Alberta bishops boycott March for Life over graphic images

[kimmielittle]

kimmie, as usual,

:hug1:

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

~huggers~ Thank You.

I think, some forget that personal opinions are equal - across the board. Yours has as much value as mine - mine as much value as some President or Prime Minister. Personal opinions need nothing of fact. Without supporting evidence / facts they remain, My Daddy can beat Your Daddy arguments in debates. That is why appeal to authority becomes a logic fallacy. We have no idea, without supporting evidence, how that personal opinion was formed…AND it’s very dangerous to assume why.

Some here would have us believe that factual evidence has been presented - I have seen none.

 

[jmcrae]

Some here would have us believe that factual evidence has been presented - I have seen none.

Read the Book of Tobit, to begin with. The Rite of Christian Funerals would be a good follow-up, to learn about how we are supposed to treat dead bodies - what is permitted, and what is not permitted.

 

[kimmielittle]

Hers, in fact.

It was in the form of a question, because I, too, am wondering what is factual.

It is a fact that pro-lifers are not legally allowed to be within 50 meters of an abortuary, so, how did a prolifer get into an abortuary with a camera and start flashing pictures?

Do you even bother with going to the links provided?

Let’s try to put this to rest.

Some come from reformed abortionist…some from medical schools…some as evidence. ALL obtained legally.

Unless you care to provide contrary evidence to support your statement / question.

Here is Center for BioEthical Reform
abortionno.org/

Here is their statement

CBR condemns all abortion related violence and will not associate with groups or individuals who fail to condemn such violence.
All of CBR’s abortion imagery was lawfully obtained in working abortion clinics. For verification: Photographers Statement | Abortionist Statement
Copyright © Center for Bio-Ethical Reform. All Rights Reserved.

Bolding mine ]

Staten Island, NY – Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, called upon all of the nation’s Catholic priests today to offer a Mass within the next few days for the “Hodari babies,” a group of aborted children who were discovered over the last two months in the trash dumpster at Woman Care abortion clinic on Southfield Road in Lathrup Villlage, Michigan. Through the efforts of Citizens for a Pro-life Society, there will be a funeral Mass celebrated this Saturday, May 3, by Bishop John Quinn of Detroit, and the babies will then be buried.

priestsforlife.org/pressreleases/08-05-01-hodari-aborted-babies.htm

abortionno.org/pdf/LevatinoLetterMay08.pdf

abortionno.org/pdf/photographervideographercertificationhardcopypixelated.pdf

Now, I have given many links disproving your assumptions…

 

[curlycool89]

Hmmmmmm… that is called an appeal to authority fallacy.

Yes, He out ranks me.

Has he made it a sin to respectfully carry a picture of an aborted baby?
Do ALL Bishops agree with Him?
Has The Holy Father instructed the Faithful that it’s a sin?

If not - it remains a personal opinion Which BTW I respect ].

AND I need not defend my respectfully carrying a poster of an aborted baby…of course, this requires some logical thought

What I don’t respect, is YOUR attempts to make statements of YOUR personal opinions as factual, or you trying to present His opinion other than what it is. - His opinion

Care to try again?

So, what you’re saying is that you disagree that an aborted baby has dignity? That you believe it’s ok to make them a sideshow as long as it gets to the ends?

 

[jmcrae]

Do you even bother with going to the links provided?

Let’s try to put this to rest.

Some come from reformed abortionist…some from medical schools…some as evidence. ALL obtained legally.

Unless you care to provide contrary evidence to support your statement / question.

Here is Center for BioEthical Reform
abortionno.org/

This one just goes straight into the graphic video, without showing the signed letter of permission from the next of kin.

Fail.

Here is their statement
Bolding mine ]

priestsforlife.org/pressreleases/08-05-01-hodari-aborted-babies.htm

I see nothing in there about letters of permission from the next of kin.

 

[kimmielittle]

This one just goes straight into the graphic video, without showing the signed letter of permission from the next of kin.

Fail.

I see nothing in there about letters of permission from the next of kin.

Now, it’s the next of kin?
Do you think a woman that aborts her baby is claiming kinship?
To use your wording… Fail!!!

Do us ALL a favor and leave the strawman attempts.

