Abortion: Whatever works

  • Thread starter Thread starter seekerz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why then are the Catholics who are in favor of this method not plastering these photos across every sanctuary and Catholic school every week? The “general public” includes Catholics who attends services, goes to meetings, etc there frequently.
Because it would not be a very effective expense of energy and time to put on pro-life march or demonstration down the halls of a Catholic school where the audience contains a targeted and disproportianate number children versus adults. The intended audience is most likely to be encountered within the general populace. It would be fun if there was a way to specifically target only adults who are pro-choice. Can you point out to me the difference between a pro-life and a pro-abortion person so I will know next time I see one?
There is even a demonstrable, statistically supported argument for their specific use in Catholic churches based on the above numbers.
You may be on to something there, but I wouldn’t say being specific to Catholic churches, rather the general populace inclusive.
 
In working to end abortion, are any and all legal means moral?
Legal doesn’t make it moral.
How do we decide if a particular method is moral?
If it doesn’t violate an intrinsic good.
Does it matter if these methods offend some?
It is a factor to be weighed on its merits or demerits in proportion to the good effect being sought. It may make no difference at all if the good accomplished far exceeds the effect of repulsion of someones feelings.
 
It looks like the questions in my original post will never be dealt with head-on by proponents of the various tactics. I see all kinds of side-issues being brought up, but the central questions here are being side-stepped:

In working to end abortion, are any and all legal means moral? How do we decide if a particular method is moral? Does it matter if these methods offend some?
Are any and all legal means moral?: No. As has been pointed out, legal does not always mean moral.

How do we decide if a particular method is moral?: By finding out how others feel about it for a start.

Does it matter if these methods offend some?: When you are claiming the moral high ground, yes it does matter.
I guess a good question to add is: who determines whether something is an offence, the one at the receiving end or the doer of the act?
The one on the recieving end.
 
What criteria would you accept as “adequate”?
Show how it violates an intrinsic principle.
Yes, good parenting is being able to do damage control. That does not make it morally acceptable for someone else to choose to knowingly and intentionally behave in such a way as to inflict that damage in the first place.
Answering a childs honest questions is ‘damage control’? In what way is damage ‘inflicted’ on children.
You are going to have to make up your mind. Is your intention in the use of these photographs to educate children or is it not?
This one was in response to your saying you teach and educate your child and she knows full well that an unborn child is human. I have stated the photos are intended to educate the parents, lest their children not be taught the human-ness of the unborn.
 
But they are appropriate places. What makes you say they aren’t?
No they are not, saying that they are wont make it true.
But there is a reason, believe it or not. That is to educate, inform, and instruct.
Its a pity that they dont really do that, but there are ways to do what your apparently aiming to do without distressing people.
But people that have abortions do go shopping, do they not?
Not everybody goes shopping has abortions or even supports abortion.
(not to mention some people who can’t have abortions, do support them, perform them, will consider having an abortion, etc.)
You seem to have this idea that you cant protest abortion, raise awareness about abortion and educate about abortion without graphic images.
None of this pertains to the morality of displaying the pictures themselves.
Your right, it has nothing to do with protesting abortion.
 
No they are not, saying that they are wont make it true.
Yes they are.
Its a pity that they dont really do that,
Sure do. Testimony previously given about life saved because mother didn’t realize what she was about to do. Your turn. support how they don’t educate, persuade, inform, etc.
but there are ways to do what your apparently aiming to do without distressing people.
There are ways of painting one’s house without using a paint brush which may or may not be more or less effective. Doesn’t make using a paint brush wrong.
Not everybody goes shopping has abortions or even supports abortion.
Not everybody that supports abortion can have an abortion. Statistically, large numbers of people, if we assume the general population goes shopping, will contain a likewise large number of those who support abortion.
You seem to have this idea that you cant protest abortion, raise awareness about abortion and educate about abortion without graphic images.
Please point out where you get this idea from. I have said on many occasions, graphic images are one of many tools in the pro-life arsenal. Not the ONLY one. And certainly not an immoral one.
 
