that the testimony of those who have contended with difficult pregnancy situations and their outcomes is invaluable. Those words could mean much more over time than the emotional shock of the images…it depends on the person…but to end this babble: thanks, and I wish you peace.

@L.I’m a “pro-abort,” so I don’t expect anyone here to care what I think. I’m just saying, most (not all, but most) “pro-aborts” know it’s not a “clump of cells,” and that doesn’t make any difference.
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/
That’s a pretty good summary.

HEY EVRYBODY HERE: PLEASE READ THE ABOVE ARTICLE! The new 2013 US trend in the culture of death! Soon to be exported world wide!
Title: “SO WHAT IF ABORTION ENDS A LIFE?”
Subtitle:“I believe that life starts at conception. And it’s never stopped me from being pro-choice”.

Read it for yourselves: I do not want to spoil the “surprize”.

In Boston, they started posting pictures of people injured and killed in bicycle accidents who were wearing helmets. Likewise, I’m sure most of you have seen the ads with people who’ve had traumatic diseases due to smoking, they show the scars, how the people need devices to speak. The government does this because they know that graphic images work. They just do.

While I’m sympathetic with the idea that prudence is always a virtue, and that not all images are equally useful, we should be showing people these images. We do need to shock the conscience. We do need to grab people by the shoulders. It won’t work on everybody but it will work on enough. That was why Uncle Tom’s Cabin was important. That was why the Allied troops walked the German people through the camps after WWII. That’s why the advent of television reporting of Vietnam led to protests of that war as people saw what war really looked like. That’s why we show movies like Hotel Rwanda, Schindler’s List, and The Pianist to high schoolers.

Perhaps we need to remember how painful these things can be more, and I agree that pictures of living children in the womb should probably be used at a higher rate, but the truth is indeed painful and I think that exposing that truth is more important than our reputations or being “liked.”

Ana Daniela’s comment is perhaps true, but also beside the point.  Yes, many pro-aborts (or abortion-choicers, if you prefer) like Ms. Daniela and Mary Elizabeth Williams may know know, but not care, that the baby is a real human being.  However, such people are not really our primary target audience.

Our target audience is people who DO care whether or not abortion kills a living human being.  The abortion industry is more than happy to cover up the truth — they say “it’s not a baby; it’s just a blob of tissue,” — in order to sell abortions to frightened teenagers and young people.  But when people with functioning consciences see the truth, their minds are often changed.

If you want to argue that point, your argument is not with us, it is with
1.  the many, many women who have told us that abortion pictures changed their minds (http://www.abortionno.org/testimonies/baby-saved/)
2.  the many, many post-abortive women who have told us that they would never have aborted had they known the truth (http://www.abortionno.org/testimonies/) and
3.  the many, many people who tell us that abortion pictures changed their minds (http://www.abortionno.org/testimonies/mind-changed/).

I strongly disagree with your article.  These are some of the more ridiculous points.  You say “There will be children at the march.”  Get real:  there will be pro-abortionists shouting vile slogans and throwing things, etc.  Any sensible parent wouldn’t bring a small child to an event with hundreds of thousands of people walking quite a ways in freezing temperatures.  If by children you mean teenagers, well then it is productive for them to see what abortion actually looks like.  That is an idiotic point you make.  Also you say,  “They sometimes push women into abortion.”  THat’s just as ridiculous.  A picture of a murdered baby forces someone to murder their baby.  That argument reminds me of when I told my sister living with someone instead of marrying was a mortal sin.  She told me I was “forcing her to leave the Catholic Church.”  What?  Huh?  I charitably share the truth your Catholic faith teaches with you and that’s forcing you to do the opposite of what the your faith teaches?  Pro-aborts also think we’re loony whether we’re holding a sign of an aborted baby or not.  Let’s use common sense here.  A picture is worth a thousand words.

Simcha’s article makes a lot of broad generalizations as if she has empirical evidence that graphic signs don’t work; but she shares none of her “proof.”  Tom Herring, you are brilliant my friend!  What great logic and charity you have shared which will help to end this brutal Holocaust of the unborn.  Unfortunately, pro-lifers like Florin can only assault you (not your arguments) with snarky comments.  And Lee, you give awesome testimony of the importance of using graphic language and images to save lives.  Know that I pray in thanksgiving for your conversion and your heroism and for your continued assurance of God’s mercy upon you.  It’s a shame those who are so filled with sensitive indignation about “life-saving” graphic images, don’t seem to show much sensitivity to you and all you’ve been through.  God love you and all those who share the truth!

Simcha I’m sorry if I sounded condescending on my first post.  I guess the following statement really rubbed me the wrong way.  “if you want people to listen to you and have sympathy for your cause, don’t come across as a lunatic.  You’re not a lunatic—but to people who don’t already agree with you, you sure look that way.”  In other words, you’re really calling Father Frank Pavone and Joe Schiedler lunatics and saying they “look” like lunatics too.  I find that very offensive and unsettling. 

Graphic abortion images should ideally be used in the one-on-one circumstances you suggest. However, I believe it’s necessary to display them in public because the reality of abortion is extremely hidden in mainstream culture and it is the only opportunity most people will have to be jolted out of their fuzzy thinking on abortion. The Salon writer is not representative of our intended audience; hopefully society as a whole is not yet that callous. The images can also lead pro-lifers to renew our commitment amid our busy lives and competing priorities.

I think it’s useful to examine how graphic images have changed behaviour in other contexts. I invite you to read the article I wrote about the parallels with the use of graphic images related to smoking: http://life.nationalpost.com/2010/11/19/could-graphic-images-reduce-the-number-of-abortions/

Without wanting to open a discussion on guns, I think this piece is also instructive, especially since it was written by an outspoken abortion advocate: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1318644—mallick-why-newtown-victim-noah-pozner-had-an-open-coffin

Injustice that is invisible inevitably becomes tolerable, but injustice that is made visible inevitably becomes intolerable.

@Fletcher Amstrong:

Did you reed the article from Salon?
Of course “most” of the pro-abort know that life starts at conception? Why else would they fight it so merciless?
Quoting from the above article:

“Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal.”

The author should had the courage to write ” ALL HUMAN LIFE IS NOT EQUAL”,  as the examples given are concerning the human life:

“But we make choices about life all the time in our country. We make them about men and women in other nations. We make them about prisoners in our penal system. We make them about patients with terminal illnesses and accident victims.”

This article is better analyzed here:
“….the pro-abortion needs to admit the fetus is
human.  And then say: ‘SO WHAT?’ A woman gets to decide because her rights are more important that the human person in utero.
It is unimaginable that 40 years after the wild-eyed frothing at the mouth abortion loving feminists went out of their way, dedicated their entire lives and careers to perpetuating the lie that the fetus wasn’t human, that TODAY, 40 years later, a total shift is happening.
Where the daughters of these liars and killers are now proposing that they just admit its human and say kill it anyway.
This is summed neatly and quite honestly a deep surprise coming from the camp that has lied for 40 years, when she concludes her article this way:
‘I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing.’
We have attached a link to the article from Salon so pro-lifers can learn and get a head start on the latest demonic strategy. This is evil pure and simple.” (Google or search on Youtube : Vortex, “Admitting the Lie!” 01-25)

L. continues:

“Abortion is like war—it’s bloody, and to some, ‘disgusting,’ and (this part is key), BEST TO AVOID THE SITUATIONS IN WHICH ONE FACES THE POSSIBILITY OF IT, but some of us don’t want to remove it as an option.

