Is this an acceptable pro-life technique?

  • Thread starter Thread starter UKcatholicGuy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joe_Kelley said:
Right - get them out sight - and out of mind.
Click to expand...
I never said that and I never intended that. You are putting words in my mouth and I don’t much appreciate it.

No - not out of sight and out of mind - but respected, just as she should have been at the outset. Not dragged around in a coffin for people to stare at and take photos of. It’s disgusting and irreverent.

~Liza
 
It sounds quite utilitarian to me, and utilitarianism as a Catholic moral principle is completely UNREASONABLE and therefore WRONG. Whatever the conference’s intentions were, to convince others to support the pro-life movement, to convince a pregnant woman somewhere not to have an abortioni, whatever, the action was and is wrong. I don’t care if 5,000 babies were saved because of this. It is wrong to use human beings as the means to an end, even a just end. It is no different than using embryonic stem cells to cure disease. No one argues that curing a disease is bad. What is bad is using human beings as a means to an end. Likewise, no one argues that less abortions is a bad thing. What is bad is using this little girl as a means to an end.
 
It’s interesting that a previous poster who supports this ‘technique’ believes that graphic photos don’t work because of desensitization (to blood and gore) by Hollywood. My question to her would be: why further that desensitization even more using a real baby in a film?

By the time our kids get to adulthood, will anything retain the ability to shock anyone? Maybe that will be a good stage to get to because then we will have to focus on teaching people that wrong things are wrong because they offend God, not necessarily because they shock man.
 
Re: the posts that have argued that the display was worth it if it converts even one mother’s heart. Consequentialism is not an acceptable system of thought. The Church clearly teaches that we may not morally use evil means to bring about a good end. We must determine the moral acceptability of this display apart from any good it might bring about.

That said, I think the whole display inexcusable. From the description available, I agree wholeheartedly with the previous posters who pointed out that it is a charade designed to elicit an emotional response rather than to communicate a brutal truth. Shock might be a valuable tool in some cases, but not when it involves the degradation of a person. The little girl was used as a tool; that is degradation.

I have a hard enough time with graphic images (I know they are very useful, but the idea of someone hanging out in an abortion clinic whilst abortions are performed, then poking the bodies about, posing them for photographs, disturbs me). This is something else altogether.
 
p.s. My connection is slow and I was still typing when some other people posted. Apologies if I’m just repeating what others have said (notably buc_fan).
 
buc_fan33 said:
It sounds quite utilitarian to me, and utilitarianism as a Catholic moral principle is completely UNREASONABLE and therefore WRONG. Whatever the conference’s intentions were, to convince others to support the pro-life movement, to convince a pregnant woman somewhere not to have an abortioni, whatever, the action was and is wrong. I don’t care if 5,000 babies were saved because of this. It is wrong to use human beings as the means to an end, even a just end. It is no different than using embryonic stem cells to cure disease. No one argues that curing a disease is bad. What is bad is using human beings as a means to an end. Likewise, no one argues that less abortions is a bad thing. What is bad is using this little girl as a means to an end.
Click to expand...
This is an excellent parallel - excellent post! 👍

~Liza
 
Reply to the title of the OP: No.

I agree with previous posts that suggest that this baby was used as a prop. A wake is a different thing, entirely.

An empty casket would have sufficed.

This was at a pro-life conference!! Do you think anyone there needed to see a dead fetus in the flesh to be convinced that abortion is wrong??

Sorry, the “sometimes graphic posters aren’t enough” doesn’t seem to apply to pro-life conference attendees. :mad:
 
Newbie2 said:
Reply to the title of the OP: No.

I agree with previous posts that suggest that this baby was used as a prop. A wake is a different thing, entirely.

An empty casket would have sufficed.

This was at a pro-life conference!! Do you think anyone there needed to see a dead fetus in the flesh to be convinced that abortion is wrong??

Sorry, the “sometimes graphic posters aren’t enough” doesn’t seem to apply to pro-life conference attendees. :mad:
Click to expand...
Have you objected equally strongly to the pictures of mass graves at the Holocaust Museum?
 
Newbie2 said:
:confused:

No. What’s your point?

I’d object to a corpse from that grave being displayed at a museum.
Click to expand...
But not pictures of the naked corpses? I think I find the digified viewing of a corpse in a coffin much more respectful than a in a heap in a mass grave.
 
Joe_Kelley said:
But not pictures of the naked corpses?
Click to expand...
Not a good comparison. Pictures show something from the past; the body is currently at rest. When a body is on display, the body is not at rest as is the Christian custom. Burial of the dead is a serious obligation for Christians and ought not to be delayed.
 
Joe_Kelley said:
But not pictures of the naked corpses? I think I find the digified viewing of a corpse in a coffin much more respectful than a in a heap in a mass grave.
Click to expand...
:confused:
UKcatholicGuy said:
Not a good comparison. Pictures show something from the past; the body is currently at rest. When a body is on display, the body is not at rest as is the Christian custom. Burial of the dead is a serious obligation for Christians and ought not to be delayed.
Click to expand...
👍

Nor should the dead be used for propaganda, regardless of the intent.

Like I wrote previously, an empty coffin would have served the purpose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top