I asked you for YOUR evidence that supports your assumptions …

Do you remember what those were?
That they were some how obtained illegally…by some pro-lifer that was interested in a photo-op.

 

[jmcrae]

Now, it’s the next of kin?
Do you think a woman that aborts her baby is claiming kinship?
To use your wording… Fail!!!

Do us ALL a favor and leave the strawman attempts.

Kimmie. We are NOT ALLOWED to photograph dead human beings without the permission of the next of kin.

Do we believe that the unborn are people?

If so, then we are NOT ALLOWED to photograph their dead bodies, any more than anyone else’s dead body. EVER. It’s not legal. Not anywhere. Never has been.

The only way someone could justify himself to take photos of these kids without written permission from the next of kin, is if he begins with the assumption that they aren’t really people - that, in reality, they are nothing more than medical waste.

The only reason it’s technically “legal” is because, under the law (which the pro-lifers are rightly trying to change) these kids are, in fact, considered medical waste, and not human remains.

 

[kimmielittle]

So, what you’re saying is that you disagree that an aborted baby has dignity?

I will ask this, one time out of charity - If I haven’t said it… please don’t you try to say what I DID say. .

I am saying you haven’t provided evidence for your statements. None of them.

I’ll ask again

In short, can you provide evidence other than your personal opinion - That poster carriers are indeed, being offensive to the dignity of the baby pictured? Something no one here has so far done. Not even the Bishops who are boycotting.

I’m presenting a defiled body as evidence of truth.

 

[jmcrae]

I’m presenting a defiled body as evidence of truth.

Ask yourself this: Would you do this to anyone else?

For example, if you were working on an anti-rape campaign, would you display the naked bleeding bodies of rape victims on billboards and truck panels?

If you were doing an anti-gang campaign, would you display the actual dead bodies of gangsters (not actors with make-up on)?

And would you do these things without the permission of the next of kin, but just surprise them with the sight of their dead loved one on a giant billboard on their way to work or school one day?

 

[kimmielittle]

For example, if you were working on an anti-rape campaign, would you display the naked bleeding bodies of rape victims on billboards and truck panels?

Why is this a strawman attempt?

If you were doing an anti-gang campaign, would you display the actual dead bodies of gangsters (not actors with make-up on)?

Why is this a strawman attempt?

Let me give you a hint:
In the above cases rape is not demoralized by society - rape is a crime…as is murder.

You grownups have allowed the pro-abortion industry to desensitize and demoralize the killing of unborn babys. Even to the point of partial birth abortions, until recently.
And it took showing a film of a partial birth abortion shown to Congress to even get their attention.

You grownups have allowed the pro-abortion industry to hide the truth from generations.

You Grownups have allowed the pro-abortion industry to pedal their "murder abortion as ] for convenience - spiel to the general public.

You grownups haven’t done these things to rape or murder.

This is why your arguments above are strawmen

 

[jmcrae]

Why is this a strawman attempt?

Why is this a strawman attempt?

Let me give you a hint:
In the above cases rape is not demoralized by society - rape is a crime…as is murder.

And yet, at one time (within my lifetime) rape was considered “a bad date.” It was not punished as it is punished today.

How did people become educated to realize that it is a very serious crime? Why are the jail sentences today a lot longer than the sentences handed out in, say, the early 1960s?

Did people sensationalize rape by showing real people who had been raped? No, they did not. They did something equally (and indeed, more) effective - they wrote stories from the point of view of he woman who was being raped. People read the stories, or saw them televised, and began to see things from her point of view. They began to understand that there is a huge difference between a bad date and a rape.

This was all done without ever sensationalizing any real woman’s dead body. Yes, paintings and drawings were made. Yes, actresses posed with make-up showing what the damage from a rape can look like. But no photos of real rape victims were ever shown. No one ever stood there making a video of a rape in progress, instead of doing something to help the woman.

So, it’s not a straw man at all - it is an analogous situation.

It’s also the same with gangsters - a lot of gangsters don’t understand why it’s wrong to kill “the bad guys” in the other gang. But we use different tools to educate them - we don’t show them real dead bodies of real shooting victims. Art forms and actors are used, of course. Story-telling is used. But not actual photos of real victims.

