Are graphic abortion images effective? An interview with Baltimore pro-life activist Jonathan Darnell

posted at 2:01 pm on July 18, 2012 by Dustin Siggins

A few weeks ago I was asked to join some pro-life activists in holding signs on Route 1 just south of Washington, D.C. Joining the group to hold up a genteel pro-life sign, I was shocked to see a number of signs showing graphic images of aborted babies. This led to a discussion with Jonathan Darnel, who had brought the signs, both in person and over the phone. Jonathan was convinced that such graphic images are actually effective, and despite my disagreement with portions of his argument I felt his argument was surprisingly valid and had more potential to convince Americans to become pro-life than I’d realized. Below is a follow-up interview to that discussion.

 

Dustin Siggins: What is your organization and what do you do?

Jonathan Darnel: I’ve never signed on a dotted line, but right now I’m working with the Center Bioethical Reform (CBR), with the Maryland chapter. The mission of CBR is to alter public opinion on abortion through interacting with the public, using a variety of methods. Most of these methods incorporate images of the victims of abortion and a good, solid argument. For example, we have a traveling packet that we take to colleges. It consists of a number of panels of aborted children juxtaposed with atrocities from human history, such as Holocaust victims.

 

DS: When I met you, we discussed the effectiveness of this kind of tactic, and I mentioned that I think it’s very aggressive and could easily scare undecided people away from the pro-life movement. Is that correct?

JD: That’s a common concern among pro-lifers. I guess I understand that. When I first went to a CBR event, I didn’t want to stand next to the signs. After a while, I was much more comfortable. You see a wide spectrum of reactions to stuff like this. Yes, there are folks who react angrily that we would act in this nature. However, most of those people are pro-choice in the first place. A lot of pro-lifers are afraid we are going to embarrass them, but similar to Martin Luther King – who was told he was too radical – we’re mostly just shaking up the system.

As an individual, I don’t use the images exclusively. They need to be part of the repertoire. However, I am working on a series of signs that will have an embryo and an infant, and compare the sizes and ask what makes this a person? Is it size, intelligence, etc.? I want to show how claims that the unborn are not people are just spurious, since you could apply that to the disabled or elderly.

 

DS: What does holding a sign on a road do?

JD: It probably doesn’t affect people too deeply, but with the Face the Truth tour you want to impact many people a little. I’d rather engage people in one-on-one conversations, but you can at least show them an image and give them a quick, pithy message. That is not useless. At the very least, it demonstrates to the neutral crowd that there are some people who care enough to get involved.

I think it keeps people thinking about the issue. If we get people to think about the issue, we win. Our argument is completely solid. Our biggest enemy is silence. We could make all the mistakes in the world, but it’s better than being silent.

 

DS: Is there evidence that holding signs on a road are effective?

JD: We believe this is effective for two reasons: The CBR website has many testimonies at www.AbortionNo.org (click on Public Education Projects) showing how graphic images have changed people’s minds. Additionally, we’re simply capturing tactics from past movements that took to the streets. Abolitionists, the women’s movement, civil rights movement activists, and others took to the streets at points, and abolitionists even took free slaves on tours and had them take their shirts off to show their scars. Was it controversial? Probably. But it doesn’t make it wrong.

Let me put it this way: If you were a German citizen who could publicly show the atrocities being done to Jews to the public in the way we do today, would you do it?

 

DS: True, but many Germans probably believed killing Jews was bad. The Nazi Party was only a small percentage of the nation’s citizens. Meanwhile, only 50% of Americans are “pro-life,” and of that 50% many support abortion in some cases. Holding up graphic images could very well cause them to turn away in discomfort or anger, not respond with an open mind.

JD: Well, I find that while many Americans who support abortions say they support abortion, many do not understand what that means. Something like 60% of Americans support Roe v. Wade should still be the law of the land, yet about three-quarters thought abortion should be illegal after the first trimester. Clearly, they fail to understand the laws and practical application of those laws as they relate to abortion, in this country.