A hymn to CONTRACEPTION, isn’t it?
Contraception LEADING TO ABORTION:

“More than half of women obtaining abortions in 2000 (54%) had been using a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant.”
From: Contraceptive Use Among U.S. Women Having Abortions in 2000-2001 by Rachel K. Jones, Jacqueline E. Darroch and Stanley K. Henshaw in Perspectives on Sexual an Reproductive Health, Volume 34, Number 6, November/December 2002, published by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (founded by and serving Planned Parenthood)

The above facts are sustaining the following analysis:

“And as for the pro-life movement, as it takes honest stock and looks in the mirror, it will be what it has turned out to be because of a strategic error all the way back at the beginning, that the 800 pound gorilla of contraception was never confronted head on.
When America accepted contraception and the pro-life movement side-stepped it, abortion had already secured the victory. And now as we see, for the exact same reason, so too will same-sex marriage. Error must be dealt with immediately before it is allowed to spread.
If the epitaph on the tomb of America will be voters didn’t care enough, the one on the pro-life movement’s tomb will be we spent everything we had on the wrong battle.
Now the culture of life forces must pick themselves up and retreat down the long dusty trail of re-committing themselves completely to the truth and that truth is – as long as contraception is accepted- there will never be an end to abortion.”
Again search on Youtube: “March For Life Special Report” Vortex 26th January 2013

GOD WITH US!

I thoroughly agree with you!  Thank you!  We frequently bring our children (5, 3, and 9 months) to pray with us at our local abortion clinic and it is so hard to keep them from noticing the two huge posters of aborted babies that some well-meaning but gruff older men insist on bringing every week.  My husband goes to the march in DC and would love to bring our 5-year-old, but the prevalence of graphic pictures is one of the main things holding us back.  I saw another comment say that people would be yelling insults and throwing stuff at the marchers - that just doesn’t happen.  But the graphic signs are there, and a graphic video of an actual abortion was shown this year.  I agree that the pictures should be saved as a last resort.

Leah, the following links seem to contradict your assertions.  Although I’m grateful you and your kids haven’t personally experienced this kind of violence I question your discernment and judgment in this matter.  Furthermore, I trust that the “well-meaning but gruff older men”, who seem to hold a more realistic world view of what they are confronting, will be the first to defense of you and your kids if you ever find yourselves personally confronted by this kind of violence.
. 
http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/breaking-abortion-clinic-security-guard-pepper-sprays-pro-lifers-video
.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/hundreds-brave-sub-freezing-temperatures-for-emotional-vigil-at-d.c.-planne

I went to the March for Life and as I walked past those graphic pictures, my heart was filled with sadness.  I prayed that God would forgive our country for this most egregious sin that we oontinue to excuse with our selfishness. People have got to realize that innocent, sweet little babies are being dismembered, burned and otherwise tortured in the most horrible manner. Who, with a right mind and informed conscience, could possibly condone it? So, it is our duty to “inform consciences.” If we don’t change hearts, we will continue to fool ourselves that it is a matter of “privacy” and that we don’t have the right to impose our will on anyone. No, we are working for all to embrace God’s Will that His children may live.  These pictures do strike at the heart so very powerfully and painfully. May God lead us to choose life!

I was staunchly pro-life until I was forced to view bloody images daily as I came to work at Notre Dame in spring 2009. Now I’m still intellectually pro-life, but the fire I had for the cause was washed away in the blood of the pictures people gloated in pushing towards the people coming to this pro-life campus.

Sue, Notre Dame is anything but a pro-life campus.  How do you explain that this so called Catholic University had the most pro-abortion president in history come speak and heaped honorary overtures on him?  Oh, and pro-lifers peacefully protested the event and were brutally carried off to jail by campus police officers (on the command of top administrators).  Your argument that your less pro-life because you’ve seen bloody images is ridiculus.  That’s like saying I was against racism before I saw those pictures of blacks hanging from a tree and after seeing those it made me lean more toward the racist side.  And I’ve never seen people with pictures of abortion gloating—I’m afraid that’s just your subjective opinion and not reality.

Leah,
It’s been documented that pro-abortion supporters have, in fact spit upon, shouted obscenities at pro-lifers, etc. at March for Life events.  There’s even documentation that these crazies have attempted to stick pro-lifers with needles (while shouting that the syringes contained the AIDS virus) during Pro-Life rallies.  I’m not making this up; there are many, many, many documented instances of violence and obscenities directed at pro-lifers at pro-life events.  Praise God you didn’t come across any of them with your children, but be aware that these anarachists are perpetrating their violence more than ever (of course with the blessing of the most pro-abortion president of all time and his minions of henchmen) with less culpability then ever.

This video explains HOW and WHY graphic images work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8Rk44gn824

Paul,
Yes. We experienced the pro-abortion crowd yelling obscene remarks at us at a previous March.
At an abortion clinic years ago, an abortion supporter threatened us with a large pair of scissors on several occasions.Because they weren’t considered a weapon & we were only threatened, not actually cut, no police action was ever taken & the intimidation continued week after week.

Couldn’t disagree with you more! Though the images don’t necesarily deter every woman from having an abortion, those who see them have no excuse for going through with it! One of the excuses they use is they were never told! The premise that it will cause women to have an abortion by seeing the results, and running faster into the mill, is just plain ridiculous! The American people (and actually the world) are very willfully ignorant! God will hold us accountable for what we know and what we don’t know! Women who later find out what their child was, a real human being not just a blob, have a better chance of repenting and being healed then those who remain in denial! Those who don’t want to carry a graphic sign, shouldn’t! Those who feel called to show the horrific reality of abortion, should be able to anywhere!

This is not a request or recommendation, it’s only my personal experience, with regard to the graphic videos during the March.  As I walked past the screens, I watched as an arm was ripped from a tiny body.  I wasn’t sure exactly how to react; I was already participating in a pro-life demonstration, representing the pro-life organization that now employs me.  I’m not squeamish, having spent several years performing animal dissections as a research scientist. 

So I did the only thing that made sense: I stared.  I didn’t avert my eyes until the images were out of sight.  The only emotion I felt was a sense of bleakness; all my excitement and energy was momentarily sapped.  I couldn’t do anything to help that one, I thought, and it seemed sad for the last vestiges of that baby’s dignity to be squandered on a snuff film.  Why was I even here, if only to be made to feel residually complicit in the manufacture and display of blood pornography?

After a few minutes, my fighting spirit returned, buoyed by the energy of the youthful marchers’ chants.  Images of babies in the womb, bursting with life and potential, reminded me that it was for them I was marching, and for their sake that I now work in a different profession.

The only possible justification I can see for the use of these images and videos is that “they work.”  And all I can say to that is this: the fact that they work at all is quite an indictment of us as people.  How little imagination must we have, how little logic must we possess, and how deep must our denial run if we can only recognize humanity in its destruction and life in images of death.

So go on using these images if you must - perhaps if you turn enough stomachs, you might turn a few hearts as well.

As for me, my heart, mind, and stomach are all quite steady and committed to the cause of protecting human life in all its stages.  That said, I have a feeling that next year, that portion of the march will be a little easier, and a little easier still the year after that.

I’m not entirely sure that’s a good thing.

This is not a request or recommendation, it’s only my personal experience, with regard to the graphic videos during the March.  As I walked past the screens, I watched as an arm was ripped from a tiny body.  I wasn’t sure exactly how to react; I was already participating in a pro-life demonstration, representing the pro-life organization that now employs me.  I’m not squeamish, having spent several years performing animal dissections as a research scientist. 
So I did the only thing that made sense: I stared.  I didn’t avert my eyes until the images were out of sight.  The only emotion I felt was a sense of bleakness; all my excitement and energy was momentarily sapped.  I couldn’t do anything to help that one, I thought, and it seemed sad for the last vestiges of that baby’s dignity to be squandered on a snuff film.  Why was I even here, if only to be made to feel residually complicit in the manufacture and display of blood pornography?
After a few minutes, my fighting spirit returned, buoyed by the energy of the youthful marchers’ chants.  Images of babies in the womb, bursting with life and potential, reminded me that it was for them I was marching, and for their sake that I now work in a different profession.
The only possible justification I can see for the use of these images and videos is that “they work.”  And all I can say to that is this: the fact that they work at all is quite an indictment of us as people.  How little imagination must we have, how little logic must we possess, and how deep must our denial run if we can only recognize humanity in its destruction and life in images of death.
So go on using these images if you must - perhaps if you turn enough stomachs, you might turn a few hearts as well.
As for me, my heart, mind, and stomach are all quite steady and committed to the cause of protecting human life in all its stages.  That said, I have a feeling that next year, that portion of the march will be a little easier, and a little easier still the year after that.
I’m not entirely sure that’s a good thing.

isn’t the last resort when 50 million babies have been killed ?

