Why do anti-abortion signs

[fix]

All I can say to those of you who think it is ok to display graphic pictures of dead children where small children might see them, is that it is a really good thing you do not live where I live. If you did you might find yourself indicted for exposing a minor to indecent material. I would be the one indicting you by the way.

Is this not an example of the dictatorship of relativism? Those who commit and perform abortions are not prosecuted, yet those who expose the evil would be prosecuted?

We are not called to do evil to prevent evil. It is evil in my opinion to expose small children to graphic photos of someone who is dead, regardless of how they died or at what age.

Right, your opinion. Is it a fact? I am not sure I am totally in favor of the tactic in every single application, but I cannot see how can you claim it is an evil?

Children have a right to be raised with some amount of innocence. Innocent lives should not be taken, but innocence should not be taken from lives either.

It is a balance. I am not sure you have made the case.

I am exposed to dead people all the time as I am a felony prosecutor. However, if someone exposed my small child to this, they better be ready to spend a little time in jail.

Is that really justice?

The ends do not justify the means.

Right, so why prosecute innocent folks?

 

[bear06]

Do you honestly believe that they would not react to a picture of a living baby in the womb? Most women I know just want to hug and hold every baby they see. You don’t think that seeing a blown up picture of a Living Baby in the womb would stop them from getting an abortion?

I really wish you’d drop the word “honestly” from your posts. I’m kind of getting the impression you think I’m somehow lying here. I honestly believe that these pictures are the most effective way to prevent abortions (other than getting laws passed which I do work on and sitting in front of the doors which I used to do). Are there other methods that can be effective? Yes. Again, it’s been my experience and those who are on the street quite regularly that the graphic pictures work best and since we’re dealing with a life and death situation, it’s best to use what works best.

You’re right it’s about LIFE and Death!
So why aren’t pictures of LIFE shown? Why is only pictures of death?

 

[gam197]

There have been a number of past forum threads also on this issue.

It is important to note that for about 20-25 years, the only signs that were held at clinics were healthy, happy babies often with a sign that would say “Choose Life”. Some people complained that they didn’t like the healthy baby signs because they felt these signs might bother the girl seeking an abortion.

It tooks years before people decided that these happy baby signs were really not effective. They were healthy babies and that really was not what these clinics were about. Often the clinics are near colleges and the abortion signs are a constant reminder that Planned Parenthood is not a good place.

A mixture of signs is what many strive for.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilzation has been 200 years. Alexander Tyler, Historian

 

[Kendy]

You may understand very well what the pictures our but you’re not reading this thread very well. I didnt say that I knew your kids wouldn’t be permanently scarred. I said I seriously doubt it. Maybe because I know literally hundreds of kids that have been exposed to them at an early age and they’re just fine even though the pictures are disturbing.

BTW, my point here is that if I have to risk my children’s peace to save a child, I will.

Yesterday I had something that reminded me of this whole conversation. I was the first on scene yesterday at a roll over accident and I had a full load my children in the car. As I go out and saw the reckage, I thought “Oh no, my kids are going to have to see this dead body! Please help them, Lord”. There was a really good chance that this women was going to be dead. Does that mean I shouldn’t have stopped? I’m here to tell you that my children would have been very disturbed. God answered my prayers because, miraculously (and I mean miraculously and if you could have seen the car you would agree) she had not a scratch on her.
Still, even if she had been bleeding all over, my husband and I had to help her.

I also think that children being upset is a natural human reaction to finding out something disturbing. Thankfully, children are free enough to express what we suppress as adults. Of course, they are horrified; it’s a horrifying thing. I remember being horrified a lot as a child. When I was sick, there was violence allover my country and I saw television footage of dead bodies. I was horrified, but it didn’t scar me. When I first read about the native Americans being butchered in Haiti, I was 7 or 8 years-old, I cried about it. Again, I am not traumatized.

Kendy

 

[bear06]

I also think that children being upset is a natural human reaction to finding out something disturbing. Thankfully, children are free enough to express what we suppress as adults. Of course, they are horrified; it’s a horrifying thing. I remember being horrified a lot as a child. When I was sick, there was violence allover my country and I saw television footage of dead bodies. I was horrified, but it didn’t scar me. When I first read about the native Americans being butchered in Haiti, I was 7 or 8 years-old, I cried about it. Again, I am not traumatized.

Kendy

I also find that when the kids have come face to face with the horror of abortion they want to do something to stop it. Children have such a beautiful way abou thtem of seeing evil and wanting to do all that they can to combat it. They believe that they can, and rightfully so, fight against evil.

 

[HoppityRedux]

I doubt a kid would be any more harmed by a pic of an abortion than by a pic of a naked human being. They can handle it.

 

[Kendy]

I also think that children being upset is a natural human reaction to finding out something disturbing. Thankfully, children are free enough to express what we suppress as adults. Of course, they are horrified; it’s a horrifying thing. I remember being horrified a lot as a child. When I was sick, there was violence allover my country and I saw television footage of dead bodies. I was horrified, but it didn’t scar me. When I first read about the native Americans being butchered in Haiti, I was 7 or 8 years-old, I cried about it. Again, I am not traumatized.