I have met many people who say they are pro-choice but have never seen an abortion’s impact or thought about being pro-life. I don’t think most people support abortion. I think most tolerate it. This is why we show our arguments every place we can. We show what the abortion industry tries to hide.

 

 

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

What says the the so-called “pro-science” left?

It hasn’t had any problem showing graphic depictions of “back-alley” abortions gone “wrong”.

Check out Our Bodies, Ourselves if you want to see the difference in how the left portrays horror. On one page is a graphic photograph of a back-alley abortion attempt but when it comes to the clinical drawing of an abortion, the unborn child looks like that picture of Chinese food on the chopstick wrappers.

princetrumpet on July 18, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Show a late term abortion live on tv and Roe v. Wade will be history by the end of the week.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

More words….more words, you still have space Dustin…we want more words…it’s a sign that you have complete command of the language, the more words the more intelligent you appear…more words.

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Too many words again. But, your heart is in the right place.

Old Country Boy on July 18, 2012 at 2:10 PM

They’re very effective at making the people holding them look like unhinged morons.

Armin Tamzarian on July 18, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Honestly, they’re only useful in showing the blind hypocrisy of pro-abortion people (since they either refuse to look or don’t seem to care) or making pro-lifers out to be extremists. They don’t change people’s mind.

Red Cloud on July 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Get out of our bedrooms except for our birth control and whatever monthly health insurance premiums we decide are less important than our iPhones, Republicans.

rogerb on July 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM

More words does not necessarily mean you are more intelligent or have a better commend of the English language. i.e. obama. He talks so much, everybody tunes him out, like charlie brown’s teacher. Nobody was more succinct or deep than Churchill – let him be your guide (although he did talk a lot when you got him going)

Old Country Boy on July 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM

“They’re very effective at making the people holding them look like unhinged morons.”

Athiestpundit in drag???

Eph on July 18, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Are graphic abortion images effective?

Effective AND relevent! That is why the baby murderors hate those so much.

DannoJyd on July 18, 2012 at 2:17 PM

It’s just … is it agitation propaganda? I don’t want to see horror images on cigarette packs designed to invoke an emotional response, instead of a warning that lets me make an informed choice. So am I a hypocrite when I want to horrify someone into doing what I want?

Does anyone really think a baby, about five minutes from birth, is biologically different from a baby five minutes after being born? Or is it that they don’t actually care to begin with.

Or does showing the image keep people from hiding from a truth they should never be allowed to hide from, so we can get this hateful thing over with?

/difficult mode

Axe on July 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM

@Armin – the only thing it does is it shows how “unhinged” the truth and how brutal the reality actually is.

Will_Hal on July 18, 2012 at 2:19 PM

It’s easy to be pro-abortion when you’re not the one being murdered.

davidk on July 18, 2012 at 2:19 PM

If it’s just a blob of tissue, a non-person, etc., what’s the problem showing pix of it?

People pay money to see the same kind of stuff in movies.

Akzed on July 18, 2012 at 2:19 PM

princetrumpet on July 18, 2012 at 2:08 PM

I believe you. I’ll skip confirmation. I’m feeling sick again.

Axe on July 18, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Show a late term abortion live on tv and Roe v. Wade will be history by the end of the week.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Depends on if the mother was a democrat or not. If she was, I’d pretty much be cheering the whole time.

lorien1973 on July 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Of course they work. Why do you think they fought tooth and nail to kill an ultrasound bill? If you can see the life that is there, you probably won’t kill it (not going to discount the 5% of future residents of hell, mind you).

nobar on July 18, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Of course they are. That’s why the Left squeals so loudly.

faraway on July 18, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Every general election cycle, I see that big truck with the close-up images of an aborted baby driving around town (am in Ohio). The very first time I saw it, I wasn’t really sure what I was looking at, and then I saw the hand.

It’s shocking, to be sure, but if abortion is exactly what the left says it is, they should have no problem looking at the ‘fruits of their labor.’ It should be no different than looking at a squashed bug to them, since that’s value they place on the baby in the womb.

tdpwells on July 18, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I’ve been a student of the sciences all my life. By all the evidence, what develops in a woman’s womb is a baby–a human being.

