Students at UC Berkeley could not miss the reality of abortion in Sproul Plaza October 26th and 27th. CBR's Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) reached many at Cal. Read more in CBR's November Newsletter.
Read all about the GAP at UC Berkeley which took place on October 26th and 27th 2009. Click Here.
CBR visits the University of Houston in Texas this week. Here is an email exchange between a University of Houston student and CBR directory Gregg Cunningham:
Pro-abortion students at the University of Houston protest CBR's Genocide Awareness Project (GAP).
Dear Ms. M,
Regarding your complaints concerning our Genocide Awareness Display at the University of Houston:
First of all, you dispute our reference to abortion as “genocide” and challenge us to “Google” the word “Darfur” to learn what “genocide” really is. Your invocation of Darfur is clear evidence that you don’t understand the controversy over the definition of genocide in Sudan. Your assertion that abortion is not genocide perfectly mirrors the Sudanese argument that the ethnic cleansing of black Africans by ethnic Arab militias (and the uninformed military) in Muslim Darfur is not genocide. Our Congress and our President and our Secretary of State have all declared the mass murder in Darfur to be genocide. They used horrifying pictures, just as we do, to make their case. But the United Nations and Amnesty International argue that crimes against humanity in Darfur are not genocide. History proves that the definition of genocide evolves over time in a process which is often marked by disputation. People who care about ending crimes against humanity usually call them genocide. People who don’t care usually call them something else. Your lack of concern for the unborn closely parallels the Sudanese lack of concern for the black Africans of Darfur. So neither of you are willing to call these atrocities genocide.
Which brings us to your second point: You boast that you “were not shocked by our graphic images.” We acknowledge that we are not “shocked” by your boast. You define yourself as “100% pro-choice.” Our images aren’t aimed at people who are fanatical pro-aborts. They are aimed at people who are open-minded with respect to abortion. Most pro-aborts are more ignorant than evil. Showing them who the baby really is and what abortion really does to him/her, is usually enough to change their minds. Our pictures work wonders for those who only lack a fundamental understanding of abortion. But for those who lack a functioning conscience, the pictures don’t matter because the facts don’t matter. Their devotion to the Culture of Death transcends mere facts and becomes an article of faith.
As for your third point, the greatest contribution you could have made to the success of our abortion photo display at the University of Houston was to have helped draw attention to it by joining a counter-demonstration, and the larger and louder the better. Nothing attracts crowds like conflict and the more vigorously you oppose our presence, the more influential you make that presence. Thank you for amplifying the impact of our exhibit.
Finally, your defiant financial contribution to Planned Parenthood is by far your most anemic rejoinder. Planned Parenthood’s annual revenue now tops one BILLION dollars. They are rolling in cash. They have so much money they can’t figure out what to do with all of it. Our pictures change everything for everyone with even a rudimentary sense of right and wrong. Your financial contribution changes nothing. Our pictures for your donation is a trade-off we will eagerly make any day of the week.
We are praying for you Ms. M and we don’t say that with the slightest condescension. God loves you and wants to forgive you, if only you will humble yourself, repent and allow Him to embrace you in the Name of Christ. In your heart-of-hearts, you know that you aren’t really comfortable with your position on abortion. You also know that all is not right with your life spiritually. Our prayer is that you will pray about these important matters.
Lord bless,
Gregg Cunningham
Executive Director
From: Ms. M
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 2:58 PM
To: Gregg Cunningham
Subject: inspired by the GAP project
To the directors and members of the Center for Bio-ethical Reform:
After seeing your presentation at the University of Houston this week, I was shocked into awareness. I would like to share the effects that your presentation has had on me.
However, I was not shocked by your graphic images. What shocked me was your utter lack of respect for women who are put in difficult situations and have to make difficult choices. I was shock by your egregious violations of basic vocabulary, such as genocide. (Google “Darfur” if you want to know what genocide is. Your appropriation of this term to your cause is ludicrous.)