I think some of the following quotes need some explaination:
1, The graphic signs dont appear to be stopping the murder of babies, abortion is still legal and still happens. But it does appear to get people to not support your cause and in some cases this falls back on those who dont use graphic images and they lose support as well. It is counter productive.
No, people don’t change from being pro-life to being pro-choice because they see these pictures. That is just ridiculous. No counter productiveness there. And, again, it has been shown that people’s lives were spared as a result of them.
2, You are not really in a position to use the “lesser evil” if you are claiming to take the moral high ground. If you choose to follow the moral high ground, then you cant lower yourself to using the “lesser evil” (you dont even try to warn people of the graphic content ahead to recapture some of the moral high ground).
Don’t have to worry about the “lesser evil” here, since it is not “evil” to display graphic images of the reality of abortion.
 
I know of know one who has ever said their children have suffered nightmares about abortion, nor have I ever seen a report on the number children suffering from nightmares from being afraid of abortion.
Well, there ya go. Proof positive. 😃
 
Well, there ya go. Proof positive. 😃
If you think about it there is almost no chance whatsoever that a child will ever see these pictures. That’s why think there is much more than meets the eye to the outragea against children supposedly been exposed to these pictures
 
Little chance or very unlikely, methinks would be more appropriate than "almost no chance whatsoever.

🤷 Whatever.

But I think you’re right in that the objections to such graphic images might be in some cases being used to cover a pro-abortion agenda.

My objection is to those who won’t acknowledge that such images could ***possibly ***be problematic for young children who may inadvertantly see them, however unlikely that may be.
 
Little chance or very unlikely, methinks would be more appropriate than "almost no chance whatsoever.

🤷 Whatever.

But I think you’re right in that the objections to such graphic images might be in some cases being used to cover a pro-abortion agenda.

My objection is to those who won’t acknowledge that such images could ***possibly ***be problematic for young children who may inadvertantly see them, however unlikely that may be.
Anything is possible there is a possiblity but is very unlikely. The unlilkley possiblity that a child will ever see these pictures coupled wIth the unlikely possiblity it will cause them any long tenm distress is no reason to consider not showing these pictures.
 
How long and how much effort has gone into posts and arguing against graphic images? I wonder if they have spent equal effort and time combating abortion. A Pro Life bumper sticker doesn’t cut it. If you are not out there actually fighting the fight against abortion you really have no idea what works and what doesn’t. Many more experienced and well respected people say they work. As a matter of fact the Priests leading the fight against abortion say they are needed along with many other things. I think people should take a good long look at what they are doing to fight abortion. If everyone who said they were against abortion actually did something it would no longer be legal, popular, and accepted. It wouldn’t even be an option. Instead of criticizing those who are standing outside clinincs, leading protests, and being active in the movement daily, maybe you should join the fight.
 
How long and how much effort has gone into posts and arguing against graphic images? I wonder if they have spent equal effort and time combating abortion. A Pro Life bumper sticker doesn’t cut it. If you are not out there actually fighting the fight against abortion you really have no idea what works and what doesn’t. Many more experienced and well respected people say they work. As a matter of fact the Priests leading the fight against abortion say they are needed along with many other things. I think people should take a good long look at what they are doing to fight abortion. If everyone who said they were against abortion actually did something it would no longer be legal, popular, and accepted. It wouldn’t even be an option. Instead of criticizing those who are standing outside clinincs, leading protests, and being active in the movement daily, maybe you should join the fight.
This isnt about fighting abortion, its not about who fights abortion, its not about being pro-choice or pro-life and its not even about what is effective in fighting abortion.

They are seperate issues to this thread. If you want to make judgmental comments about fighting abortion or what is effective, its probably best to start up another thread.

This thread is about if these graphic images are moral or not, not anything else regarding abortion or anything else.