Liam on July 18, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I find it laughable that these decency crusaders who are against violent, gory imagery in films and video games… will think nothing of brandishing a picture of a bloody, mutilated late-term fetus at an anti-abortion protest.

Would you want someone to take the goriest scene from “Faces Of Death”, blow it up to poster size and walk down the street with it for all to see? If not, how does the fact that the subject matter never passed through the birth canal alive make it okay?

I’m pro-life myself, but this is hypocrisy in the plainest sense. You can call attention to your protest without using Marilyn Manson-style tactics. Jonathan should know better than that.

TMOverbeck on July 18, 2012 at 2:26 PM

For me, learning what an abortion does to the baby is what flipped me. I hate the gruesome images.

I do like knowing what a baby looks like at 1 month, 2 months, 3 months etc. I do like knowing when they have a heartbeat.

El_Terrible on July 18, 2012 at 2:27 PM

They’re very effective at making the people holding them look like unhinged morons.

Armin Tamzarian on July 18, 2012 at 2:10 PM

You’ve probably never spoken to one of those “unhinged morons”, have you? You’d be surprised how nice they would be to you.

Pro-aborts hate to be confronted with the reality of what an abortion is, and looks like.

Ward Cleaver on July 18, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Liberals are so demented that they tried using RICO laws to get courts to ban the public showing of the results of abortion.

Liam on July 18, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Would you want someone to take the goriest scene from “Faces Of Death”, blow it up to poster size and walk down the street with it for all to see? If not, how does the fact that the subject matter never passed through the birth canal alive make it okay?

TMOverbeck on July 18, 2012 at 2:26 PM

That depends. If nearly half the country were totally cool with murder and argued that a dead person wasn’t really a person at all, than yeah, I probably would think it was okay to do that.

tdpwells on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

I find it laughable that these decency crusaders who are against violent, gory imagery in films and video games… will think nothing of brandishing a picture of a bloody, mutilated late-term fetus at an anti-abortion protest.

TMOverbeck on July 18, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Really, so you think these people are the same ones? You interviewed them, or did you just stereotype them? I am sure it’s the latter.

And just to poke you a little out of your lazy reasoning…ever heard of the word discernment?

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

And abortion stop being a form of birth control.

Wanna try again?

Liam on July 18, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Are graphic abortion photos/ videos part of the sex ed curriculum in high schools?

Bmore on July 18, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Does anyone really think a baby, about five minutes from birth, is biologically different from a baby five minutes after being born? Or is it that they don’t actually care to begin with.

Or does showing the image keep people from hiding from a truth they should never be allowed to hide from, so we can get this hateful thing over with?

/difficult mode

Axe on July 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM

I don’t think they care. The “right” to do it has trumped all consideration of anything else. And yes, I do think they want the horrors of the procedure hidden, so they don’t have to confront them.

changer1701 on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

You’ve probably never spoken to one of those “unhinged morons”, have you? You’d be surprised how nice they would be to you.

Of course they’d be nice. Passive-aggressive evangelical Christians always are. It’s part of what makes them so utterly creepy.

Armin Tamzarian on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Birth control pills act as an abortifacient as well. In cases where conception isn’t preevented, BC pills can cause an embryo to not implant – it’s an abortion.

Ward Cleaver on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

They do, it’s called Abstinence.

nobar on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Some people relish at the thought of sucking the brains out of a baby, crushing his/her skull, injecting poison into their bodies…it actually doesn’t bother them at all. In fact, you can see a few right on this blog, killing a baby is of no consequence to many.

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

After the Allies liberated the concentration camps in Germany it was necessary to march their citizens through those camps to get it to sink in what atrocities they had enabled, elected, pretended not to see for so many years.