I am now and have been for most of my adult life, 100% pro-choice. I do not usually feel the need to take political action or support groups that advocate for a woman’s right to choose abortion. However, your presentation changed this for me. Not only did I stand with a crowd of people protesting your display, I have signed up to make a monthly contribution to Planned Parenthood.
So here’s the effect your presentation has had on me: not only am I more committed than ever to being pro-choice, I am donating some of my hard-earned money to Planned Parenthood. Looks like the bad guys are winning. And you have only yourselves to thank.
Sincerely,
A pro-choice college senior
CBR’s Aerial Billboards Fly Over Liberty University
-
-
A Knoxville journalist writes about the impact CBR’s abortion imagery had on him and why the people of Knoxville said “NO” to Planned Parenthood:
Watch this video from Americans United for Life:
Gregg Cunningham’s October letter is available online in both a pdf format for reading and an audio mp3 format for listening. You can find them both linked from the CBR Newsletter Archive page: http://abortionno.org/index.php/site/newsletter-archive/
Also, the October 2009 Communique Newsletter as well as other back issues are available at the above link.
PRESS RELEASE:
The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR) Goes To Berkeley
Monday, October 26th and Tuesday the 27th, CBR, in conjunction with Berkeley Students for Life (BSL), will sponsor the Genocide Awareness Project on Sproul Plaza at U.C. Berkeley. The exhibit is designed to establish that abortion is genocide, not health care.
Slavery-Bigotry
10-Reproductive Care
The display will be exhibited from approximately 9:00am until 5:00pm both days. More of the signs comprising the Genocide Awareness Project can be viewed at www.abortionNO.org.
Mark Harrington (614-419-9000), Fletcher Armstrong (865-776-1312) and Don Cooper (541-760-6620) of CBR and Alberto Gonzalez, director of BSL (925-451-5959), will be available for interviews at the U.C. Berkeley campus on the 26th and 27th. Interviews prior to or following the 26th and 27th may be arranged by contacting Gregg Cunningham, CBR executive director, via email at cbr@cbrinfo.org.
Gregg Cunningham
Executive Director,
The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform,
PO Box 219,
Lake Forest, CA 92609
Office Phone: 949-206-0600
Mobile Phone: 714-240-6976
A request recently came to us asking us to reveal the methods and sources we use to acquire our vast abortion imagery archive. Below is the answer Gregg Cunnigham gave in regards to this matter:
Dear Mr. S,
Your topic is a difficult one about which to conduct an interview because the details of our abortion clinic access agreements are highly confidential. Disclosing the wrong information could jeopardize the wellbeing of abortion industry workers who collaborate with us and place all future access at risk.
I am quite amazed at some of the ill-considered journalism on the subject of abortion photos. The New York Times (http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/behind-19/) recently conducted an interview with a woman of whom I had never heard who many years ago photographed late term fetuses taken from the refuse of abortion clinics. When I began doing this work those were the only photos available and they saved a lot of babies but they weren’t very good. The ages of the babies were far from being representative of most abortions and age matters greatly in the public mind. The camera formats produced images which were not large enough for billboard use, which greatly limited their utility.
The pictures themselves were often taken on amateur equipment by amateur photographers. They meant well but many, such as the woman interviewed for the NYT story was not a professional activist and as a consequence, she seemed more focused on depicting the babies in ways which minimized the violence of abortion (a high percentage of late term abortions involve intact deliveries which mute the visual horror of abortion) which made the pictures of little value in convincing the public that abortion is an evil of sufficient magnitude to justify criminalizing the act. She and many pro-lifers such as she apparently had little understanding of the history of social reform and their pictures reflected that lack of awareness.
