Author Topic: Pro-life groups graphic display (Read 1929 times)

John Grace · « **on:** November 11, 2012, 10:42:57 AM »

I'm not surprised a "pragmatic" pro-life group 'distanced' themselves from Abort67.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-life-groups-graphic-display-censored-by-foes-attacked-by-friends
Pro-life group’s graphic display censored by foes, attacked by friends

Quote

BY HILARY WHITE
Fri Nov 09, 2012

ROME, November 9, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The pioneering pro-life demonstration group Abort67 is making waves all over Britain with its photographic displays of aborted children, and they are being attacked by friend and foe alike for their troubles.

Fresh from their resounding court victories after being arrested last year for displaying the images in Brighton, Abort67 has moved on to a national platform with new groups forming around the country. Organisers have said that the publicity surrounding their case, including close coverage from the BBC and several national newspapers, was worth the trouble of the arrest and court case.

But not everyone in the pro-life community is pleased with the success of the graphic images strategy. After Abort67’s appearance at their campus, Bristol University Students for Life published an op-ed condemning and distancing themselves from the other group and the use of graphic images. The Students for Life mandate, they say, is the correct way to address the life issues, “from a secular and non-judgemental perspective”.

“Abort 67 and Bristol Students for Life both oppose abortion. That is where the similarities end,” the Bristol students’ group wrote.

“We shall be respectful, accepting and acting with the utmost tolerance towards both the society members, and members of the public regardless of background, opinion and creed”. The group says they have “unanimously rejected” the use of graphic images, saying they “do not feel it is appropriate or useful to cause great distress or alarm to others”.

Bristol Students for Life say they make the case with debate and argument and that they are willing to “engage with” opponents, so that “emotive and graphic pictures are not needed.” The group, however, condemned the arrest of Abort67 activists last year, saying they are “dismayed at the attitude of some British police officers” and that “protest cannot be a criminal offence in a liberal society”.

The Students for Life are thought to be reacting defensively to demonstrate their liberal credentials in the face of a counter-demonstration staged by the University’s students’ union (UBU). While Abort67 brought their graphic image display to campus the officially “pro-choice” UBU set up a banner in front of the graphic abortion display that read, “This union is pro choice”. University student’s unions around the Western world have a long track record of acting against campus pro-life groups and individuals who step out of line and make a strong case against abortion.

But Student’s for Life’s desire to distance themselves from such a high profile and highly successful activist group is not being well received by everyone associated with them. Rhoslyn Thomas, a former Bristol University student and organiser of Bristol Students for Life, told LifeSiteNews.com, “We were much more tolerant and sensible when I was there.” She was on the group’s organising committee for the academic year 2011-2012.

She responded to the accusations of her former classmates that the use of graphic images is counterproductive, saying that before Abort67 started using them, no one in Britain was giving abortion a second thought.

“If it upsets people then they are thinking about what abortion is, aren’t they? We’re upset by a lot of images, things that have happened in the past, like the Hiroshima bombing. Those are horrific pictures, but no one says we shouldn’t see them because it’s upsetting. But we know from that picture that it was wrong and how many people were hurt and killed by it.

“For some reason [the Bristol pro-life students] think people shouldn’t be forcefully reminded of abortion. But if you do nothing but talk about it, people might think it was just one issue among many. But when you see it, it’s much harder to say that it is just a ‘woman’s right to choose,’ because it’s such a horrible reality.”

She added a plea for civility and tolerance to her former classmates, saying that there needs to be a united front among the pro-life movement, or at least one of mutual respect. “Even if they disagree with Abort67, you can always find a way to disagree respectfully,” she said.

“Particularly other pro-life people whom you know have good intentions, and who have saved women from abortions. They’re not breaking the law, and they’re not hurting anyone, in fact they’re helping people.”

Pro-abortion groups have also reacted with outrage at the presence of Abort67 on Monday at historic King’s College, Cambridge. A group of students there brought home-made placards and stood in front of the Abort67 photos. Later King’s students brought out a flower pattern sheet to cover the photo display and disrupt conversations with passersby.

Similar actions were taken by pro-abortion counter-protesters at Abort67 demonstrations in Nottingham and Sussex.

The Huffington Post reported that students at Sussex University felt “distressed and intimidated” by the presence of the photo images and complained to each other on Twitter. The Student Rights group at Sussex said Abort67’s demonstration, held in late October, was “deeply concerning”.