Dachau opened in 1934 as a prototype death camp only a year (or less) after Hitler gained power. It wasn’t until the bombs began falling in their own back yards that typical Nazi sympathizers began to question the Austrian messiah and the holocaust machine he had emplaced.

viking01 on July 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

…the graphic anti-smoking ads are having results…

KOOLAID2 on July 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Of course they’d be nice. Passive-aggressive evangelical Christians always are. It’s part of what makes them so utterly creepy.

Armin Tamzarian on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

And utterly genuine, unlike you.

Ward Cleaver on July 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

They do, it’s called Abstinence.

nobar on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

There’s also NFP.

Ward Cleaver on July 18, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Drywall constantly reminds us the importance of family planning albeit not in the manner he intended.

viking01 on July 18, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Sigh…it can be a bit tough for those of us who had a stillborn child to see those images. But utterly worth it, if it changes people’s minds.

mrsknightley on July 18, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Of course they’d be nice. Passive-aggressive evangelical Christians always are. It’s part of what makes them so utterly creepy.

Armin Tamzarian on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Riding that unicorn today I see…nothing worse than a gentle spirit that wants to have babies live, just creepy people, imagine fighting to give babies a chance to live.
Best you stay away from those scary creepy people, seems like you are focused on your fantasy world. Reality is much worse, stay where you are.

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

You know, Rywall, the mess we’re in is because of liberals. You and your sick ilk hate the idea of teaching abstinence, you find that ‘too religious’ to be presented as a fair and honest option.

That aside…the reason liberal penis-borrowers love abortion so much is because it lets you rutters off the hook of responsibility. You liblet males don’t make love to a woman. You

rut

, like a deer or an elk. But, unlike animals, you run from what you did with a “Who, me?” ‘defense’.

Stay in your trite little world there, Rywall. You may well think you’re sh*t-hot, but even liberal women don’t much appreciate guys like you.

Liam on July 18, 2012 at 2:37 PM

viking01 on July 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Eisenhower commanded that detailed photos be taken of each prison, because he stated that man would never admit to such atrocities, that man could never face the fact that man could do that to fellow man…that is why these photos of unborn are valuable, there will be a time where others will say “That never happened”, man could never crush a babies head for the sake of convenience.

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:40 PM

History will look kindly on those who have told the truth.

samuelrylander on July 18, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Change the law slightly. Each woman who has an abortion gets a nice clear jar with the remains of her tissue-blob plopped inside. Sort of like the dentist giving you your pulled wisdom teeth.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 2:41 PM

“Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.”

Athiestpundit in drag????

Eph on July 18, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Some of the most anti-war people are people who have been in savage wartime situations.
Go figure.

Badger40 on July 18, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Would you want someone to take the goriest scene from “Faces Of Death”, blow it up to poster size and walk down the street with it for all to see? If not, how does the fact that the subject matter never passed through the birth canal alive make it okay?

TMOverbeck on July 18, 2012 at 2:26 PM

OMGawd…could you imagine? You might have to avert your eyes or something! Next thing you know people will be allowed to swear in public too; we need a government program to stop these freedo….er…abuses.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Why is it, that some posters are running for the reality that 40% of Americans are Conservative and 78% are Christian, per Gallup.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt, y’all.

kingsjester on July 18, 2012 at 2:46 PM

I’m sure it’s just as effective as the graphic images on cigarette packages.

ButterflyDragon on July 18, 2012 at 2:49 PM

I have no respect for the twits at PETA because if they had any transferable sense at all they would campaign against abortion twice as hard as they do against meat eaters and fur wearing.

CitizenEgg on July 18, 2012 at 2:51 PM

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:40 PM

A lot of people don’t know that the German Resistance, besides obviously trying to get rid of Hitler, made many efforts to inform the German people what was going on around them. There was an underground railroad, of sorts, to get Jews and other Nazi opponents or targets to greater safety in England or the US.

The biggest obstacles to the German Resistance effectiveness in that regard were Nazi collaborationist Jews and those so blindly loyal to Hitler of a mindset matched, perhaps, in our day by Chrissy Matthews’ blind yet rabid loyalty to Zero.

viking01 on July 18, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Show a late term abortion live on tv and Roe v. Wade will be history by the end of the week.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Although I’d love to see Roe v Wade overturned, and as an adamant pro-lifer (unless it’s rape, or if the life of the mother is endangered without one) it’ll never happen. Even if it were simply being talked about in the SCOTUS halls, the nation would dissolve into anarchy in a short time…and make the LA riots after Rodney King’s verdict look like a boy scout jamboree.

