Agree or Disagree: Pictures and advertisements of Aborted Fetuses makes a positive impact

I was actually debating posting an actual picture…

But I couldn’t do it.

But there is a group that can. And they feel that they are getting their point across.

They are called the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. They are a Pro-Life Organization. They have a blog called Unmasking Choice . They show pictures of aborted fetuses on their website.

You may have seen them on a truck.

That’s where the controversy is. You can go on a website and make a choice to see this. While on a street going about your day, it is a picture of an aborted fetus on the truck with the word “Choice”?

You can go Here for an explanation.

What do you think? Does it impact you? Or offend you?

What are your thoughts?


3 responses to “Agree or Disagree: Pictures and advertisements of Aborted Fetuses makes a positive impact

  1. It doesn’t offend me – but I think it’s completely unnecessary and not an effective way to advocate your beliefs. I think people should have a choice in everything they do – including seeing images – highly disturbing images at that – while they are just on the street (or at the Stampede parade, the last place I was when I saw one of the trucks Kevin talks about above). I think these groups are free to do this but if they really want people to get on board with their views, I think they would be more effective to hold an info session or a rally and invite people who WANT to hear/see about the issue to attend. I feel the same way about people who get up in my face on the street about their religion, or their charity, or ask me for change. I like to think most people are engaged citizens who think for themselves and if they want to form an opinion on an issue, they will go out and seek it. All this being said, I have waved signs on the street for people running for political office so maybe I’m a hypocrite in some of this. Who knows? Maybe if people also had trucks with photos representing marriage equality, human rights, poverty reduction, and other issues I feel strongly about, the abortion ones wouldn’t stand out so much and I would be more okay with them.

  2. interestingly the word choice here again. What do human beings have choice for? what is the decision process for? Is it to choose between different ways to rob a bank? well obviously no. Is it for some sort of freedom? It seems to be connected to such an idea, after all if you can’t choose freely than can you choose all. But is their any purpose to UNLIMITED choice? Do we really care about being able to choose between child molestation and bank robbery? I sure hope not. Rather, Is it not really about being able to choose between a variety of good things.

    WE have signs about all kinds of bad things mostly about staying away from them sometimes about encouraging us to do things we shouldn’t. They are sometimes on the free way and streets too. Does this impinge on our freedom? a little bit to be sure. but our decisions are still very much our own. We would never claim in a court of law that “the sign made me do it” we would be sure to get convicted in any decent court, if that was our defence.

    So what is it really about? perhaps it’s about being “in peoples face” as Ashley suggested. We really would rather not tell people how to go about their lives unless we are trying to get them to buy a car or a product we are selling, and even then a lot of people only put up with advertisement because it lowers the cost of their Tv subscription. For a little bit of cash people are willing to be “harassed” but what about when we are not saving any money is it fair to subject people to stuff then. Well I don’t think it’s about cash For instance in north america we have this thing called amber alert. It is an advertisement that goes out all over the place It is for a good cause, but it is the very definition of spam advertisement. A child has been abducted, so the police interrupt media and even electronic free-way signs to post relevant information on the child and the abductor to try and catch the criminal and save the child. I’m confident no one could come up with a descent argument against amber alerts, after all it for the kids.

    So what is it that’s at the root cause to our aversion to these “in your face” signs.
    Ashley has conceeded the possibility, probably with some skepticism, that perhaps if the signs were about something she cared about more strongly that she’d be for them or rather that she might be. But it does on some level seem a little self contradictory. I understand that we are willing to put up with things for the sake of the things that are most precious to us but I’m not talking about that. These are just they are just there. If they only affected us as mildly as soap box ads would we care one way or the other? You can put what ever you want on the bumper of your car about motor oil or fruit snacks and I’m not really going to notice or remember. Isn’t it because we don’t like pictures of chopped up fingers toes smeared in blood? or maybe just anything smeared in blood? depending on our stomachs. Especially young things though.

    I think that has something to do with it. The other question I have gets back to the amber alert. If there is a real possibility that a child is being harmed or that a little baby is in fact the victim of a procedure that turns him in to little chopped up fingers essentially being shoved in a blender, or in some cases a furnace, depending on the procedure, then isn’t it worth it. Doesn’t that little child if he is in fact a child have a right to be in our face about the fact that he was dismembered by some doctor and nobody saved him. I think that possiblity presented to us in living vibrant bloody color is a very objectionable thing to our senses.

    And for the record I do have a problem with the signs They are nasty and uncomfortable ugly and horrific, but they are what the end results of abortions look like. If you are a logical human being, you can either be comfortable with those signs and comfortable with what abortion does, or you can be uncomfortable with those signs and uncomfortable with what abortion does. I think the people who use them are just as uncomfortable having to see them as anybody else, They also see those signs as totally justifiable because of what they see abortion to be.

    I’ll repeat a few things because they are the main thrust of my discussion.
    If he is in fact a child doesn’t that little child have a right to be in our face about the fact that he was dismembered by some doctor and nobody saved him?
    Doesn’t he have a right to complain about the fact that he was treated like cattle and chopped up like steak?
    But if he is not in fact a child why does his bloody body bother us anymore than a rare steak.
    If the people who believe abortion is wrong really do, aren’t they doing exactly what they should be doing by showing us pictures of bloody toes and fingers, and stomach churning pictures, disemboweled little children.

    If we can be okay with the abortion than how can we not be be okay with the picture I linked to.
    but If one can’t be okay with abortion how can one not show the picture of what it does, so people will know with clarity exactly what the procedure does.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s