I’ve been raised in this movement since 1969 .

I will have to follow Father Pavone’s lead on this .

I agree with Simcha on this one. After Mass on Pro-Life Sunday in our Diocese, our pro-life ministry was handing out pamphlets, magnets with Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa on them with pro-life quotes, baby feet pins, and other pro-life materials. I do not mind this at all ... however ... my young children were handed some of these materials and then proceeded to ask me what abortion was. I was very ANNOYED. So I told my children that sometimes a mom doesn’t want her baby and she gets rid of it. My children then asked, why? is she mad at the baby? And I said, yes, kind of, and scared. So they asked me why they weren’t “abortioned” when I get mad at them. So then I re-explained and said the mom kills the baby before it’s born. My children were horrified. I guess I have instilled a strong sense of pro-life values in my children, but I would have liked to wait until much later to discuss this.

My own opinion on this is ... the graphic images should be by (or in)the abortion clinics ... where there are hopefully no children around. However, to use the excuse as people must be shown what is done is weak… Then should we see pictures of all the dead and beaten bodies from crime? What was done to a woman when she was raped? What a child looks like after being sexually assaulted? I think showing the graphic images gives some half crazed people ideas, almost like copy cat crimes.

I think the church needs to focus more on impulse, the evil of immediate gratification, and lack of self control. Teach church doctrine as to WHY pre-marital sex is wrong. Not just try to tidy up after the fact.

If I am repeating anything that anyone else said, sorry, I did not read all the posts.

Suck it up buttercup. The truth hurts and life is not fair. Ask any aborted human. Teach your children about this atrocity when very young. I was taught about all the horrible (facts) things people had done and do at a young age. When others were approached (public schools) I already knew the truth. My daughter was sent home from school in 4th grade for wearing pro-life t-shirts? She knew more truth than grown adults. She is now a 8th grade leader in her Girls for God (public school) group. These kids are turning the tide! Those are facts and this is my opinion. I DO see its fruits! Glory be to God!

Craig,

Life isn’t fair but not everyone needs to be subjected to images of aborted babies.  (Please note: I am not saying that the MFL or vigils in front of abortion mills isn’t the right place.) 

As my handle suggests I am a catechist.  This year I’m sponsoring a young lady in her mid 20’s.  When we showed a non-graphic video about NFP which also talked briefly about abortion she had to leave the room because she was ill from the thought of abortion.  I can only imagine how much more upsetting it would have been for her had we put an image of an aborted baby on the wall.  Although I have seen these images in the past I know I wouldn’t have been able to handle it very well myself.

It is awesome that your daughter is involved in Girls for God.  (We call ours DoGs - Disciples of God.)

Last year my daughter was asked by a (public high school) teacher to change her shirt the first time she wore the below referenced Pro-Life T-Shirt, she refused.  Most of the kids thought she was a life guard at a pool and when asked she tells them to read the back.  She wears this and other Pro-Life shirts to (public) high school almost everyday.

http://www.monkrock.com/pictures/tees/A-Tee-LifeGuard-Front-Back-White2.jpg

Planting the message is very important, but like today’s reading when you plant the message in good soil will it grow; and only through God’s grace can we cultivate the rocky and thorny soil before the seeds of faith can grow.

I have taken the broken bodies of the aborted unborn out of clinic trash dumpsters, I have spent countless hours photographing these innocent victims. Photos that we have taken are used all over the world in pro-life work and more recently we have them posted at imagesofabortion.com.
Moreover, abortion victim photography is featured in my newly published book “Abandoned—The Untold Story of the Abortion Wars.” (www.saintbenedictpress.com)  I have been a pro-life leader for over 2 decades, involved in the movement since 1976.  I can not disagree more with Simcha’s point of view in the use of graphic images in the pro-life effort—especially her categorical ban on thier use in a public forum. I have extensive experience in displaying such photos—posters in public, at clinics, at demonstrations, at Face the Truth Tours both in the U. S., Canada and overseas.
  One of the major handicaps of the pro-life struggle—and indeed one of the plights of the unborn child slated for extermination is the hidden quality of the abortion injustice. It is imperitive that the public itself see the reality of the injustice of abortion. The major mainstream media has conspired to keep the victims concealed. If the media was open and honest and willing to show the truth of abortion as it did show such truths of war during the Vietman conflict—then perhaps we would not need to go to the streets and the public squares. I cannot begin to record the numerous babies saved from the public display of these images, and indeed I have seen with my own eyes the awakening of souls when confronted by the images of the broken unborn. I plan to write a full treatise on this subject—but for now, it needs to be stated that the public use of the images of abortion have a place in the stuggle to defend the innocent unborn.

Monica,
God bless you for what you do.
That’s a good point, the images that were broadcast into our homes on the nightly news from the Vietnam War helped turn public support towards ending our involvement.My guess is that the media is only willing to show graphic images that suit their own world viewpoint, though.

I feel the need to re-post here what I said on your facebook post:

“I agree wholeheartedly with you, Simcha. Here is another reason that I use: My 5 year old son has high functioning Autism. His brain functions in a way that is extremely literal. We must be very careful to avoid letting him watch movies or tv shows with violence (even Thundercats was too much), because he cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality.

When he sees something like a car accident or the like, he immediately begins to think it WILL happen to him, and it will stick with him for weeks or, in some cases, months. This is deeply traumatizing to him and can cause him to have constant night terrors and depression. He also has an extremely good memory.

I am not planning on shielding him for the rest of his life, but until he can learn coping skills, there is no reason for him to see images like that. I am sure this is also true for many autistic and developmentally disabled or delayed children and their parents.

I was grateful that the first time I marched in 2009 (Dallas) I did not see images like that. Unfortunately the march is almost always the same day as his birthday party, so I haven’t been since, but then I am always reminded of how much a blessing he is, especially on that day.”

I think the point Simcha is trying to get across is that there is a time and a place for graphic images to be used, and MFL is probably not the right place.

An incident I recall at Baylor University a few years back, one of these groups erected a 3-story tall billboard depicting an aborted fetus.  In the middle of campus.  To get from one class to another, I had to walk by this billboard several times a day.  I tend to get ill seeing pictures like that, and it was difficult to keep my lunch down when I’d walk to class.  Not the appropriate time or place, either.  I’ve always been pro-life (more so now that I am a mother, myself, if that’s possible), but that billboard made me shy away from pro-life activists for many years.  Now that I’m older I can see their point, but I still think it was not the right place or method to get their point across.

We should pray, flat on our faces, that we never become so craven as to suppress evidence of injustice, for fear of persecution.  Ephesians 5:11 commands us, without qualification, to “expose the deeds of darkness,” not to show them only privately, and only as a last resort.  Responsibility for the terrible longevity of history’s most horrific slaughter does not rest entirely upon our adversaries.  We will be judged for our timidity, perhaps as harshly as they will be judged for their barbarity – by history and by Providence.

Gregg Cunningham

Director, The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform

The press has reported tragic news stories describing children as young as nine-years-of-age being victimized by abortions.  Every day in our public schools some pregnant, thirteen-year-old child is taken out of class by a school nurse who, behind the backs of this child’s parents, will arrange a secret judicial proceeding, presided over by a pro-abortion judge who will authorize Planned Parenthood’s abortion of a pregnancy the child’s parents will never know existed.  Some of these children would have the moral courage to resist this scandalous exploitation if they understood the full magnitude of the evil which abortion represents.  Children who are old enough to be threatened by abortion are certainly old enough to benefit from the protection afforded by seeing abortion pictures.  We must muster the moral courage to grant them that protection.

Gregg Cunningham
Director, CBR

Hiding evidence of injustice is cooperating with those who perpetrate it. It shows complicity.
I do not intend to offend, but I do intend to speak truth.

I too disagree with Simcha. I wholeheartedly believe that the reason why abortion is still legal, is because it’s hidden. If your children are too young to see the images, then leave them at home. If it makes you upset to look at them, then don’t look at them. But stop using all or any of those excuses from participating in public witness events like MRL. Evil must be exposed to the light, or it will endure. Man-up people! Good grief, learn to be generous enough to put your own pain aside, and help the most helpless. If only the “unwounded” were called to this battle, our ranks would be empty!