Kendy

I meant when I was six, not sick. And all over is definitely two words.

 

[Monica02]

All I can say to those of you who think it is ok to display graphic pictures of dead children where small children might see them, is that it is a really good thing you do not live where I live. If you did you might find yourself indicted for exposing a minor to indecent material. I would be the one indicting you by the way.

We are not called to do evil to prevent evil. It is evil in my opinion to expose small children to graphic photos of someone who is dead, regardless of how they died or at what age. Children have a right to be raised with some amount of innocence. Innocent lives should not be taken, but innocence should not be taken from lives either.

I am exposed to dead people all the time as I am a felony prosecutor. However, if someone exposed my small child to this, they better be ready to spend a little time in jail. People of all ages are killed every day. It is a horrible thing. Stripping the innocence from a small child is not going to stop people from killing each other, but it sure does a great deal of harm to the child.

The ends do not justify the means. Just my two cents for what they are worth.

Yours in Christ.

A

What you are suggesting is not allowed in the USA (is that where you live). Demonstrations involving aborted baby pictures are perfectly legal and I participate in these demonstrations many times througout the year. If you decide to jail someone for this then expect a lawsuit. It is disgraceful that you feel that your opinion trumps the rights to freedom of speech.

I, for one, will consider cutting back my activities when aborted fetuses are considered by our laws and people to be dead children.

 

[Monica02]

I doubt a kid would be any more harmed by a pic of an abortion than by a pic of a naked human being. They can handle it.

I have participated in countless “aborted baby pix” demonstrations and I have never seen a child freak out or scream or cry. I have seen adults get irrational and violent.

Most kids either ignore the pix or show compassion for the little baby. Alot of parents bring their kids over to see so they can tell them how awful abortion is.

One time a mother asked for a flier to show her son so she could prove to us that that it would harm him. So she shows him the pix and he thinks it is disgusting and lets it go at that. The mom proceeds to hound the poor child until he cries.

Their are so many lies out there about abortion, the pix are the best way to show the reality of it. It is difficult for a driver to not have to look at the pix because he/she must look up to drive.

 

[Karin]

I have participated in countless “aborted baby pix” demonstrations and I have never seen a child freak out or scream or cry. I have seen adults get irrational and violent.

Most kids either ignore the pix or show compassion for the little baby. Alot of parents bring their kids over to see so they can tell them how awful abortion is.

One time a mother asked for a flier to show her son so she could prove to us that that it would harm him. So she shows him the pix and he thinks it is disgusting and lets it go at that. The mom proceeds to hound the poor child until he cries.

Their are so many lies out there about abortion, the pix are the best way to show the reality of it. It is difficult for a driver to not have to look at the pix because he/she must look up to drive.

how old are these kids…over say 10?
My concern is for little kids …under the age of 5 seeing this photos

 

[Monica02]

how old are these kids…over say 10?
My concern is for little kids …under the age of 5 seeing this photos

I have encountered kids of all ages. The people that appear to be most traumatized are always adults. I have seen adults bow their heads and cry or get violent and irrational. Kids of all ages either ignore the sign or ask what it is and show compassion for the dead baby. Older kids usually are very interested in the sign.

 

[Mommyof02green]

I really wish you’d drop the word “honestly” from your posts. I’m kind of getting the impression you think I’m somehow lying here. I honestly believe that these pictures are the most effective way to prevent abortions (other than getting laws passed which I do work on and sitting in front of the doors which I used to do). Are there other methods that can be effective? Yes. Again, it’s been my experience and those who are on the street quite regularly that the graphic pictures work best and since we’re dealing with a life and death situation, it’s best to use what works best.

Again, where I am, we use both kinds. I advocate juxtaposing the two pictures to cover all bases and when I’ve gone, we do use both kinds.

If you look up the websites of the more active pro-lifers, Scheidler, PFL, the Survivors,etc., they have all explained that they have found that these pictures are the most effective. How can I tell you different when it’s the truth? Nobody is making this up because we simply want to show gory pictures.

Actually I HAVE NOT posted anything new in a few days. My quotes you used came from post number 50 and you gave answers to them in post 53 and now you are addressing the same post again here in post number 82.

My hubby had surgrey earlier this week… so I HAVE NOT been on for a few days My last posted was on Nov 19 thanking the mods for moving the thread. (of course now there is this post)

 

[bear06]

Yes, I noticed this after I posted. For some reason when I logged on that day, it showed this as the last post. I guess only pulled up the first page that time. I’m using a notebook right not since I’m on vacation. Mea culpa! Many prayers for your husband too.

Monica, it seems we have had similar experiences although I’ve never seen anyone harass their children to make a point. How sad.

 

[Mommyof02green]

Yes, I noticed this after I posted. For some reason when I logged on that day, it showed this as the last post. I guess only pulled up the first page that time. I’m using a notebook right not since I’m on vacation. Mea culpa! Many prayers for your husband too.