 

[kimmielittle]

And yet, at one time (within my lifetime) rape was considered “a bad date.” It was not punished as it is punished today.

How did people become educated to realize that it is a very serious crime? Why are the jail sentences today a lot longer than the sentences handed out in, say, the early 1960s?

Did people sensationalize rape by showing real people who had been raped? No, they did not. They did something equally (and indeed, more) effective - they wrote stories from the point of view of he woman who was being raped. People read the stories, or saw them televised, and began to see things from her point of view. They began to understand that there is a huge difference between a bad date and a rape.

This was all done without ever sensationalizing any real woman’s dead body. Yes, paintings and drawings were made. Yes, actresses posed with make-up showing what the damage from a rape can look like. But no photos of real rape victims were ever shown. No one ever stood there making a video of a rape in progress, instead of doing something to help the woman.

So, it’s not a straw man at all - it is an analogous situation.

It’s also the same with gangsters - a lot of gangsters don’t understand why it’s wrong to kill “the bad guys” in the other gang. But we use different tools to educate them - we don’t show them real dead bodies of real shooting victims. Art forms and actors are used, of course. Story-telling is used. But not actual photos of real victims.

GOOD POST!!!

Which of the 42 million aborted babys this year… will tell his/her story, do you think?
I think the one on my poster will speak volumes.

 

[jmcrae]

GOOD POST!!!

Which of the 42 million aborted babys this year… will tell his/her story, do you think?
I think the one on my poster will speak volumes.

I think there are better ways. You could paint a realistic doll to look as if it had been aborted, and say, this is what an aborted baby looks like.

You could have mothers who have aborted their babies and then regretted it speak out and tell their stories. (Many of them are already doing that.)

You could have people who might have been aborted, but were not, tell their stories. (Many of them do that, too.)

You could write television dramas and short fiction that tells the stories of people choosing to keep their babies, and portray them as being very courageous, and show how the struggle is worth it. (People are also doing this.)

There is no need to degrade the actual children themselves.

 

[kimmielittle]

I think there are better ways. You could paint a realistic doll to look as if it had been aborted, and say, this is what an aborted baby looks like.

You could have mothers who have aborted their babies and then regretted it speak out and tell their stories. (Many of them are already doing that.)

You could have people who might have been aborted, but were not, tell their stories. (Many of them do that, too.)

You could write television dramas and short fiction that tells the stories of people choosing to keep their babies, and portray them as being very courageous, and show how the struggle is worth it. (People are also doing this.)

Catch me if I’m wrong here.

Haven’t you grownups been using all of the above for the last 35 years, or so - as we export and fund the GROWING abortion industry globally?

Can you name a taxpayer who doesn’t directly / indirectly fund and by funding, promote the abortion industry world wide?

I’m sorry , there is no “pro-choice” to abortion - abortion funding - abortion industry promotion…ALL of us are active participants.

Now ask this question:
The March for Life targets who?

POLICY MAKERS!!!

Policy makers who seem to be ignorant of truth until it’s “in their face”.Policy Makers who are wined - dined and sold a bill of goods by who?..Oh my…why the abortion industry.

It will never become inconvenient for Policy Makers to fund…legalize…demoralize abortion - UNTIL it becomes inconvenient for… Policy Makers!

Otherwise, we could sit on this forum all day and talk of the evils of abortion.

There is no need to degrade the actual children themselves.

Once again, a personal opinion stated as fact… without evidence.

 

[catharina]

Ask yourself this: Would you do this to anyone else?

For example, if you were working on an anti-rape campaign, would you display the naked bleeding bodies of rape victims on billboards and truck panels?

If you were doing an anti-gang campaign, would you display the actual dead bodies of gangsters (not actors with make-up on)?

And would you do these things without the permission of the next of kin, but just surprise them with the sight of their dead loved one on a giant billboard on their way to work or school one day?

In usual circumsatnces, victims who
are still alive do give consent.

However in other situations like war itself,
the dead/slaughtered/murdered are much
in evidence in the media from newspapers to TV.
Photojournalism exists to show reality to those who
are not there - but who need to know what occurs.