JetBoy on July 18, 2012 at 3:00 PM

JD: Well, I find that while many Americans who support abortions say they support abortion, many do not understand what that means. Something like 60% of Americans support Roe v. Wade should still be the law of the land, yet about three-quarters thought abortion should be illegal after the first trimester. Clearly, they fail to understand the laws and practical application of those laws as they relate to abortion, in this country.

Well, I find that while many Americans say they support abortion, many do not understand what that means. Something like 60% of Americans say Roe v. Wade should still be the law of the land, yet about three-quarters thought abortion should be illegal after the first trimester. Clearly, they fail to understand the laws and practical application of those laws as they relate to abortion, in this country.

Your last paragraph is duplicated.

This post is fine. Anyone complaining about length has an attention span problem.

As for the depth of the conversation, the images are effective. The majority of “moderate” pro-abortionists do not want to be confronted with what they are promoting… the murder of an innocent. Once they digest that fact, visually or otherwise, they are much more likely to become pro-life. History shows that making people see the consequences of their actions has much greater effect than just telling them. People process information visually at a much higher rate than words alone.

njrob on July 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM

JetBoy on July 18, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 3:12 PM

NRJob,

Thanks for pointing that out. I am pasting what was intended to be the final paragraph now.

Dustin Siggins on July 18, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Also, people are commenting on the length because I’ve written several long pieces this week, and they are pointing out that I need to be more succinct.

Correctly so, I might add. :O)

Dustin Siggins on July 18, 2012 at 3:16 PM

This is all a wasted discussion.

I’m anti-abortion … NOT “Pro-Life”, I’m actually for taking life if there’s a valid reason to – as in Osama Bin Laden. Don’t know why we call our side “Pro-Life” – most of us aren’t.

But I digress.

I like the signs, have no problems with the signs but it doesn’t do a damn thing. What’s it gonna make people do? Vote REPUBLICAN?

Heh, we’ve been voting for so-called “Pro-Life” Republicans for DECADES and they’ve even been in power – and they’ve never done a damn thing. Every time they have a chance to tip the scales of the SCOTUS all the way to the right to solidify a strong ANTI-ABORTION coalition of judges – they always end up picking a “moderate” and he sides with the leftists on the court.

Don’t know when you Conservative Slaves will realize the GOP has been playing you for over 40 years with all this “conservative” talk. They talk about small government and the rights of the unborn … they don’t DO a damn thing about it though.

But they seem to keep you guys pretty wound up! LOL.

HondaV65 on July 18, 2012 at 3:16 PM

JetBoy on July 18, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 3:12 PM

There’s also the little problem of cowardice. Tossing a rag doll into the devil’s mouth is easy; taking it back out is a b**** — but that doesn’t mean you don’t have to reach for it.

(PS: Not calling you a coward JetBoy. Actually, judging myself a little here. :) Just thinking aloud about all this.)

Axe on July 18, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Dustin Siggins on July 18, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Well you didn’t make a good first impression by calling birth control “immoral”.

It be your opinion but it’s not the majority opinion here and when you call it “immoral” – then you’re kind of suggesting that those who practice it are immoral also – and that’s a can of worms my friend.

HondaV65 on July 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM

I don’t know if they’re effective or not., but they helped me confirm that my decision to stop sending money to NARAL was the right one. In my days as a young lass I was affected by all those Movies of the Week showing girls dying from back alley abortions so gave small sums to NARAL once or twice.

What first turned me off the pro- abortion crowd was the callous language about late term abortions I heard one use on NPR. She said it was just like any other surgery to remove unwanted tissue. That flipped the switch for me right then and there. Years later, seeing those pictures made me very opposed to any abortion past a certain stage.