When I was a kid, I saw a picture of a bunch of aborted babies in a garbage bag in the dumpster behind an abortion clinic.  The anti-life side has never had a chance w/ me since that day, nor has any argument ever been as eloquent.  Hiding and sanitizing abortionism is the job of the other side!

Another thing.  If child sexual abuse were legal, or if half the people in the country were taught that rape is just a harmless game that doesn’t hurt anyone, then, yes, we would need to show pictures.  Or put another way, the President of the United States is not an apologist for “rape” or “child sexual abuse.”

I just heard you talk about this on Al Kresta -and wanted to let you know your defense was clear and is the most compassionate for all.  Your composure was impressive!  I totally agree.

Simcha,
.
I heard you on “Kresta in the Afternoon” today.  I thought you handled yourself well, and made convincing arguments.  But I was disappointed with Dr. Miller and Al Kresta.  I have great admiration for both of them.  Monica Miller is a pro-life hero, and I was looking forward to reading her new book.  Al Kresta is my favorite Catholic radio host, and I think he is a terrific interviewer.  So I was disappointed that they both were so critical of you (with Dr. Miller often interrupting you as well), when really this is an issue on which good pro-life Christians can disagree.  You have your prudential judgement on this issue, and Dr. Miller has hers, but that didn’t seem to be the way that the issue was treated by either Dr. Miller or Al Kresta—they both seemed determined to prove you wrong. 
.
I did hear Al Kresta say that he will cover this issue further next week, and I hope that he will take a more balanced approach.

The fervent words of my post abortive friend, Louise M. “I wish TO GOD that someone had shown me pictures of aborted fetuses as I went into that abortion clinic. I believed the lies the abortion clinic told me—that my baby was only a mass of cells and tissue.  I found out the truth during a sonogram with a planned baby.  When I saw it, it was if someone had kicked me in the gut!!  What should have been a special moment in my life became a nightmare! I had MURDERED MY BABY because I didn’t know the truth! Show those pictures to EVERY woman entering a clinic! Women deserve the TRUTH!!!

The ONLY time I had my life threatened while partcipating in a a pro-life activity was when I was holding a sign of a living baby that was amongst graphic aborted image signs. The flak is always heaviest NEAR the target.  !!! Satan does not want images of his evil sacrament of human abortion to be exposed for all the world to see.  These images should be place though ONLY in front of the Supreme Court every March For Life. Right next to the 10 paid pro-abortion “protestors” that the lame DC news films every year.

John, what “10 paid pro-abortion ‘protestors’” do you mean? Plenty of us do pro-abortion rights work for free, because we believe in the cause as passionately as you do. Threats are not cool, though.

I heard part of the “Kresta in the Afternoon” interview, too & my first thought was that nothing pleases Satan more than division amongst believers.
We can all work together towards good using different methods.I think we all have the same goal in mind.Contention takes our sights off the goal & makes us less effective.Which is what the opposition wants.

  Sometimes it is illuminating to see who else agrees with your position. In this instance, I hear Planned Parenthood shouting Hooray to your article. They would like nothing more than to have the evidence of their work kept in the shadows.
  I thought Roberts comments above regarding Our Lady of Fatima showing hell to the 3 children was an insightful refutation of your premise.
  A picture is worth a thousand words and 1/3 of those who expressed agreement with this article admitted that it was through such images that they can to be pro life. Why deny others the way to truth that you took?

I am a pro-life believer. While I understand the images are shocking—that is the point.  People disregard life as an after thought. People NEED to see and UNDERSTAND that it IS a life that they are killing!  We sugar coat everything in America in the name of convenience and rationalization. 

There is no sugar coating murder!  Those babies did not ask to be born. Those babies did not want to be murdered. 

The abortion clinics continue to feed lies to those women who seek them out. It’s time to defend our littlest beings—protect them.  And, it starts with knowledge and understanding of what abortion is really doing—horrifically killing the most innocent and helpless of human beings.

Unfortunately, our society is too void of any emotion or care about this topic. People try to make this a social issue for women’s rights rather than understanding this is a MORAL issue. The two are not comparable.

The graphic images are an important part of the abortion war. The criticism of Joe Scheidler and the other activists who have saved more lives and done more for the prolife cause by Simcha (Who are you and what have you done to save lives?)is really arrogant. You have not suffered like they have for the love of those being led to the slaughter.
You cannot tell another prolifer that certain peaceful and legal means are off limits. I am sick and tired it. Censorship is what you are advocating!Just like Planned Parenthood. You are advocating for the enemy of life! Because we followed the advice of people like you is why we have the ever increasing death toll from abortion.From the beginning one well-organized pro-life group, the National Right to Life Committee, advocated that prolifers stick with images of living children. It got us nowhere and in fact we started losing more and more.
Also, when I was young,there were often documentaries from World War II of the Nazi Holocaust which were shown on Saturday afternoon when many children were watching.I can remember seeing the stacks of bodies. It made us horrified of that slaughter. So I disagree with you. There are a lot of uneducated newbies who go the March and they are precisely the ones who need to see the images since they are censored in our society. You should be ashamed of yourself. Little children are not going to be traumatized since for them they don’t comprehend it totally. They will be educated for life though and realise that the baby is broken and that it is wrong to break the baby.

I disagree, the pictures of the dead babies killed by abortion need to be shown at the March for Life as a reminder of why we are marching in the first place and to motivate prolifers to do more than just attend the March for Life. Those pictures keep me from being a passive prolifer. Many have never seen the victim and many young people need to see the victim to prevent them from having an abortion. I hear many a time of Christians who are prolife but have abortions when they find themselves in an “unwanted” pregnancy.

This article is way out of touch w/ the reality & effectiveness of the inocent lives that are being murdered every day. We pro-lifers demonstate this reality there for all to see. I have been to many pro-life demonstratiions wiith children present w/ their families. These kids become all the more Pro-Life b/c they’ve seen the greusome reality of what really goes on. Reading this article makes me wonder whether I’m reading something from the “Catholic” Standard instead of the National Catholic Register. I want to ask the author whether she’s seen what Pope Benedict & Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City, Missouri have to say about our need to stand up for the Lord & His teachings.
Fenner

Simcha, why are you blocking my post of 2/4/13?

A sign that needs to be held when defending the unborn is a sign about the abortion and its connection to breast cancer.  Women who have had an abortion have increased their risk especially if they have not had a full term pregnancy prior to their abortion(s).  Check out the “ ABC link”.  The major breast cancer walk organizations know of this link but they refuse to assist women to make an informed decision.  I would be willing to share more information if anyone is interested.

Thanks for this. I never thought there were so many very good reasons not to show this kind of image, and I agree with you

But .. One snowy day in Minneapolis, I was waiting for a bus downtown with my two children, and we noticed picketers nearby walking around in the cold with graphic images of bloody battered baby seals.  I then wrote an opinion piece for the Minnesota Daily asking why intellectuals deplore the use of bloody pictures of aborted babies but are somehow comfortable with the use of bloody pictures of dead baby seals. Nobody had a good answer.  Of course, the reason is that if anti-abortion people do something it’s despicable but if a consecrated liberal does the same thing, they think it’s all right.

@Joe, I haven’t blocked any comments.  I’d be happy to go into the system and see why the spam filter held it up, though.

@Joe - I’m sorry, but I can’t seem to find a comment from you that hasn’t already been published.  Was it on this post?  I hope you will realize that, if I were planning to censor you, I’d probably also censor your comment asking why I blocked your post!  This morning, I went to the library, the pediatric dentist, the school, the supermarket, the bank, and the library again, and I’m just now going through the morning’s emails.  Delays in comment moderation are unavoidable sometimes.

.

If you choose to re-post and it still doesn’t show up, please email me your comment directly, and I be sure to post it under your name.  Thanks for your patience and understanding.