Not sure what went on in Canada (or what goes on
there now) but most certainly, I know that during the
war in Vietnam came into our homes every night
here in the USA. Dead, mangled bodies of both
troops and civilans were viewed by all. It might
be said that photojournalism helped end that war.

None of these victims of war signed waivers for such
pics to be used - but the pics were used and helped
citizens in this nation RECOGNIZE the atrocities
of war. Since we NEED to defend babies who would
and could be slaughtered, how about showing what
such slaughter looks like? I thinks it’s a worthy effort.

 

[curlycool89]

GOOD POST!!!

Which of the 42 million aborted babys this year… will tell his/her story, do you think?
I think the one on my poster will speak volumes.

A couple weeks ago, we had Silent No More on campus - in the main student’s building no less! It was very good actually, even just the image of 4 women up there with large posters declaring “I REGRET MY ABORTION”.

In usual circumsatnces, victims who
are still alive do give consent.

However in other situations like war itself,
the dead/slaughtered/murdered are much
in evidence in the media from newspapers to TV.
Photojournalism exists to show reality to those who
are not there - but who need to know what occurs.

Not sure what went on in Canada (or what goes on
there now) but most certainly, I know that during the
war in Vietnam came into our homes every night
here in the USA. Dead, mangled bodies of both
troops and civilans were viewed by all. It might
be said that photojournalism helped end that war.

None of these victims of war signed waivers for such
pics to be used - but the pics were used and helped
citizens in this nation RECOGNIZE the atrocities
of war. Since we NEED to defend babies who would
and could be slaughtered, how about showing what
such slaughter looks like? I thinks it’s a worthy effort.

I don’t think you’re getting our objection. Actually, all you’ve done again is basically say “the ends justify the means”, or more popularly now it goes “I did what I had to do”.

To quote exactly what you said, “It might be said that photojournalism helped end that war.” That is an ends. And the ends never justify the means. Never. Ever. That rule is inviolable, no matter how good the ends.

What you’re really saying is that those people’s dignity gets sacrificed in order to get to our preferred ends. What you’re saying is that those people’s dignity doesn’t matter. And that’s denying the inherent dignity they have as children of God.

 

[catharina]

A couple weeks ago, we had Silent No More on campus - in the main student’s building no less! It was very good actually, even just the image of 4 women up there with large posters declaring “I REGRET MY ABORTION”.

I don’t think you’re getting our objection. Actually, all you’ve done again is basically say “the ends justify the means”, or more popularly now it goes “I did what I had to do”.

To quote exactly what you said, “It might be said that photojournalism helped end that war.” That is an ends. And the ends never justify the means. Never. Ever. That rule is inviolable, no matter how good the ends.

What you’re really saying is that those people’s dignity gets sacrificed in order to get to our preferred ends. What you’re saying is that those people’s dignity doesn’t matter. And that’s denying the inherent dignity they have as children of God.

No. What I’m really saying is what Father Pavone says:
(paraphrase)

THIS NATION WILL NOT END ABORTION UNTIL IT SEES ABORTION.

I’ve been active in prolife work for 40+ years.
This action, showing the carnage, is a helpful one.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

No. What I’m really saying is what Father Pavone says:
(paraphrase)

THIS NATION WILL NOT END ABORTION UNTIL IT SEES ABORTION.

I’ve been active in prolife work for 40+ years.
This action, showing the carnage, is a helpful one.

Without regard for the personal dignity of those children. Just use them. Who cares about them? They can be Exhibit #1 for the anti-ABs.

 

[catharina]

Without regard for the personal dignity of those children. Just use them. Who cares about them? They can be Exhibit #1 for the anti-ABs.

You don’t get it.
Is 40 yrs of slaughter not enough for you?

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

You don’t get it.
Is 40 yrs of slaughter not enough for you?

Don’t get it? My wife was a principal in an alternatives-to-abortion facility in Little Rock for years two decades ago, I spent many a Saturday in front of a local abortionist’s office praying and trying to convince the women going in there to reconsider - and a fair number did.

WE never waved pictures of aborted children around - NEVER. There was the dignity of the children to be considered. I have no use for anti-abortion folks who would exploit those children that way. Ends justifing the means, that’s all it is. Unconscionable!!