Warning: Graphic images. As always, remember that forgiveness and healing are possible for those who have participated in the abortion process.
This was on display at the college that my youngest daughter attends. I hope that it changed some hearts and minds. Some people object to graphic images, but I think they are appropriate on a college campus. Other groups wouldn’t hesitate to use them to advance any other cause.
They addressed key themes such as “gendercide,” Down Syndrome children, authentic feminism vs. “you must have the right to kill your own children to prove you are equal with a man” feminism, what if homosexuality really was genetic?, and more.
Good for them to take devote their time and money to advance the cause of life!
Bonus: See a secular case against legalized abortion.
The perfect summary of Che followers:
Should we velvetize the Bible’s hard truths to suit a culture that hates moral clarity? — Short answer: No. Click for a great response from Charles Spurgeon.
Pastor Timothy has moved his blog home to WordPress, so be sure to update your favorites and/or blog readers with his new page.
John Stossel explains how environmentalism kills millions of people — DDT saves lives. And why didn’t the opponents show up to debate?
Actress Janine Turner is a conservative and not afraid to speak out. Yea for her! Bring back Northern Exposure.
The use of images in the pro-life movement can be a controversial topic, but used appropriately I think they add a lot of value. What could be more relevant than the truth about what the procedure in question accomplishes? I didn’t get the precise quote as I heard it on a Podcast of Stand to Reason, but Greg Koukl quoted Melinda Penner saying that showing pictures of aborted human beings is a way for the victims to give their testimony.
A tale of 2 protests. Watch and decide for yourself. Also see New Video of Tea Party Protest, Still No N-Word. Where is the retraction from the MSM?
Also note this reaction by the MSM:
- Swastikas shown to protest President Bush = OK
- Swastikas shown to protest President Obama = really, really bad
- Swastikas shown to protest immigration laws = OK
I linked to these abortion images in a comment at the blog of pro-abortion Christian who insists that he loves science but repeatedly denies the scientific fact that a new human life begins at conception. He had told me to “think compassioniately,” so I pointed him to that excellent pro-life site and questioned his compassion.
That’s pretty disgusting Neil. Really.
My response back to him:
Why is it disgusting? I mean, I think it is disgusting viewing the remains of crushed and dismembered human beings. But for those who insist that it wasn’t a human being who was destroyed, it isn’t any more gross than your random episode of House.
We should use caution when showing images, but there is no reason they should not be part of the debate. After all, what could be more relevant than an image of what is being discussed? People have been in denial far too long about what abortion really does.
So which is more disgusting: Images of abortions or the abortions themselves?
The other blogger thinks it is the images. I think it is the abortions.