Simcha should be writing for Family Circle and la-la land Parent’s Magazine who only want to express brotherly love and well wishes in whatever choices people make no matter if others suffer from their choice.
  I’ve had a lot of experience holding the “Witness to Truth” posters and I can tell you they work.  People respond with many different emotions when they see what a baby looks like after it has been under the abortionist’s knife.  Healings must begin with mothers and fathers who aborted or assisted in the slaughtering of their children. 
    Abortions will not stop until the shades are pulled up and the windows are opened for people to see what goes on inside these abortuaries.  These murders are paid for by our tax dollars.  There are 3500 babies slain daily.  Many mothers die with this very unsafe procedure. 
  Imagine this:  mothers are the only segment of society that is given the right and protection to kill another human being.  If a mother chooses death for her baby, the father has absolutely no legal backup to defend the life of his child.  Wake up MEN!!  Ladies, you are also up for the slaughter because no matter if a female survives this unsafe surgical procedure, she will suffer consequences both physically and emotionally for as long as she lives. 
  There are two victims in each baby killing.  The mother might be fortunate enough to walk away but rarely does a potentially new brother or sister live to tell about their survival.  Have you visited http://www.metropulse.com/news/2010/jun/02/meet-mark-crutcher-man-behind-maafa-21/
that explains how the Sanger legacy continues on and so much more.  Mark Crutcher and his staff have done a remarkable job exposing the inside activities of abortion clinics.  Please spend time researching Mark Crutcher and his organization “Life Dymanics” to discover how evil is the loss of 55 million plus babies led to the slaughter since Roe v Wade.     
  These are the recorded number of babies not with us.  This does not take into account the abortifacient effect of birth control pills that cannot be counted.  Simcha needs to find another job for she does a grave injustice to not only the unborn but to women.  You have not come a long way ladies!  Your lives are more at risk now in this age than in any other time of human history.  You do it to yourselves if you oppose these witness to truth graphic pictures along with the help of ‘simcha’s’ who claim to be your friend.  With friends like her you don’t need enemies.

One reason to show the ugly truth of what abortionists do to unborn children: it’s not OUR lives that hang in the balance,

John Ryan, every citizen in the world suffers from the sin of abortion.  None are exempt from sharing in the responsibility of this most grave atrocity.  Most want to deny that abortions are happening or refuse to do some sort of work to save the lives of innocent babies in the womb.  Many do not consider it to be their problem.  Little girls are being prepared for their later abortions in the parochial schools.  See the “Growing In Love” series with imprimatur.

Simcha:

God bless you for your common sense and solid practical wisdom and charity.  You are a light in a crazy time.

Another sign that needs to be held when defending the unborn with ‘witness to truth’ posters is one about abortion and its connection to breast cancer.  Women who have had an abortion have increased their risk extensively especially if they have not had a full term pregnancy prior to their abortion(s).  Check out the “ ABC link”.  The major breast cancer walk organizations know of this link but they refuse to assist women to make an informed decision because the information is not politically correct.  I would be willing to share more information if anyone is interested

Hi Simcha, please give us your take on how to respond to people who favor graphic images by comparing them to the Holocaust, saying:  “It shouldn’t be censored any more than images of the Holocaust shouldn’t be censored. Deal with it.” How should I respond to that? What do you think of Holocaust images?

That Hat Lady,

I’m not Simcha, but I would like to respond with my view on the Holocaust issue. 

I don’t see people driving around in big trucks with larger than life images of holocaust victims.  I think most of us first saw concentration camp victims in pictures at school, when we were at least beyond the age of reason.  I may have been in high school before I ever saw them, or any medium depicting them, like movies.  In fact, when movies come out involving those awful things that happened to people, if they are true enough to life, and graphic, they often come with at least a PG-13 rating, if not R. 

The real disagreement is not, *if* we should use the images, but when, where, and how.  I hope it is okay to drop a link to my post which discusses that very thing, here: http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2013/02/graphic-abortion-images-its-not-matter.html

What about the whole saling of Baby Body Parts pictures?  See:

http://www.priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx

“Priests for Life has known for some time of the grisly trade in baby parts taking place in abortion facilities throughout the nation. Through the efforts of our friends at Life Dynamics, Inc., the details of this trade have come to light. You may obtain from Life Dynamics (1-800-401-6494) copies of the actual order forms used. Some of the forms request that there be no abnormalities. Many mistakenly think that abortions in later stages of pregnancy are performed only in cases of fetal abnormality.

Fetal tissue wholesalers are companies which place employees in abortion clinics to harvest tissue, limbs, organs, etc. from aborted babies. This material is then shipped to researchers working for universities, pharmaceutical companies and government agencies. Although it is against federal law to sell human tissue or body parts, these organizations have devised a system to circumvent this restriction. Technically, all fetal material they harvest is “donated” to them by the clinics. However, they do pay a “site fee” to the clinics for the right to access the tissue. The tissue is then “donated” to the researchers who in turn pay the wholesalers for the cost of retrieval. Profit is realized by the wholesalers’ ability to set their own retrieval fees.”

American will not stop abortions until America sees what an aborted baby looks like.

“God bless you for your common sense and solid practical wisdom and charity.” -Mark Shea

Covering up the evidence that abortion kills children is the practical wisdom of Planned Parenthood. It is certainly no act of charity towards a baby scheduled for decapitation.

“You are a light in a crazy time.” -Mark Shea

When pro-lifers work with PP in hiding the truth about abortion, yes, we are living in a crazy time. No injustice was ever ended by covering it up.

It is a great travesty that so many more babies will have to die while some of our strongest cultural leaders (Shea and Fisher) unwittingly undermine the movement. Pictures are the most effective means of convincing the public that abortion is an act of violence which kills a real baby. Their misguided thinking on this matter is precisely why we are losing an eminently winnable fight.

Disturbing pictures of children in coal mines are what brought an end to child labor at the turn of last century.

Disturbing pictures of Emmett Till, and blacks strung up in trees, and blacks being attacked by Police Chief Bull Connor’s guard dogs are what ultimately brought an end to the racist treatment they were subjected to in the South.

Disturbing pictures of Vietnamese children running naked down the street, clothes and skin burned off by napalm, are what brought an end to the Vietnam War.

And only disturbing pictures of aborted babies will bother Americans enough to finally do something to end abortion.

MLK was right:

“Like a boil that can never be cured as long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its pus-flowing ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must likewise be exposed, with all of the tension its exposing creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.”

When holding the “Witness to Truth” graphic pictures of aborted babies, the most often hatred towards them was expressed by families with children.  These parents hide behind their children because they cannot face the truth of what is an abortion.
  When it is possible, I ask these parents what will they tell their children when they ask them some day what were they doing during the abortion holocaust to stop it?  The question provokes anger, but than healing includes getting in touch with that emotion.

Hello-
I teach nursing- this year for the first time in 10 years of instruction two students brought in pictures of their babies in utero via ultrasound. This was during a growth and development class where I instruct the students to bring pictures of family from Newborn to old age. One of the pictures was of a 7 week old girl and we put it on the overhead right next to her 7 year old picture now.
The ultrasound is a great weapon- show the developing baby and how early it begins to grow.
Just an option instead of showing bloody pics.
God Bless

Margaret Johnson,  The “bloody pics” stir up denial and is necessary for healing.  Often times women cry when they see these ‘bloody pictures’.  The Planned Parenthood workers told them its only tissue and to evacuate her body of this material so that she can continue on with her life as though nothing happened.  Women are NEVER the same after an abortion and most do not know that only Jesus Christ can forgive and heal her and the father or any other participants in causing the loss of children.    Pro - choice women who show up at rallies cannot stand these ‘bloody pics’ and have to leave.  When questioned they will tell you nothing is wrong. 
  We are less 56 million plus people just in the United States and you want to stay in your comfort zone.    Get out of your comfort zone, Simcha and Margaret Johnson for the sake of human lives!!!

Rosemary, it’s NOT TRUE that pro-choice women “cannot stand these ‘bloody pics’ and have to leave”—in fact, I have shown such photos to my own children, so they can understand abortion better.

Margaret - Have you ever held these bloody pics on sidewalks, in busy sections or in front of a Planned Parenthood abortuary?