Our photo acquisition work is logistically difficult, emotionally draining, financially costly and in some ways, even dangerous. We often take hundreds of photos to get one truly powerful image. But we now have by far the largest archive of abortion imagery in the world and it is in use by activists in a growing number of foreign countries. We concentrate on first trimester procedures because 90% of abortions occur during that phase of pregnancy. A woman who is seven weeks pregnant will often dismiss a twenty week abortion photo as morally irrelevant to her situation because she rationalizes that she would never abort that late in pregnancy. She wants to believe her baby is not yet a baby and that denial may work for her unless we show her a six week aborted baby and then if she has a functioning conscience, we have her. That six week baby photo can save the life of twenty week baby but a twenty week baby photo will much less often save the lives of six week babies.
All the best,
Gregg Cunningham
The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform
Below is a portion of a recent email exchange that is instructive as to why the church’s witness against the evil of abortion is so weak. The name of the receipient of this email has been changed for privacy reasons.
Hi Joe,
Because of your generous support for our work and your influential relationship with Liberty University, I am sure you will be interested in the note (below) I received from one of our staff. He has long experience working with students in our Genocide Awareness Project and is very diplomatic in the way he promotes our work, especially when he encounters resistance, which he often does. It appears that two unhelpful lessons are being taught to students at Liberty: The first is that it is not appropriate to display abortion photos in public (private showings are approved but not public displays) and that criticizing administration policies at the school, even respectfully, is out of bounds. Both of these erroneous principles are obviously unbiblical.
It may also be helpful for you to be aware that shortly before Rev. Falwell’s death, I met with him on campus to propose that Liberty create an academic major to prepare interested students for professional careers in pro-life ministry. I explained that secular schools worked hard to inspire and equip students for careers in abortion advocacy but that there is no corresponding attempt by any Christian school to professionalize the ranks of pro-life activists, the vast majority of whom are amateur volunteers. We met for more than two hours and he responded enthusiastically. At the conclusion of the meeting he designated one of the administrators who was present to be the point person who would work with a department chairman to form a curriculum committee to begin the process of designing such a major. I was encouraged by his supportive response but it was very clear to me that none of the administrators in the room shared his view. As I feared, I later had great difficulty getting my calls taken or returned and the project died a quick and decisive death.
Christian colleges (and seminaries) are staffed by enormous numbers of administrators who view abortion as someone else’s problem and they see attempts to involve the church in the abortion wars as a threat to ministry. That view is shared by most faculty members and gets thoroughly internalized by students who go on to pastor churches. There are students at Liberty who are sexually active. Some of them are getting pregnant. Some of those who are getting pregnant are killing their children. Some of those who are killing their children would have carried to term had they seen the horror of abortion. Almost none of them will attend our director’s talk on abortion. Almost all of them would see our photos displayed outside the student union building. The decision to suppress the truth about abortion is so common at Christian schools that we began using aircraft to tow abortion photos over their campuses. That is what we had to do to Biola when the school told us that we could only display our signs if we turned them to face a wall behind which passersby would have to go to see them. We can sue public schools which try to ban our pictures but we have to resort to truck billboards and airplane billboards to reach Christian students. This is why so many Christian students abort and who so few Christian students every become seriously involved in pro-life activism. I will pray for your conversations with Matt.
This is a very wide-spread problem. I remember a broadcast of James Dobson’s radio program on which he interviewed six Christian college presidents and he asked them if they had ever seen a pregnant student on their campuses. To a person, they said no. To a person they all believed this was evidence that their students were living chaste lives. James Dobson was incredulous. I am not.
Gregg Cunningham
Executive Director, The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform
GAP Returns to State College Today
Dear Pro-Life Friend,
I Timothy 2:2 reads, “And the things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also …” This passage speaks of the multi-generational transmission of truth. CBR’s mission is to fulfill this command by raising up pro-life leaders to carry the message of the unalienable right to life to future generations. PLI trains. GAP reaches the masses. On September 27, PLI will equip Penn State students in pro-life apologetics and then take them out onto the campus on September 28-29 to use their newly acquired knowledge.