“Students have a right to express pro-life views, but the detrimental impact that Abort67’s intrusive demonstrations have on students wellbeing, as well as on campus cohesion, should mean that they have no place on our campuses.”

John Grace · « **Reply #1 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:46:49 AM »

The UK Life League are correct here.
http://www.uklifeleague.com/our-statement-of-principles/

Quote

We believe that people will never reject abortion until they see what abortion really is. Therefore LifeLeague champions the use of graphic images showing the full bloody horror of abortion. We understand this tactic is extremely unpopular, however, the LifeLeague will always strive to put the reality of child killing in front of every person in this country.

6. We are absolutists. We can never subscribe to the popular ‘gradualist’ approach, which is infecting the other Pro-Life groups. We will never tolerate a wee bit of abortion, LifeLeague campaign to stop all abortions, to criminalise the act and to hold to account in law, (not the mothers) all those who perform, assist or are in any way connected to the promotion of baby murder. Until abortion is outlawed completely, the LifeLeague will campaign to defend our unborn brothers and sisters with every means at our disposal.

http://www.uklifeleague.com/introducing-the-lifeleague/

Quote

LifeLeague believes that political lobbying will not achieve the necessary results. Pro-life groups have tried this approach for years, and it is clear that they have failed. Whilst debate and argument have their place, what is really needed is the people of this country being confronted with and facing up to the grim and gruesome reality of abortion.

Pro-life groups have never been allowed to show detailed and graphic images of what abortion does to children on television or in newspapers. Abortion, unlike other operations, is not explained to the person before it is performed. Pro-life views are not taken into account when ‘family planning’ literature is produced. Mainstream media and literature constantly try to dehumanize the unborn child as a means of making abortion acceptable.

We in the LifeLeague will continue the campaign against murder by abortion. If society deems that pictures of abortion are so awful that they must be banned from public view, why on earth does society allow this barbaric act in the first place? Abortion is a bloody and brutal reality, whether you see it or choose not to.

For years, many pro-life activists genuinely, if somewhat naively, thought that if they could only get the politicians to listen to our Pro-life arguments that the MP’s would see the error of their ways and revoke the odious ’67 Abortion Act. For forty years this was tried through intense lobbying, massive rallies and marches. Huge mailing campaigns were launched, trains were chartered to ferry thousands to protests outside Parliament, and what has been the result of this enormous effort over nearly half a century?

Abortion figures have exploded and MP’s have hardened their attitudes against the unborn. Yet, up until the emergence of the Lifeleague, this failed, tired and thoroughly discredited form of lobby was still the only plan being put forward by the ‘establishment’.

The Lifeleague through extensive research into successful campaigning throughout the world came to the conclusion that first we must change the public’s opinion about abortion and in turn the public will change the politicians. Abortion, like pedophilia or animal cruelty must be stigmatised, not the women who are also the victims, but the Act, the providers and all those who work in, promote or are supporters of child killing.

We believe that abortion should never be reduced to a sanitised moral debate. Abortion is a uniquely evil act of premeditated murder perpetrated on societies most vulnerable members: the Unborn Child.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #2 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:49:23 AM »

Pro-lifers need to stop stabbing their own people in the back.

How effective are such displays? I don't know, but in a war we can't be squeamish.

The struggle against abortion is a war, not a polite conversation.

John Grace · « **Reply #3 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:54:21 AM »

This has happened in Ireland in the past also.

Life Soc distance themselves from anti-abortion group
NUI Galway’s FREE Student Newspaper
Volume 6 Issue 5 Monday November 21 2005

Quote

The Irish pro-life student group Ultrasound will be visiting NUI
Galway on Thursday, November 24 as part of their ‘Revelation’
tour, which will see the group visit six Irish universities in eight
days. The event is not sponsored or endorsed by the NUIG Life
Society, who in an email circulated to members said that, while
they generally agree with the principles of Ultrasound, they do
not necessarily agree with their methods.

The group has been criticised
for what some see as its graphic
use of images in its posters,
as well as its hard-line campaigning.
Speaking at the visit will be
American Gianna Jessen, who
suffers from cerebral palsy as a
result of a failed saline infusion
abortion about two months
before she was born.
Despite
her disability, she has toured
both the USA and the rest of
the world and has testified
before US Congress on abortion
issues. She claims that she
should be blind, burned, and
dead. She also argues that, if
abortion is truly a woman’s
right, then many feminists
would rather see her dead.
The tour will see 15 members
of Ultrasound giving talks
throughout the day, with Ms
Jessen addressing the
O’hÉocha theatre at 7pm on
November 24. Admission is free.