LET US CRY FOR OUR BABIES THAT WILL NOT SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING:
  vON Schönborn of Vienna has twice given the Pope Gregory XVI award for merits to pro abort politicians.  See this 2006 release about him and ask yourself why does abortion exist in American?
  Cardinal Schönborn Accepts Abortion.

    “Press hour” of ORF [Austrian Broadcasting] on the 3rd of December 2006,  interviewers: Andreas Koller (“Salzburg News”) and Mathilde Schwabender (ORF).  A cited selection.

  “Koller:  “Your Eminence, you have formulated your affirmation for life before. How can this be understood as regards the law [Fristenlösung] allowing the termination of pregnancy which has been in effect for some time— the Catholic Church was not happy with this—, I have the impression that the Catholic Church has resigned itself to the situation.  Now there is another representative, Herr Stadler, who said to me, one can even discuss the termination law, even calling it into question.  Will you also go so far,  that is said, there should be a change in the law regarding the time limit [Fristenlösung].”

  Cardinal Schönborn replies: “Our position from the Bishops, from the Catholic Family Organizations, Pro-Life Organizations, was always clear on this consideration: we are not seeking after the punishment of women in distress, but we expect with justification, that what has always been said since the Kreisky government and has never been strictly adhered to, the so-called supporting measures, which means, in one country, in which demographic questions are really a serious question, it has simply been shown that—we also have no statistics, but the estimates are still shocking—, that for every child that’s born, one is killed.  That really must shock us, that it must horrify us. ......”  read the rest:
  http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2013/02/cardinal-schonborns-yes-to-abortion.html

This report by Randy Engel’s explains why we are having the abortion controversy today:

http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=62&action=inline

Nothing wrong with showing these pictures.
Know the old saying, out of sight out of mind?, There is some truth to that.
You think that for people that have had an abortion, and are repentant of it, not seeing the pictures is making their suffering any lesser? There are consequences to sin, and perhaps having to face our past is part of them.
Don’t you think that if the German people had seen what was going on in the consecration camps, they would have shown less support to their government and possibly even start their own movement to overthrow it?
Hiding what is happening at the abortuaries is not doing anyone any good.
It just perpetuates the status quo.
And the excuse about children watching this, well children have been watching worse carnage on TV, and likely in their own public schools.

Orlando, I tried to get PBS to show it as they do for so may other surgical procedures.  This surgery is done about 3500 times each day with the help of our tax dollars.  PBS likewise uses our tax dollars yet refuses to broadcast this common every day procedure of slaughtering babies.

It is about time someone spoke with some common sense. Pro-lifers already have come across as crazy idiots,who stand out in front of clinics to show women (some who are simply there for other concerns that are truly none of anyone’s business-let alone the pro-life movement) and suppose to move them. It only makes women at and in those clinics wondering what kind of religous nutcase is out there and do I need to call the police? It will be far better for the movement to simply be there for a shoudler to cry on and not mention the ‘sin’ or the ‘murder of their unborn’ and just be there. Jesus did not condemn the women-neither should we.

No one is condemning the women coming for abortion, but they are trying to change their mind.  Standing in silence while murder is being planned and carried out is not exactly the goal. Yes, being there for women is good, but they do need to know that they are about to kill a human being. There is no hiding that. There are just better ways to do that, then carrying signs of carnage.

I agree with Chris Cobb and other like him (including May) who is finally speaking with common sense. Pro-lifers who are in front of linics with those pictures are not doing the work of Christ. In truth, not every woman who is in a clinic is there for other health concerns, none of which is anyone’s (including the pro-life movement) business. If more women (and Men) sought bith control,Ella,morning-after pill,and condoms-there would not be many reasons to get an abortion. Those pictures who graphic in high school, and now it does not bother me. Like the many crucifixion movies,art,and what is in churches I am not bothered by the images.
I also agree with someone who said that showing pictures of the remains of an abortion is disrespecting the dead. It is because of all this why some Catholics are wanting abortion to be safe and legal in all states for every woman. That is how it should be;to be catholic means to fight for social justice. Jesus would never want this kind of ‘faith’ to be called His.
By the way, abortion has been around for centuries-just because it was kept under the radar, does not mean it never happened in the past until now.

Ann - if birth control worked, why are there so many abortions?

Would you have walked into a concentration camp to get services other than being gassed, knowing that they were starving people there and killing them in the gas chambers?

Does that question sound ridiculous? Well, so does yours…saying that people go into PP for other services. There is not one service that PP gives that is 1) not subsidized by our tax dollars 2) not tainted with their killing of innocent children.

55,000,000 (millions) of innocents have been slaughtered.
Science can now prove that this is not only MURDER of another human being but also TORTURE.
Everyone needs to know of this torture, even children.
Seeing is believing.
How would any of you feel if your limbs were pulled off or you were purposely burned by chemicals?  This information should not be hidden by anyone.
Hiding the truth is the work of the devil.
Go to the web medical web site - “Endowment for Human Development”, and you will find that:
- at 8 weeks and 2 days - “Touching the embryo elicits squinting, jaw movement, grasping motions, and toe pointing.”
- at 9 weeks and 3 days - “The fetus can also grasp an object, move the head forward and back, open and close the jaw, move the tongue, sigh, and stretch.
Nerve receptors in the face, the palms of the hands, and the soles of the feet can sense light touch.
In response to a light touch on the sole of the foot, the fetus will bend the hip and knee and may curl the toes.”
The TRUTH is the TRUTH.
Never lie or hide the truth of evil.

Ann, I suggest you consult a legitimate priest as soon as possible.  Let healing begin in your life.

I’m glad that the author brought up the matter of desensitization, which is the only point that is not as readily addressed in these discussions. The other points, however, are much more open to critique and are fairly easy to cover, and Mark Harrington from Created Equal has promised to respond in his next update, so I would recommend everyone who wishes to explore the side in favor of a wider use of the graphics to read what he will say, as the comment section is a rather limited forum in which to present the yea side of this this discussion. One thought though, which do you think makes one look more like a lunatic, the opposition to abortion and other forms of euthanasia out of a moral or religious ideology, or one based on the concrete horror of the injustice done to children and (often)their mothers by a shady industry with no regard for human rights? I myself have found it far more effective to start with the photos of the victims, discussing the matter from a natural law/human rights perspective, and then discuss my religious world view and reasons as appropriate.

“Fr. Pavone famously said, ‘America will not reject abortion until America sees abortion.’  Most pro-lifers understand that Americans are tragically ignorant about what abortion really is—what it really does to real babies.”

“But a public place is not the place to use these images—ever, I’m convinced.”

These two statements are contradictory. In order for the entire nation of America (a lot of people) to see and reject abortion for what it is, we must use the public square. The alternative Fisher offers (very limited use of images) simply will not get the job done, and is tantamount to saying “We can show Americans what abortion is, but not very many of them, and only once.” This is equivalent to hiding the truth, and allows people to persist in self-delusion and apathy. Half measures will not do when thousands of children are being murdered every day.

Fisher says we need to be sensitive to post-abortive mothers and therefore we should not use images. I agree that we need to treat post-abortive mothers (and fathers, and grandparents) with compassion, but you are missing the point. The point of these images is to make sure there aren’t any more women in this position. I would rather make one women cry than allow a child to die and another women to be hurt. If we hide injustice out of a misguided sense of compassion, we will perpetuate it.

Oh, I just saw that Tom and Fletcher have both given excellent rebuttals of the article in the comments. I definitely could not have said it better. Keep up the fantastic work brothers!

From my cursory reading of the comments, I get the impression that the general consensus is that these images should be used “only as a last resort” in the debate and only in certain circumstances.  So, would the abolitionist have avoided using images of slaves with their whip-scarred, manacle-mangled flesh in the abolition debate?  Also, after 40 years and 56 million aborted humans when do we determine the point at which it becomes “the last resort” to show America the reality of this holocaust?  Perhaps the greater question becomes, “If I were soon to become the victim of either slavery or abortion, would I want people to SEE what was about to be my fate, or would I prefer to be sensitive and avoid the images, relying only on words?”
From grade school through college and throughout the media, this hidden holocaust has been permitted to destroy life precisely because we have avoided the supposed “desensitizing” of people on the truth of this evil by avoiding the reality of images.
Ephesians 5:11 admonishes us not to participate in deeds of evil but rather to expose them.  We should do so with truth and grace.