Claire Nelson, Vice President of PSU’s Students for Life, is excited about the upcoming events on her campus:
We the Students for Life are very pleased to welcome the Genocide Awareness Project to the Penn State campus this year. We hope to raise awareness and create meaningful discussion throughout the student body. We believe GAP will facilitate much need debate on an otherwise apathetic campus. This demonstration will be one of our biggest events this year and we can’t wait to see how students will react.
With your help, Claire Nelson is another in a long line of college students who can be influenced by GAP.
The Pro-Life Institute and GAP deliver the one-two punch of training and outreach. Many groups educate. Few motivate. And even fewer provide real time experience in defending ttue with their peers. Here are the dates for upcoming events:
· September 28-29 – GAP at Penn State University (Day 1 – Palmer Art Museum , Day 2 – Pattee Library)
To send a check, write to:
CBR
PO Box 360503
Columbus, OH 43236
Read CBR’s September 2009 update here.
For more information contact Mark Harrington at 614-759-5195 or mark@cbrinfo.org
Mark Harrington is also the Executive Director of CBR Midwest, and President of Pro-Life Institute
Martyred pro-life hero James Pouillon (white cap) holds CBR sign at Notre Dame Obama protest.----May 2009
See CBR’s official press release regarding the murder of James Pouillon here.
THE CENTER FOR BIO-ETHICAL REFORM
September 11, 2009
The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR) condemns the murder of defenseless, pro-life activist James Pouillon, shot by a cowardly passerby while Mr. Pouillon displayed aborted baby photos outside a high school in Owosso, MI. The New York Times (“Anti-Abortion Protestor Shot to Death,” September 11, 2009) today quotes law enforcement authorities as follows concerning the shooter’s admitted motive in Mr. Pouillon’s murder: “Prosecutors said the suspect, who is 33, singled out Mr. Pouillon because he disapproved of the victim’s protests in front of children at the school. ‘There was some displeasure with how open he was,’ said Sara Edwards, the chief assistant prosecutor for Shiawassee County. ‘He tended to carry big signs with very graphic pictures of fetuses.’”
Ironically, every student at the school in front of which Mr. Pouillon displayed aborted baby photos was old enough to have an abortion, without parental permission or even parental notice (pursuant to “judicial bypass” procedures imposed by the Supreme Court in every state). But the shooter apparently believed they were not old enough to see an abortion. This non sequitur reflects delusional thinking of the most bizarre sort. Students who are old enough to have an abortion are certainly old enough to see an abortion.
CBR intends to confront the very dishonest double-standard in this country regarding the public display of graphic images. Disturbing pictures of all kinds are seen by children every day in America. Even parents who don’t allow their children to watch violence on television or play violent video games, often take them to the grocery store where check-out lines are flanked with magazine racks whose publications feature cover photos which are inches away from young faces. These photos often exhibit bloody images of dead and dying victims of violence, terrorism, natural disasters, etc. The news organizations responsible for these shocking photos virtually never publish abortion pictures.
Angry parents are often in massive denial about this reality and almost always dispute these facts, so we have put up scores of examples of disturbing news photos on our website (www.abortionNO.org) under “PUBLIC EDUCATION PROJECTS” and then “USING GRAPHIC IMAGES IN PUBLIC.” Some of those magazine covers and newspaper photos are as gruesome as any abortion photo and they have been seen by countless children whose clueless parents never even noticed. The reason they complain about our disturbing photos but not the disturbing press pictures is because many feel more guilt when answering their children’s questions about abortion, with which they may well have some humiliating personal experience, than the feel when questioned about a terror attack for which they bear no responsibility at all.
Although CBR does not specifically target very young children for the display of abortion photos, there is no public venue which is reliably free of the presence of young children and public venues are often the only places we can reach women before they become pregnant and lose their objectivity about abortion. We care about the feelings of born children but we care even more about the lives of unborn children.