There has been no criticism of people for standing outside clinics, protesting and being active, those things are not relevent. There has been criticism for indiscriminatly displaying the graphic images in question because some believe that sort of behaviour is wrong/immoral, but certainly none for protesting against abortion and I dont think that anyone here actually objects to protesting against abortion.

Do you believe that it is morally right to use these images?

Why/Why not?
 
Not all of us are in a position where we can fight on the front lines, but we’ll pray for success for those who do. 👍
 
Yes

Because there is no evidence that children have been exposed to them more or less suffered long term distress becuase of their display.
Well I wasnt actually asking you (not being rude but you have already stated your opinion, so you are just repeating yourself). But it does seem that you have changed that opinion about children being distressed by the pictures in question (ie: no effect has changed to no “long term” effect). But you wouldnt actually know if there was evidence, I mean you did insinuate that every person that says that they were distressed was a liar.
 
Well I wasnt actually asking you (not being rude but you have already stated your opinion, so you are just repeating yourself). But it does seem that you have changed that opinion about children being distressed by the pictures in question (ie: no effect has changed to no “long term” effect). But you wouldnt actually know if there was evidence, I mean you did insinuate that every person that says that they were distressed was a liar.
I did:eek: That most ceratinly was not my intention.

My contention remains the same-the chance of a child seeing these pictures is infintesimal and the chance it will cause any long term distress is even less.
 
If you think about it there is almost no chance whatsoever that a child will ever see these pictures.
If you actually believe this, then I am afraid you are very out of touch with the way in which some groups (especially the ones in my area) are actually displaying these pictures. I don’t see that one can reasonably argue that “there is almost no chance whatsoever that a child will ever see these pictures” when these trucks are driving down city streets during times that parents are picking their children up from daycare or school. When planes are towing these banners over public beaches. When trucks are parking in apartment complexes and neighborhoods, outside churches on Sunday morning (without the permission of the church), etc.

Case in point. We have a very large regional mall here, just off the interstate. It houses a number of children’s clothing and toy stores as well as venues that are very popular places to have children’s birthday parties. Across the street from the main entrance to this mall is a strip center that contains the only Toys R Us and Babies R Us stores in the area. The big Chuck E Cheese is nearby as are several fast food places with large indoor playspaces, and lots of family-friendly restaurants. This is an extremely popular area with families who have children in the age range I am discussing, especially on the weekends. This mall entrance is just off the interstate and traffic often comes to a standstill in the short space between the interstate and the mall entrance.

Last month Operation Rescue chose to stage a protest. Did they set up anywhere near an abortion clinic? No, instead they chose to stand with their huge posters with large pictures of mutilated dead babies beside the driveway to the toy store on a Saturday afternoon. Along the stretch of roadway where traffic that is going into the mall and surrounding area to birthday parties, to family dinners, to buying toys, etc comes to a standstill for several minutes at a time and there is nowhere to turn off if you see these posters ahead. With the pictures right at the window level of all those minivans.

There is not an abortion clinic anywhere near where the protesters were set up.

So far through some fairly complex levels of vigilance, I have been able to keep these images from my daughter. We don’t go near the mall on the weekends. I make sure to place myself between her and the car when we come out of any store (I have found these images plastered to my windshield in the grocery store lot, even though the booster seat is clearly visible and the store is nowhere near an abortion clinic). I make sure that I enter any public restroom (including those in grocery stores, McDonalds, etc–places that families frequent for purposes other than having abortions) first in order to do a visual sweep of the area to be sure no “surprises” have been left. Etc.
 
If you think about it there is almost no chance whatsoever that a child will ever see these pictures. That’s why think there is much more than meets the eye to the outragea against children supposedly been exposed to these pictures
“Almost no chance whatsoever”? My child was exposed at age 6, to a large gory banner being flown above a July 4th parade.
What makes it worse is that he was at the stage of sounding out every word he saw on signs as we drove along.

Happily, the excitement of the parade distracted him and the issue didn’t have to be dealt with prematurely (which is the point parents against this method are making; young children don’t need this kind of info yet).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top