Quote

The room was locked and Gianna was forced to give her talk outside in the corridor to hundreds of people who turned up for the talk. The pro-life society were the ones who phoned campus security.It was quite remarkable.

The situation is much improved with good people involved in that pro-life society these days.

John Grace · « **Reply #4 on:** November 11, 2012, 11:02:08 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Pro-lifers need to stop stabbing their own people in the back.

How effective are such displays? I don't know, but in a war we can't be squeamish.

The struggle against abortion is a war, not a polite conversation.

Indeed. The displays are quite effective but activists in my opinion should use manuals like 'Action' by Jean Ousset. Fighting abortion is only one part of the war. Some don't realise we are at war. One should never worry about being a counter revolutionary or a radical. Quite often many in these "pragmatic" pro-life groups are members of establishment political parties so won't rock any boats.

Whilst Youth Defence in my opinion are a little too politically correct now, the situation in Ireland would be dire had we waited for the Pro Life Campaign (PLC).Same if we had paid heed to the Irish Bishops.

Young Ireland · « **Reply #5 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:08:45 PM »

To be honest, I think that images of aborted babies are counter-productive. It shows a lack of respect to the victims of abortion, i.e. the baby. You wouldn't go flashing around images of murder scenes in public, would you. Abort67 certainly have the right to protest, but they are more likely to win support if they were to use life-affirming images instead. The cavalier tactics of the UK Life League have also brought the British pro-life movement into disrepute.

Personally, I am glad that YD are "politically correct". People who would have stayed away from them previously are now joining them. This can only be good for the pro-life cause. Distancing themselves from the fascist views of Justin Barrett was the best thing that could have happened for them, and they are a lot healthier and more respected for it.

stgobnait · « **Reply #6 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:30:20 PM »

politically correct.... that must come from the expert group...(sic)

Telesphorus · « **Reply #7 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:31:44 PM »

Quote from: stgobnait

politically correct.... that must come from the expert group...(sic)

Young Ireland is making excuses for Jєωs and doesn't want people to see what abortion is.

Well, Ireland now has the Jєω Alan Shatter in a very high position.

Determined to destroy the morality of the country.

But it's more important for someone like Young Ireland people to defend Jєωs than to defend Catholics.

Wasn't Young Ireland a masonic group in the 19th Century?

Young Ireland · « **Reply #8 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:34:51 PM »

Quote from: stgobnait

politically correct.... that must come from the expert group...(sic)

Are you suggesting that I am a pro-abort? Because if you are, you are way, way off. If being politically correct means opposing comments inciting hatred against certain groups (including ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, which does NOT involve endorsing their sinful actions), then I am more than happy to refer to myself as "politically correct".

Young Ireland · « **Reply #9 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:38:51 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: stgobnait
politically correct.... that must come from the expert group...(sic)

Young Ireland is making excuses for Jєωs and doesn't want people to see what abortion is.

Well, Ireland now has the Jєω Alan Shatter in a very high position.

Determined to destroy the morality of the country.

But it's more important for someone like Young Ireland people to defend Jєωs than to defend Catholics.

Wasn't Young Ireland a masonic group in the 19th Century?

I am not a Mason, if that is what I think. How is opposing anti-Semitism "making excuses". In fact, if anyone is making excuses, it is Bp. Williamsom and Fr. Fahey when they try to differentiate "anti-Judaism" from anti-Semitism. If you read posts that I have made in other forums, you will know that my screen name is deliberately intended as a parody of advocates of Irish Catholo-republicansm. Read my blog and then see if I do not defend Catholics.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #10 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:46:15 PM »

Quote from: Young Ireland

I am not a Mason, if that is what I think.

It doesn't matter or not if you're a mason you identify yourself with a pro-masonic group.

Quote

How is opposing anti-Semitism "making excuses".

You're not opposing antisemitism your siding with Jєωs against Christians exposing Jєωιѕн support for child murder. It's absolutely perfidious and evil.

Quote

In fact, if anyone is making excuses, it is Bp. Williamsom and Fr. Fahey when they try to differentiate "anti-Judaism" from anti-Semitism.