I think it’s true that people just don’t think about what’s happening to that fetus when it gets injected and ripped apart, or expelled early and left to die. . If they saw it done to a non-human fetus or a chicken embryo they’d freak out, but they prefer not to know about the same process regarding humans.

Yesterday on HuffPo I was reading George Lakoff’s latest attempt to “frame” abortion terminology. The euphemisms he is pushing are hilariously creepy, and sure to alienate people on the fence.

juliesa on July 18, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Of course it works. People need to see the consequences of their actions, or planned actions many times in order to make the right choices.

astonerii on July 18, 2012 at 3:24 PM

I was a sophomore in college when I first saw one of these pictures and it inverted my view on abortion in a nanosecond. Up until that point I assumed that the whole “lump of tissue, cluster of cells” argument was valid, simply because I had never seen it challenged before.

Walter Kovacs on July 18, 2012 at 3:24 PM

That’s a pretty stupid arguement that if they see a picture of an aborted baby it might push them to the side of a pro-aborts. That makes as much sense as if I show you a picture of a starved and gassed Jew, it will drive you into the camp of the SS.

All these euphemisms piss me off. I guarantee you there are a lot of women (and men) that think, right now, that an abortion is just getting rid of a blob of tissue.

John_G on July 18, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Surely don’t advocate showing a late-term abortion on TV !
Good grief .. even a first trimester one is a snuff video !
There are actual abortions offered on YouTube .. glad they are, but, TV ?? NO WAY !!

I am fine with holding these graphic-image posters, though.
They are effective.

pambi on July 18, 2012 at 3:49 PM

John_G on July 18, 2012 at 3:45 PM
??????
What have I missed, here ?

pambi on July 18, 2012 at 3:51 PM

The reason the Marxists and their abortion industry are so vehemently opposed to ultrasound is that it illustrates before the mother’s and all viewer’s very eyes that her baby is our precise equivalent potentially doomed to death only by size, location, defenselessness and another traitorous Supreme Court which betrayed the preamble to the Constitution.

viking01 on July 18, 2012 at 3:53 PM

More words….more words, you still have space Dustin…we want more words…it’s a sign that you have complete command of the language, the more words the more intelligent you appear…more words.

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

A picture is worth 1000 words. You can put up a sign with a pithy phrase. Or you can capture a 1000 word message with a picture in an instant. The latter may be more effective.

jpferman on July 18, 2012 at 4:06 PM

For example, we have a traveling packet that we take to colleges. It consists of a number of panels of aborted children juxtaposed with atrocities from human history, such as Holocaust victims.

Why that’s very clever! I like juxtaposing a pro-lifer’s ant-abortion statements with statements showing their hatred of gay people.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:11 PM

I have no respect for the twits at PETA because if they had any transferable sense at all they would campaign against abortion twice as hard as they do against meat eaters and fur wearing.

CitizenEgg on July 18, 2012 at 2:51 PM

No at all. Adult animals have a developed frontal cortex unlike first trimester fetuses. PETA is big on the pain issue.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Some people relish at the thought of sucking the brains out of a baby, crushing his/her skull, injecting poison into their bodies…it actually doesn’t bother them at all. In fact, you can see a few right on this blog, killing a baby is of no consequence to many.

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Yep, killing a fetus is of no consequence to me. A good many fertilized zygote don’t make it to birth.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Fox, since they’re already hated by the left,should just go all in and have a prime time special – made documentary style – following a young woman through the process of her abortion – and then show the abortion and the aftermath of the fetus and the mother. There are surgery shows on cable networks all the time – showing beating heart open heart surgery operations or various surgery room footage of this or that surgery. Really graphic stuff. They should simple do that with an abortion. Let the public see it. All of it. It’s simple – either abortion is objectionable or it isn’t. If it isn’t then the woman who has 12 abortions is no worse than the woman who has one abortion. And, well, if it isn’t objectionable, then show it on television.