Monica, it seems we have had similar experiences although I’ve never seen anyone harass their children to make a point. How sad.

Thanks! God Bless

 

[Aesq]

What you are suggesting is not allowed in the USA (is that where you live). Demonstrations involving aborted baby pictures are perfectly legal and I participate in these demonstrations many times througout the year. If you decide to jail someone for this then expect a lawsuit. It is disgraceful that you feel that your opinion trumps the rights to freedom of speech.

I, for one, will consider cutting back my activities when aborted fetuses are considered by our laws and people to be dead children.

Actually what I am suggesting is perfectly legal in the US. You may want to do a little research before you write. I do not believe that my opinion trumps freedom of speech. However, freedom of speech is not an unlimited right. Obscene speech is not protected speech. Knowingly displaying graphic photos of dead persons in a location where children will likely be exposed to them is a violation of Constitutionally valid obscenity laws in many jurisdictions.

Persons can sue away. I for one will do my best to protect children from both abortion and from abortion protesters using images which could harm children. If you think the threat of lawsuit will stop me from protecting children you are very confused. I have received death threats in the course of doing my job protecting the rights of helpless victims of child abuse and that has not stopped me from doing my job.

 

[bear06]

Actually what I am suggesting is perfectly legal in the US. You may want to do a little research before you write. I do not believe that my opinion trumps freedom of speech. However, freedom of speech is not an unlimited right. Obscene speech is not protected speech.

LOL! You might want to spend some time reading some bumper stickers and t-shirts next time you’re at the mall.

Knowingly displaying graphic photos of dead persons in a location where children will likely be exposed to them is a violation of Constitutionally valid obscenity laws in many jurisdictions.

 

[Monica02]

Actually what I am suggesting is perfectly legal in the US. You may want to do a little research before you write. I do not believe that my opinion trumps freedom of speech. However, freedom of speech is not an unlimited right. Obscene speech is not protected speech. Knowingly displaying graphic photos of dead persons in a location where children will likely be exposed to them is a violation of Constitutionally valid obscenity laws in many jurisdictions.

Persons can sue away. I for one will do my best to protect children from both abortion and from abortion protesters using images which could harm children. If you think the threat of lawsuit will stop me from protecting children you are very confused. I have received death threats in the course of doing my job protecting the rights of helpless victims of child abuse and that has not stopped me from doing my job.

The whole point is that aborted babies are NOT CONSIDERED PERSONS by our government. If it is illegal to show graphic pictures of dead PERSONS then aborted babies do not fall into this category. Like I posted earlier, when unborn babies are considered people by our laws I will consider cutting back on my activities.

 

[bear06]

The whole point is that aborted babies are NOT CONSIDERED PERSONS by our government. If it is illegal to show graphic pictures of dead PERSONS then aborted babies do not fall into this category. Like I posted earlier, when unborn babies are considered people by our laws I will consider cutting back on my activities.

 

[Aesq]

The whole point is that aborted babies are NOT CONSIDERED PERSONS by our government. If it is illegal to show graphic pictures of dead PERSONS then aborted babies do not fall into this category. Like I posted earlier, when unborn babies are considered people by our laws I will consider cutting back on my activities.

You again may want to do a little research.

In some States it is murder to cause that death of a child in who is not yet born. If you were to cause the death of the mother and thereby cause the death of the child it is a double murder. Further, if you unlawfully cause the death of the child only it is murder.

If you are going to make claims about the law you should do a little research first.

I will give you a quote from the Texas Penal Code " § 1.07. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code: “Individual” means a human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth."

So it seems that our government, at least in Texas, would consider a picture of an aborted baby a picture of a dead individual or person. So it seems that you are mistaken. If you wish to function under mistaken a understanding of the law, feel free. Please just do not try to tell me what the law is in the US.

 

[bear06]

In some States it is murder to cause that death of a child in who is not yet born. If you were to cause the death of the mother and thereby cause the death of the child it is a double murder. Further, if you unlawfully cause the death of the child only it is murder

.
And you might want to do a little research. In those very same states, an “unwanted” child is not considered a baby and thus one is not charged with murder in performing or procuring and abortion. You’re right to use the determiner “unlawfully” because the state doesn’t consider a child a child when it comes to abortion. So, Monica is correct in saying that these pictures violate no law because the aborted child isn’t considered a child - it’s just a fetus.

I will give you a quote from the Texas Penal Code " § 1.07. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code: “Individual” means a human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth."

So it seems that our government, at least in Texas, would consider a picture of an aborted baby a picture of a dead individual or person. So it seems that you are mistaken. If you wish to function under mistaken a understanding of the law, feel free. Please just do not try to tell me what the law is in the US.

And you failed to quote the statute about aborted babies and pictures of a dead person. Please tell me one state that considers an aborted baby to be a child and where it is illegal to show pictures of one. This might be why nobody’s being prosecuted for this anywhere.