Making excuses for whom? Catholic saints like Pope St. Pius V who expelled Jєωs and said they threatened the life of his Republic?

Quote

If you read posts that I have made in other forums, you will know that my screen name is deliberately intended as a parody of advocates of Irish Catholo-republicansm. Read my blog and then see if I do not defend Catholics.

Well, you're a parody of a Catholic as well, getting on here to defend the Jєωιѕн people who love and defend their abortionists in overwhelming numbers.

Young Ireland · « **Reply #11 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:59:01 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

It doesn't matter or not if you're a mason you identify yourself with a pro-masonic group.

I am not identifying myself with them, I am using their name to satire Irish republicanism, Masonic cօռspιʀαcιҽs, and Gaelo-Catholicism.

Quote

You're not opposing antisemitism your siding with Jєωs against Christians exposing Jєωιѕн support for child murder. It's absolutely perfidious and evil.

There was no such thing as child murder. There is such a thing as anti-semitism though.

Quote

Making excuses for whom? Catholic saints like Pope St. Pius V who expelled Jєωs and said they threatened the life of his Republic?

Saints are not perfect. The most recent Church docuмents on the matter prove this.

Quote

Well, you're a parody of a Catholic as well, getting on here to defend the Jєωιѕн people who love and defend their abortionists in overwhelming numbers.

I do NOT condone the views of anybody who supports abortion, and I have already stated such. But I also refuse to condone attempts to use abortion to depict Jєωs as evil. Btw, describing me as "perfidious", "evil" and "a parody of a Catholic" falls short of the charity one would expect from a traditional Catholic.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #12 on:** November 11, 2012, 06:03:48 PM »

Quote from: Young Ireland

There was no such thing as child murder. There is such a thing as anti-semitism though.

Abortion is child murder, and Jєωs support it, but it's more important for you to defend Jєωιѕн child murderers than to be Catholic.

For that you will go to Hell.

Quote

Saints are not perfect. The most recent Church docuмents on the matter prove this.

For someone such as yourself to accuse St. Pius V of antisemitism in order to defend your precious Jєωιѕн abortion lovers is beyond the pale and absolutely disgusting.

Quote

I do NOT condone the views of anybody who supports abortion, and I have already stated such. But I also refuse to condone attempts to use abortion to depict Jєωs as evil. Btw, describing me as "perfidious", "evil" and "a parody of a Catholic" falls short of the charity one would expect from a traditional Catholic.

Jєωs support abortion because they are the enemies of Christ's Church.

That's what Catholic Tradition teaches.

But you're far more interested in smearing Catholics with PC imprecations like "antisemite" than in resisting their evil machinations.

songbird · « **Reply #13 on:** November 11, 2012, 06:05:25 PM »

Young Ireland: Do agree with birth control/condoms?

Young Ireland · « **Reply #14 on:** November 11, 2012, 06:10:15 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: Young Ireland
There was no such thing as child murder. There is such a thing as anti-semitism though.

Abortion is child murder, and Jєωs support it, but it's more important for you to defend Jєωιѕн child murderers than to be Catholic.

For that you will go to Hell.

Quote
Saints are not perfect. The most recent Church docuмents on the matter prove this.

For someone such as yourself to accuse St. Pius V of antisemitism in order to defend your precious Jєωιѕн abortion lovers is beyond the pale and absolutely disgusting.

Quote
I do NOT condone the views of anybody who supports abortion, and I have already stated such. But I also refuse to condone attempts to use abortion to depict Jєωs as evil. Btw, describing me as "perfidious", "evil" and "a parody of a Catholic" falls short of the charity one would expect from a traditional Catholic.

Jєωs support abortion because they are the enemies of Christ Church.

That's what Catholic Tradition teaches.

But you're far more interested in smearing Catholics with PC imprecations like "antisemite" than in resisting their evil machinations.

Firstly, no one can EVER say that someone is going to Hell. You can say that someone is doing something gravely sinful, but condemning someone to Hell is beyond belief. Please point out to me where opposing hate speech against Jєωs is gravely sinful, as opposed to the hate speech itself, which IS grave matter.

It is wrong that they support abortion, but to say that they oppose it because they are the "enemies of Christ" is an outrageous claim to make. If you claim that, then your point is nothing but anti-semitic. I rest my case.