CBR has had innumerable women tell us that nothing less shocking than our abortion photos would have sufficed to dissuade them from killing their children. Many more have told us that had they seen these photos before aborting, instead of after, they wouldn’t have done it. Large numbers have confided that it took the photos to force them to stop trying to justify a sin they needed to confess and of which they needed to repent, spiritually. And virtually every person we have ever met in serious pro-life activism had admitted that it was pictures which activated them, making it impossible for them to remain complacent.
Parents and teachers frequently cover-up the horror of abortion. This is a form of child abuse and/or neglect. We aren’t going to allow adults to hide the truth from children who will thereby be more likely to kill a baby out of ignorance. It is the responsibility of the pro-life movement to stop this cover-up whether parents like it or not. The staff of CBR is frequently threatened and/or attacked for displaying similar photos to students and the public generally (see examples of such threats and attacks detailed on our website), and Mr. Pouillon’s murder only strengthens our resolve to show the truth.
The Associated Press reported (“Mich. Man leaves town after cops say he was target, September 12, 2009) that Mr. Pouillon “was a polarizing figure in Owosso….” Praise God for that fact. CBR’s principal objective is polarization. This battle will be lost when the abortion wars are allowed to end. Most Americans cling to the illusory notion that there is a “middle ground” position on the issue of torturing babies to death. Pictures of babies being tortured to death force those people out of the fictional middle, if they have a functioning conscience. Our pictures demand a response. They insist that viewers get off the fence and take sides.
It should come as no surprise that the press has consistently refused to publish the abortion photo which Mr. Pouillon was holding at the time of his murder. That is the cover-up which allows Americans to remain in the “middle” regarding abortion and it is why we must carry on the important work Mr. Pouillon helped pioneer.
But perhaps the ultimate irony in Mr. Pouillon’s murder are the remarks of Matthew Trewhella, a man who claims to be a “pastor” but who is also associated with an anti-abortion organization called “Missionaries to the Preborn.” Mr. Trewhella condemns the murder of Mr. Pouillon (detnews.com, “With suspect in custody, police searching for clues in Owosso shootings,” September 11, 2009) but as a leader of this organization, Mr. Trewhella, on the “Missionaries” website (www.missionariestothepreborn.com), calls Paul Hill, convicted and executed for the murders of abortion providers, “the sanest and bravest man of our age.” He says Hill’s murders were motivated by “rational, Biblical reasons….” He says he did not visit Hill in prison “to condemn what Paul did ….” He adds that Missionaries to the Preborn” will not “disparage those whose use force” in anti-abortion activism.
Mr. Trewhella’s refusal to condemn the murder of abortionists robs him of all moral authority in condemning the murder of a pro-life activist. He is not alone in this moral confusion and the result is tragically predictable. Mr. Trewhella may not have pulled the trigger, but he surely contributed to Mr. Pouillon’s death by glorifying and encouraging abortion-related violence.
We can only pray that an endless cycle of reciprocal violence will not now be initiated. The rule of law is the only responsible way to settle policy differences, irrespective of the dispute at issue.
Gregg Cunningham
Tonight, President Obama’s health care address to a joint session of Congress was interrupted by Rep. Joe Wilson, (R.- S.C.), who shouted, “You lie!” when the president falsely claimed that “illegal aliens would not benefit from his proposals” (APNewsMyWay.com, September 9, 2009, “Obama: Time for ‘bickering’ is over on health care”). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, (D. – CA) seemed stunned and the AP reported that “first lady Michelle Obama shook her head from side to side in disapproval of the interruption.” The story added that the “outburst” was “unusual.” I would argue that it was “unusual” because Mr. Obama’s lies are so seldom rebutted.
Thank God for Rep. Wilson’s outburst because the official Republican response was delivered by Rep. Charles Boustany (R. – LA) who not only ignored the president’s lie about illegal aliens but he also gave the president a pass on the lies he told about “death panels” and “abortion funding” in the bill.