JasperBallbaggins on July 18, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Yep, killing a fetus Jew is of no consequence to me. A good Too many fertilized zygote neighbors don’t make it to birth too crowded.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:16 PM

As I said earlier one of the biggest obstacles to the German Resistance helping Jews to escape the Holocaust were the collaborationists to whom other Jews fates were of “no consequence to them.”

Your fried mindset is no different.

viking01 on July 18, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Why that’s very clever! I like juxtaposing a pro-lifer’s ant-abortion statements with statements showing their hatred of gay people.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Nothing like making a blanket assumption about pro-lifers also being homosexual haters, thuja. You must have a very closed circle of friends.

chelie on July 18, 2012 at 4:29 PM

If you want to get an emotional reaction from a Democrat, all you need is three things:
1.) a kitten fetus
2.) a shotgun
3.) a camera
Then you will hear all about an innocent life being take.

Glenn Jericho on July 18, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Show a late term abortion live on tv and Roe v. Wade will be history by the end of the week.

Bishop on July 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

True dat!

redlucy on July 18, 2012 at 4:43 PM

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Thanks for a candid confession reprobate.

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

And abortion stop being a form of birth control.

Wanna try again?

Liam on July 18, 2012 at 2:31 PM
——-

If you could write in English that would help.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 5:39 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Birth control pills act as an abortifacient as well. In cases where conception isn’t preevented, BC pills can cause an embryo to not implant – it’s an abortion.

Ward Cleaver on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM
———

0.000000000000001% of the time as opposed to some moron getting pregnant because she didn’t bother or was too stupid to use birth control or was prevented by as*hole family members or as*hole clergy members from using birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Pro-life a*sholes like Darnell should be promoting birth control.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM

They do, it’s called Abstinence.

nobar on July 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM
—–

For the 95% of the population who do not wish to follow your/his abstinence idea, other forms of birth control are required. Surely you won’t deny people that.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 5:44 PM

For the 95% of the population who do not wish to follow your/his abstinence idea, other forms of birth control are required. Surely you won’t deny people that.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 5:44 PM

They can do whatever they like, as long as I don’t have to pay for it through my taxes.

chelie on July 18, 2012 at 5:54 PM

For the 95% of the population who do not wish to follow your/his abstinence idea, other forms of birth control are required. Surely you won’t deny people that.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 5:44 PM

.
.
Can’t keep your testosterone under control?

Have it removed. Period.

There’s no excuse for being defiant towards the idea of abstinence.

listens2glenn on July 18, 2012 at 6:06 PM

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Thanks for a candid confession reprobate.

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM

I don’t quite understand you here, unless you quoted from the wrong post. What I wrote at 4:13 was about PETA’s beliefs, and not my own. I no more like PETA than I like the pro-life movement. I do think we should be full of loving-kindness, but that doesn’t make it an evil to occasionally kill an animal for meat or other uses.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Can’t keep your testosterone under control?

Have it removed. Period.

There’s no excuse for being defiant towards the idea of abstinence.

listens2glenn on July 18, 2012 at 6:06 PM
———-

Wow, what century did you just arrive from?

Maybe you need to go back there.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 7:26 PM

For the 95% of the population who do not wish to follow your/his abstinence idea, other forms of birth control are required. Surely you won’t deny people that.

Drywall on July 18, 2012 at 5:44 PM

“Birth control” is the stuff you can go buy at the drugstore or get with a doctor’s prescription.

Using abortion as birth control is astoundingly irresponsible even if you’re an immoral hellspawn that doesn’t care about the moral qualms.

MelonCollie on July 18, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I don’t quite understand you here, unless you quoted from the wrong post. What I wrote at 4:13 was about PETA’s beliefs, and not my own. I no more like PETA than I like the pro-life movement. I do think we should be full of loving-kindness, but that doesn’t make it an evil to occasionally kill an animal for meat or other uses.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I can’t help you with those scales on your eyes.

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 8:18 PM

thuja on July 18, 2012

Just ugliness. That is how you are defined.

CW on July 18, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Of course they’re effective when used properly.  Deciding whether to use them at all depends on which of the following you deem more important:

1) Protecting the lives of unborn humans; or
2) Protecting the feelings of born humans.

