How is graphic abortion footage obtained?

[runningdude]

I chose this thread because it is marked for “pro-life” issues, so hopefully the knowledgeable people are here.

My concern about how this footage is obtained stems from moral concerns I have about its use at all. At a minimum, I fear that over exposure to the brutal results of abortion may desensitize the general public to its evil. At best it should be used sparingly, so that its impact is not lost.

However, we are talking about death footage of a human child, and I’m concerned that over exposure can be an abuse of the child’s human dignity. We are using THIS child’s death to promote an agenda. We need to respect the child’s dignity so that his or her image is not some anonymous graphic footage presented only for its shock value. Again, I acknowledge though that it can be respectfully used to promote the Pro-Life cause, but we need to be aware of the child’s dignity.

However, the most morally problematic concern is how graphic footage is obtained. I’m concerned that some may be participating unwittingly in the documented child’s destruction to obtain the footage…

So, some questions:

• Are the brutal results routinely documented by “medical” practitioners. If so - why?
• Does the footage come from former abortionists, who release the footage when they discover the evil of their ways?
• Or is the footage surreptitiously acquired?
• Or, and I hope and pray this isn’t the case, do SOME misguided pro-lifers coordinate with abortionists to document the procedure? How often do you think relative to other “methods” of obtaining footage?
• Do other, non-activists, such as documentary producers, do such coordination?

The first three “methods” are the least morally problematic means of exposing the horrors, but the latter too give me grave concern that a helpless child is being murdered, and rather than intervening, the child is being exploited to further a political agenda. The ends do not justify the means, even if the ends are the pro-life cause.

I come here not to accuse, but to express my concern because, as I said, using this footage can easily be abused, and simply obtaining it can be sinful in and of itself.

 

[runningdude]

(I previously started another thread with a mistyped title… this is the corrected thread)

I chose this forum because it is marked for “pro-life” issues, so hopefully the knowledgeable people are here.

My concern about how this footage is obtained stems from moral concerns I have about its use at all. At a minimum, I fear that over exposure to the brutal results of abortion may desensitize the general public to its evil. At best it should be used sparingly, so that its impact is not lost.

However, we are talking about death footage of a human child, and I’m concerned that over exposure can be an abuse of the child’s human dignity. We are using THIS child’s death to promote an agenda. We need to respect the child’s dignity so that his or her image is not some anonymous graphic footage presented only for its shock value. Again, I acknowledge though that it can be respectfully used to promote the Pro-Life cause, but we need to be aware of the child’s dignity.

However, the most morally problematic concern is how graphic footage is obtained. I’m concerned that some may be participating unwittingly in the documented child’s destruction to obtain the footage…

So, some questions:

• Are the brutal results routinely documented by “medical” practitioners. If so - why?
• Does the footage come from former abortionists, who release the footage when they discover the evil of their ways?
• Or is the footage surreptitiously acquired?
• Or, and I hope and pray this isn’t the case, do SOME misguided pro-lifers coordinate with abortionists to document the procedure? How often do you think relative to other “methods” of obtaining footage?
• Do other, non-activists, such as documentary producers, do such coordination?

The first three “methods” are the least morally problematic means of exposing the horrors, but the latter too give me grave concern that a helpless child is being murdered, and rather than intervening, the child is being exploited to further a political agenda. The ends do not justify the means, even if the ends are the pro-life cause.

I come here not to accuse, but to express my concern because, as I said, using this footage can easily be abused, and simply obtaining it can be sinful in and of itself. What are you’re opinions or responses to the matter?

 

[runningdude]

I mistyped the title to this thread, I refiled it under “How is graphic abortion footage obtained?”. Please click the link below to visit it!

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=514128

 

[Bluegoat]

I don’t know the answer, but I also question its use for similar reasons. We do actually have limits on the use of photographs or film of the dead - if identifiable (and even if not) they are not usually used without permission of the immediate family. THis isn’t always followed unfortunately, but it is, I think, a good principle on many levels.

It seems to me that using abortion footage, at least in more “public” places, is really in violation of this idea. If we were talking about dead term infants, even ones that had been brutally murdered, we would be very careful, I think, about putting photos of them on posters.

That being said, where I live I seldom see anti-abortion materials with this kind of thing on them.

 

[vera_dicere]

Chances are its orginally crafted for medical training purposes. There’s a medical supply place online that has images of abortions after various technqiues and equipment was used.

Once its placed under teh banner of “medical training” its not all that hard to obtain, which is why I find the pro-abortion arguments that “oh, its jsut sauce and dolls photoshopped” or whatever to be rather spurious.

Abortionists need to know what they’re looking at post an abortion to be sure they’ve evacuated all the foetal tissue et al.

Its kinda like the precious feet image, taken after a child was removed from as an ectopic pregnancy. I doubt that the doctor holding that foetus was thinking “this’ll make a great pro-life image”.

 

[runningdude]

I don’t know the answer, but I also question its use for similar reasons. We do actually have limits on the use of photographs or film of the dead - if identifiable (and even if not) they are not usually used without permission of the immediate family. THis isn’t always followed unfortunately, but it is, I think, a good principle on many levels.

It seems to me that using abortion footage, at least in more “public” places, is really in violation of this idea. If we were talking about dead term infants, even ones that had been brutally murdered, we would be very careful, I think, about putting photos of them on posters.

That being said, where I live I seldom see anti-abortion materials with this kind of thing on them.

Its fortunately rare here too. I was at a rally where these type of poster were specifically prohibited, but the no particular reason was given (my shift was at 2 am, so there was also no one to do the explaining, haha). The topic was on my mind though because of another post.

Chances are its orginally crafted for medical training purposes. There’s a medical supply place online that has images of abortions after various technqiues and equipment was used.

Once its placed under teh banner of “medical training” its not all that hard to obtain, which is why I find the pro-abortion arguments that “oh, its jsut sauce and dolls photoshopped” or whatever to be rather spurious.

Abortionists need to know what they’re looking at post an abortion to be sure they’ve evacuated all the foetal tissue et al.

Its kinda like the precious feet image, taken after a child was removed from as an ectopic pregnancy. I doubt that the doctor holding that foetus was thinking “this’ll make a great pro-life image”.

This does belay my concerns about obtaining the footage. Really here, only the abortionists are involved, and their perverse “educational materials” are being turned upside down. Still, I’m glad public protests using such material are rare for my aforementioned concerns.

 

[vz71]

This does belay my concerns about obtaining the footage. Really here, only the abortionists are involved, and their perverse “educational materials” are being turned upside down. Still, I’m glad public protests using such material are rare for my aforementioned concerns.

We are utilizing the educational materials to educate.
I would hardly classify that as turning it upside down. If anything, the whole of the abortion agenda is upside down.

I suspect as time goes on materials will become harder to find.
Now that the pro-death people can see the effect such materials have, they will try to curtail propogation of the materials.