Mark Harrington did a good job showing the reaction to the graphic pictures of aborted babies.  I’ve held them often. Mark doesn’t show the anger reaction and the many expletives.  Tears and anger are both necessary to heal.  We all know women who have aborted.  We all pay the consequences for the lies and misinformation that caused them to abort their baby(s).  Mark Harrington needs to get a sign with the abortion link to breast cancer (ABC Link) and be prepared to defend the connection.  Breast cancer was once an old women’s disease.  Not any longer.  It needs to be broadcasted.  Women who have had an abortion(s) before a full term pregnancy in their teens need to have start mammograms when they are 30 years of age. Children are losing their mothers because they are not seeking early detection.  Simcha should do her next article on the ABC Link.

If the 77 million Catholics in the U.S. collectively refused to support abortion in any way whatsoever, including not shopping at businesses that support Planned Parenthood, not sending contributions to nonprofits that support Planned Parenthood, and not voting for politicians who support Planned Parenthood and abortion, the gruesome practice would probably cease or, at the very least, struggle to survive.

Both the Catholic hierarchy and religious on a diocesan and parish level, as well as “faithful, practicing Catholics” need to follow the lead of CBR and speak out firmly and loudly against this evil thing that has taken the lives of 55 million human beings since 1973.

Seriously? 

Article is so wrong on so many levels.

Hard to know where to start.

Reading this and agree with this article? 
Realize you are part of the cover up, part of the problem.

“Desensitization” occurs when the viewer repeatedly sees a horrific injustic AND DOES NOTHING TO STOP THE INJUSTICE. 

The desensitivity issue is about killing one’s own conscience, not about hiding from the battle.

If we want to stay sensitive, see the horror AND TAKE RESPONSIBLE CONSTRUCTIVE ACTION to stop continued violence.

The author is on to a valid point but doesn’t follow the actual numbing process accurately through.  Talk to those who are passionate about saving the unborn and who use those photos and ask them if they are really insensitive having used them. They are still upset about the injustice on the image.

Kathleen Richardson - The Martyrs, Saints and Virgins accepted struggles, sacrifices, mortifications and sufferings to save their souls and others.  The “People of God” in the conciliar/AmChurch want to set their own standard for morality to avoid discomforts. Do they recognize this “liberation” from God’s divine law is to be enslaved by passions and a direct loss of happiness and freedom?

How do you know about the Holocaust…um yeah it might be because of those gruesome pictures you saw in history class. I appreciate their enthusiastic take on things but when I see people in the MFL dancing and singing I have to remind myself of the 55 Million babies have been ripped apart in their mother’s wombs. While celebrating pro-life how are we remembering the millions of babies that have been horrificially murdered, and showing the world how that murder happened? We are working against people who tell the world 40 year old science about fetal development to get away with abortion. Maybe we should use some science and fact on our end in order to stop the mass killing that America participates in everyday.

Alycia - Who’s celebrating?  “Maybe!!” we should stop the sexualized catechetics taught in the U S bishops’ schools that secures abortion?

Simcha, I chaellenge you to do a column on this female’s life lost at an abortuary.  If you care about women and the ‘choice’ they make that could end their life, you will do a column to expose the most dangerous surgical procedure.  Still, in spite of its danger it occurs 3500 times a day in the U S on mothers with unborn babies.
  “Marla Cardamone was 18 and pregnant.  She would not make it to 19.”
        See her life at:
http://safeandlegal.com/

@Orlando and all of the others who have so rudely and vehemently pushed for the showing of these images anytime.

Your comment really bothered me, and I needed to take some time before I could respond politely.

“And the excuse about children watching this, well children have been watching worse carnage on TV, and likely in their own public schools.”

This comment seems way out of line to me.  Perhaps my earlier comment got lost in the shuffle, but let me say it again:

My five year old son has high functioning Autism.  He takes things very literally, is a very visual/spacial learner, and has a difficult time separating what he sees on tv/movies/pictures/etc from everyday life.  When he has seen a disturbing image, he immediately thinks the same thing WILL happen to him.  If we drive by a car wreck on the highway, I try to divert his attention or he will become frightened that we are certain to be in an accident.  He will have nightmares for weeks or months.

We don’t let him watch violent movies because of this, and because he will act them out.  He doesn’t get to see “carnage” on tv.  In fact, we don’t even have any sort of television service, we use AppleTV and Netflix, and therefore choose what we watch commercial free.  While he has recently begun attending a public school pre-k program (for his behavioral concerns), I seriously doubt they show anything remotely violent there in the three hours he attends daily.

No, I’m not going to shelter my child for the rest of his life, just until he learns how to cope with his disability and can understand what images like this are shown for.

When something like a “truth truck” pulls up next to my car, or someone sticks a poster in a place where people can’t help but see it in a VERY public place, it undermines my ability to be a responsible parent.

Ho, I don’t use my children as an “excuse” to avoid seeing something that makes me uncomfortable.  My children are the most important people in my life, and I was entrusted by God to raise them properly.

Not once did Simcha say these pictures shouldn’t be shown, and perhaps she wasn’t very clear, but the point I am certain she is trying to get across is that there is a time and a place for pictures like this.  Yes, the general public *should* be informed about the horrible reality of abortion.  However, discretion should be used.

As for Holocaust pictures? I first saw those pictures when I was in high school.  I was a teenager, and could understand what I was seeing by then.  I was not a *child*.  There is no good reason to force a *child* to view anything as graphic as these pictures.  That includes TV and violent video games.  I thought pro-life meant protecting the right to life of ALL people: the unborn, the recently born, the elderly, the infirm, the healthy, and even those in war or prison?  Do children not have the human right of dignity and protection of innocence?  Do post-abortive women not have the human right of dignity - to not be terrorized for their past sins?  Do families who have suffered a miscarriage not have the human right of dignity - to not be forcibly reminded of a terrible personal tragedy?  What about the dignity of the subjects of those images?

These are some thoughts to meditate on before advocating without prejudice or discretion the use of graphic images.

Courageous Grace - when you equated a miscarriage with an abortion than I knew you are the one who is hiding. That is a feeble COMPARISON!!!
  Who will speak for the slaughtered babies?  It appears those who oppose it will not come out of their comfort zone to speak for the babies who suffered a cruel and excrutiatingly painful death.  Also, the mothers of these babies are often living as zombies because they do not connect the horror of the act to their current disposition. 
  It is only until they are “lovingly” assisted to face the loss that they will heal.  First, however, comes the tough work of stirring up the anger and the sadness of their lost baby(s).  These pictures do provoke this process.  If priests and bishops were doing their jobs as ‘fathers and shepherds’ many women might not have been convinced by the slaughter house personnel to destroy their child(ren).  One needs to hold these posters in order to see the successes; or if they choose not to, at least give courage to those who do.  It is a demanding and grueling effort to hold these posters for hours and I say hours because so few people are willing to take the mocking, harrassment and the ridicule. When the opportunity arises to hold them, we make the most of the time often beyond endurance. 
  I speak from experience of holding these posters.  When I protest by an abortion clinic I expect these signs to be made available.  If they are not than I hold my own and will NOT hold the namby pamby signs that DO NOT work.

Courageous Grace - Who will speak for this mother who lost her life at a slaughter house supported by our tax dollars? 
  See: Marla Cardamone was 18 and pregnant @  http://safeandlegal.com/

The victims, the slaughtered unborn, should be held high at the front of every march.  Until we can look them in the eye, and embrace them in our hearts, while really taking in what we have done to them (by silence, or by action), we do not love them.  It is justice. Every victim is given an opportunity in court to give a victim impact statement.  Why do we continually disallow the voices of these babies to be heard?!  The imagery gives them a voice - and we need to let their screams be heard - loud and clear.  We owe it to them. 
From a post abortive mom, and an RN who has been in the abortuary.  On the table and next to the abortionist.  If someone had shown me these images, my babies would be alive - I know it. 
The world is rotten because of silence - St. Catherine of Sienna.

to read case histories of women who were killed for refusing to have abortions:
http://safeandlegal.com/hidden-violence/

@Rosemary

Please provide a quote where I equated an abortion to a miscarriage? Were you really reading my comment? Where I explained that every human has God-given dignity? A repentant post-abortive women has the same right to her dignity as a woman who has miscarried. Of course they are not equal situations, but we are called by God to love one another as he loves us. I understand that this means also that we are to honor the dignity that he has given both of these women.