This is not the first time the President has lied about illegal aliens and health care. He also said it’s “not true” that illegal immigrants “will get health insurance under reform” in a recent radio address (RealClearPolitics.com, Mr. Obama, August 22, 2009, “Debunking Phony Health Care Claims”). But it is true. HumanEvents.com reports (“Immigration Distrust on HealthBill,” August 27, 2009) that:
Section 246 of the bill [HR 3200] – dealing solely with insurance subsidies – states: ‘Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.’
***
It says they should not receive the bill’s new insurance subsidies. It doesn’t say they can’t receive taxpayer-paid health care. It doesn’t say they can’t receive other benefits from HR 3200, such as expanded Medicaid.
The article adds that, “There are other avenues for illegal aliens to receive health care at public expense” and that “All efforts to add enforcement language to HR3200 were defeated by mostly party-line votes. We can expect that the bureaucracy would look the other way under Obama’s control ….” The story also warns that “The House bill not only makes a major expansion of Medicaid eligibility but also restricts (in Section 1702) inquiries about immigration status.” This is the worst form of official corruption. Democrats take money from law-abiding taxpayers and use it to buy votes from illegal aliens, lying about it all the while. And the state-owned media covers-up the whole charade.
Human Events further reports that:
Federal regulations [7 CFR 273.4 (b)] explicitly require that immigration authorities must be notified if they learn that an illegal alien is within a household applying for Food Stamps. However, a ‘Catch 22’ was created by the Clinton Administration. In an ‘Interagency Notice (65 Fed. Reg. 58301, Sept. 28, 2000), bureaucrats were told that unless a person has already had a hearing and been formally determined to be an illegal immigrant, no government agency really ‘knows’ that they are illegal – so they need not be turned in.
In other words, the burden of proof isn’t on the illegal alien to establish that he is legal, it is on the liberal, Democrat, government bureaucrats to prove that he is illegal. And with twelve million illegals in the U.S., even if liberal, Democrat, government bureaucrats were willing to enforce the laws they are obligated to enforce, the sheer volume of illegal alien criminality would quickly overwhelm the administrative courts in which their status would have to be adjudicate`.
Democrats have run these kinds of scams for a long time. For instance, The Heritage Foundation (“The Threat of Non-Citizen Voting,” July 10, 2008) reports that:
Thousands of non-citizens are registered to vote in some states and tens if not hundreds of thousands … may be present on the voter rolls nationwide. These numbers are significant: Local elections are often decided by only a handful of votes and even national elections have likely been [decided] within the margin of the number of non-citizens illegally registered to vote.
Democrats also say they support laws prohibiting voting by illegal aliens but they just as frequently oppose the enforcement provisions without which the prohibitions are meaningless. Ironically, Rep. Eugene Green (D-TX) voted against requiring photo IDs to vote and then required photo IDs for admission to town hall meetings at which he feared criticism from people outside his district (as newsbusters.com puts it, August 11, 2009, you couldn’t make this stuff up). If federal law can’t keep millions of illegal aliens out of the country, can’t keep them from getting jobs, can’t keep them from getting driver’s licenses and social security cards and welfare, how is it going to keep them from getting health care?
The “death panel” process about which Mr. Obama lied tonight is more euphemistically called Comparative Effectiveness Research. Martin Feldstein says in the Wall Street Journal (August 18, 2009, “ObamaCare Is All About Rationing”) that it is designed to “reduce costs by rationing care.” For many, that will mean death. This strategy is consistent with Mr. Obama’s repeated expressions of skepticism concerning whether his grandmother’s cancer should have disqualified her for hip replacement surgery. He also questioned whether the elderly mother of a town hall questioner should have been given the pacemaker her doctor recommended. In a Bloomberg.com piece titled “Ruin Your Health With Obama Stimulus Plan,” Betsy McCaughey says influential Obama health care advisor Tom Daschle believes that “seniors should be more accepting of the conditions which come with age instead of treating them.”