Choose one.

OhioCoastie on July 18, 2012 at 9:06 PM

I can’t help you with those scales on your eyes.

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Matthew 7:3-5
New International Version (NIV)

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 9:28 PM

“Birth control” is the stuff you can go buy at the drugstore or get with a doctor’s prescription.

Using abortion as birth control is astoundingly irresponsible even if you’re an immoral hellspawn that doesn’t care about the moral qualms.

MelonCollie on July 18, 2012 at 7:54 PM
——–

So explain why militant pro-life a-holes aren’t promoting the hell out of birth control that prevents pregnancy.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 10:16 PM

So explain why militant pro-life a-holes aren’t promoting the hell out of birth control that prevents pregnancy.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 10:16 PM

As opposed to birth control that doesn’t prevent pregnancy?

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 10:56 PM

thuja on July 18, 2012 at 9:28 PM

It’s like being in the wilderness with satan all of a sudden.

You are too cute :P

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 10:56 PM

So explain why militant pro-life a-holes aren’t promoting the hell out of birth control that prevents pregnancy.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 10:16 PM

As opposed to birth control that doesn’t prevent pregnancy?

tom daschle concerned on July 18, 2012 at 10:56 PM
——–
So explain why militant pro-life a-holes aren’t promoting the hell out of birth control that prevents pregnancy.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Can’t keep your testosterone under control?

Have it removed. Period.

There’s no excuse for being defiant towards the idea of abstinence.

listens2glenn on July 18, 2012 at 6:06 PM

———-
.
Wow, what century did you just arrive from?

Maybe you need to go back there.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 7:26 PM

.
Where I’m from (on the timeline) is irrelevant.

The One whose idea I referenced up above, is forever. And so is His idea.
.
.
On the other hand . . . if you’re going to insist on being a defiant atheist, anything I say doesn’t help much, does it?

listens2glenn on July 18, 2012 at 11:45 PM

I think it’s very aggressive and could easily scare undecided people away from the pro-life movement. Is that correct?

As a convert to the pro-life movement, I can say that the images made me think that pro-lifers were loons. It was words and ideas that swayed me.

Also, as a mom, those aren’t images I want to have to explain to my small children in rush hour traffic. Just like one of my many beefs with the libs in public ed, I should be the one to decide when this topic gets introduced to MY kids.

Otherwise, keep up the good fight (but keep the images away from my little ones).

Laura in Maryland on July 19, 2012 at 12:18 AM

So explain why militant pro-life a-holes aren’t promoting the hell out of birth control that prevents pregnancy.

Dave Rywall on July 18, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Why would a sane person on the internet validate an insane person on the internet’s assertion?
You reprobate ignoramus.

tom daschle concerned on July 19, 2012 at 1:04 AM

Why would a sane person on the internet validate an insane person on the internet’s assertion?
You reprobate ignoramus.

tom daschle concerned on July 19, 2012 at 1:04 AM
——–

Awwww was the question too hard for you you pouty little girl?

Dave Rywall on July 19, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Where I’m from (on the timeline) is irrelevant.

listens2glenn on July 18, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Especially loved that bit. :)

Axe on July 19, 2012 at 10:32 AM

And just to poke you a little out of your lazy reasoning…ever heard of the word discernment?

right2bright on July 18, 2012 at 2:30 PM

If you mean discernment on the part of the graphic images, it shouldn’t make a difference… after all, fetuses should be considered people too, right? It’s a child, not a choice, right?

Community standards should dictate that such images, either from an abortion clinic or a horror film or a snuff film, should not be viewed in a public space where it would be easily viewed by sensitive adults or children.

And remember, I AM pro-life, I’m not complaining about the protests… just some of the pictures that are occasionally used in such protests. You wouldn’t put a picture of a dead, dismembered, disemboweled 2-year-old on a street corner, would you? Like I said, why would it be OK if it was a third-trimester fetus?

TMOverbeck on July 22, 2012 at 4:19 PM