I feel very upset that you are both putting words in my mouth and stating hurtful assumptions about me without knowing anything about me. For your information, I am the younger sister of three babies in Heaven that my mother miscarried one after another. In fact, she was warned to not get pregnant again, and while pregnant with me, was encouraged to get an abortion to “save her the pain of having another miscarriage”.

I am telling you this so that you may know I have a personal reason to have strong pro-life beliefs.  I was also raised to be respectful of others, and to treat other humans as I would wish to be treated.

Now I have a question for you, considering my previous comment, would you really think it’s acceptable to show my son your poster if we were walking down a sidewalk that happened to go past your display?

As for the link you posted, that is a terrible tragedy, and believe it or not, I did view the pictures on the website. In the privacy of my office, after my kids were asleep. It broke my heart. Then I read the other cases on that site. I turned my computer off and went to bed crying. It seems like you are doing a good job so far of getting that young woman’s story out. Please, keep it up. When I spoke of discretion, a site like that is a perfect example. The graphic pictures are available, yet voluntary to view.

God bless you for the work you do, and may you prayerfully discern how ALL people may be affected by graphic images.

Dear Courageous Grace,  Only you as a loving parent should decide what your son is capable to handle. 
  When I have the opportunity to respond while holding the posters to parents who are outraged that their children will see them, I thank them that their children got a chance to live and ask them what will they tell their children when their children ask where were you, dad and mum,  when the holocaust was going on and what were you doing to stop it?  Of course I only get angry responses.  This is an emotional time for many.
  I know from personal experience about ‘miscarriage’.  My anger is that I did not know about the abortifacient effect of birth control pills.  It was not until years later that I read the symptoms of what happens when a mother conceives and then loses her child due to these drugs.  Of course women are not explained that birth control pills often do not prevent conception but its the chemicals that make it impossible for the baby to survive in the womb.
  Birth control pills and birth controlling are topics Simcha should cover.
  Please forgive me if I offended you, Courageous Grace.  You see, I think I have a grandchild who was lost to the holocaust.  I get emotionally charged up on this subject.  Still that is no excuse for offending you.  May God graciously shine His face upon you and all your family, and give you that perfect peace that surpases all human understanding.

Damn internet gremlins that ate my comment twice.

of course I forgive you, and thank you for your gracious response. :)

I remember as a child seeing the horrific photos of Nazi concentration camps! My parents didn’t show them to me, but due to the onset of the “information era”, the truth of the holocaust was shown worldwide! The Germans were marched through those camps to be shown what they took part in by their silence!! We, those of us who are part of the Body of Christ, are no less guilty by our silence, while in the beginning of the 1970’s, abortion was legalized in a few states, including New York, prior to Roe v Wade! Then, where was The Church in 1973? “A picture is worth a thousand words”! And that is true! The children of today are inundated with images so graphic, so horrific, that I am surprised those of you who oppose the use of these pictures, can honestly oppose them! Are you all that careful with your children so as to monitor their every move, friends, tv viewing, etc? (That would be nice!) The commercials on fairly decent tv channels are even worse than many bad programing! How many watched the super bowl? I wouldn’t have a television in my home if my children were young again! In fact, I don’t have anything other than Christian videos for my grandkids to watch when they are with me! I say this, not with criticism, but to make the point that when your children see these pictures, you have an opportunity to witness to them concerning this “fact of American life” which, unfortunately, they WILL be confronted with as they mature! “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Proverbs 22:6

So, my comment was submitted as spam! Was it because I quoted the Bible….“Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”

Constance Thomson RN - God bless you for sharing.  Do you know if “Silent No More” or “pro life joes” are currently active organizations?  I attended a public presentation of Silent No More.  These women were courageous in telling their stories.  Most were forced into aborting their children.  The press viewed the talks for about 5 minutes.  It’s not politically correct to report the anquish and the torment of mothers who thought they had no other choice.   
    Where are the wimpy men??  For the most part, and there are exceptions, chivalry is dead.  The day of accountability is already weighing upon them whether they admit it or not.  Simcha should do a column on post abortive men - men who forced the mothers of their children to abort and men who grieve because they did not have the law on their side to save their children.  Simcha, are you listening?

Yes, Rosemary, I am reading all of your comments.  If you will take a moment to do a quick internet search, you will see that I have written dozens and dozens of articles on all sorts of aspects of the issue of abortion and the pro-life movement.  You might consider submitting your ideas to another writer.  I try not to repeat my subject matter too often.  Thanks.

Do the same things and get the same results. Logic 101.

Sorry

Perhaps the inhumanity is best kept under wraps so that people don’t get upset by gruesome images. 

Easy for us to say.  We weren’t the ones tortured to death.

“When the apostles begged the Lord to send the dead to persuade people to repent, He said that if they didn’t listen to the prophets, then they wouldn’t be impressed by the dead coming back to life, either.”

He was prophesying what the majority response to His return from the grave would be. “The dead” was Himself. Then, when He died on the cross (Matthew 27:50) many dead faithful were raised and walked about in Jerusalem (Mt 27:52), and the opposers weren’t impressed. After all, when Jesus raised Lazarus the chief priests plotted to kill Lazarus.

Simcha,  Since you are sensitive about being redundant and repetitive in regards to the killing industry that tortures 3500 innocent babies to their death, creating another 3500 wounded victims – the mother, plus 3500 more wounded victims – the father which tallies to 10,500 victims DAILY just in the U S alone, I ask you to further reconsider your silence considering these figures. 
  Every month the murdering industry smites the will of God who wills each life by destroying 105,000   brothers and sisters with the assistance of OUR tax in- God- we trust dollars and thus inflicting pain and sorrow upon 210,000 mothers and fathers each MONTH.  For the rest of their lives these parents will not realize their God-given potential until they have been absolved of these actions by the Divine Healer.  This atrocity hanging over the parents’ lives and the loss of so many people harms ALL society. 
  Can you please explain why you are reluctant to be the voice of the wounded and the lost when you have the space, you have the mike, the platform and the opportunity to speak on their behalf?  Not included in these losses are the victimizers’ souls, the killers employed in the abortuaries.  That should create a flurry of agitation.  You say you’ve written in the past about the abortion holocaust so claim being released from further action.  How can any one of us be released from defending the defenseless as long as it still occurs?  Think about it, please!

I disagree with you completely. People need to see the horror of abortion. The pro-choicers do everything they can to dehumanize the unborn baby and get us to ignore them. We shouldn’t help them do this.

These signs convey the brutality and horrors of abortion at a glance.  Pro choicers reconsider their position when they see these signs.  People who have been neutral become more thoughtful about the issue and pro life.
Pro lifers are strengthened in their resolve to stop the killing of the innocents.  The author is mistaken.  These images, like those of racism in the 1950’s, and those of the holocaust from WWII, powerfully bring the truth to everyone.  Praise be Jesus Christ, defend life!

Abortion will be legal just as long as the U S bishops’ schools   sexualize youth at an early age with the use of curriculae such as “Growing IN Love” with imprimatur!

Even reading about these images in this article made me more sympathetic to the ‘pro-life’ movement, but reading some of the comments is alienating me from it once again.
If you put your time and resources into preventing unwanted pregnancies in society firstly, and secondly supporting single young mothers, especially in minority communities, then I will support your movement, because then it will really be pro-life - pro-human rights - rights of mothers, children, and fetuses. Why do you only care about a fetus up until it becomes a baby? There is so much more to life than that. And if you do care about after their birth, why not put your energy and resources there?
I think there is an ignorance and lack of compassion for vulnerable women in desperate situations around the world, in the past and present - in places where abortion is illegal, abortion still occurs. Some women will still risk their own lives having an abortion. Women should not have to risk death because of their situation.