As for the abortion funding lie which even Rep. Wilson allowed to go unchallenged, FactCheck.org says (August 21, 2009, “Abortion: Which Side Is Fabricating”) “… the president goes too far when he calls the statements that government would be funding abortions ‘fabrications.’”
How slavishly is the state-run media shilling for Mr. Obama? The Washington Post’s coverage of his address tonight not only ignored Rep. Wilson’s heckling but the story made no mention of Rep. Boustany’s official Republican response.
Another AP story on tonight’s address was headlined “Obama heckled by GOP during speech to Congress.” It detailed various Republican interruptions of Mr. Obama’s remarks and referred to “The nastiness of August” reaching “from the nation’s town halls and into the U.S. Capitol.” But “nastiness” may now be the only for us to cut through media censorship and be heard in opposition to Mr. Obama’s attempt to socialize medicine. When Harvard Professor Henry Gates was shouting down Officer James Crowley, (giving rise to Mr. Obama’s stupid assertion that Officer Crowley “acted stupidly” in arresting Mr. Gates), New York Times columnist and race-baiter Bob Herbert wrote an essay titled “Anger Has Its Place.” He said America’s reluctance to discuss racial issues (on what planet has he been living?) gives blacks the right to “rant and rave … to confront and … do whatever is necessary to stop a continuing and deeply racist criminal justice outrage.” I would agree that “anger has its place” and that place is every place where our lying president lies!
UPDATE: Rep. Wilson has now apologized to the White House for the “inappropriate” manner in which he called the presidet a liar. CNN.com quotes many Democrats and Republicans who condemned Rep. Wilson for being disreapectful but none is condemning Mr. Obama for lying. That is why heckling may be the only effective way to make a point in a political climate which values etiquette over integrity.
UPDATE: The Senate Finance Committee nogotiators now announce that they will insert enforcement language in the Senate version of the health care bill. This will be a version of the same language Democrats repeatedly rejected when offered by Republicans before Mr. Wilson called Mr. Obama out as a liar. The press is reporting that the White House will support these enforcement mechanisms. There is, indeed, a place for rudeness in the public square.
Another amazing story about a child who was born “disabled” but is living life to its fullest.
It is not too late to sign up for the 4th Annual Pro-Life Student Leadership Conference. To be held at the University of Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee, September 18-19, 2009.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CLICK HERE.
THE CENTER FOR BIO-ETHICAL REFORM CONDEMNS ASSOCIATED PRESS JOURNALISTIC HYPOCRISY
Lake Forest, CA, September 4, 2009:
The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR) condemns the journalistic hypocrisy of the Associated Press (AP). The “disturbing” photo of a U.S. Marine dying in combat is not deemed too “disturbing“ for publication because the AP believes it is in the public interest to “convey the grimness of war and the sacrifice of the young men and women fighting in it.” The AP, however, has steadfastly refused to publish similarly disturbing photos of abortion. They apparently believe that it is in the public interest to suppress images depicting the “grimness “ of abortion and the “sacrifices” being made by the young boys and girls who are being slaughtered for the convenience of their parents. The AP publishes bloody photos of the war against the Taliban because they are anti-war. They censor bloody photos of the war against the unborn because they are pro-abortion. That is why they will publish this:
But spike this:
1st Trimester, 10 Week Abortion
TimesOnline
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article6828145.ece
Here are key phrases from this article on the photo of our Marine dying on the battlefield in Afghanistan which I believe have strong abortion relevance are as follows:
“Defenders of the photograph accused Mr. Gates of attempting to sanitize the conflict, by concealing the grim reality of the war at a critical political juncture.” Our adversaries constantly strive to sanitize abortion.
“The photograph violates one of the oldest taboos, by intruding into the sacred privacy associated with the moment of death. It was published in defiance of the wishes of the dead man’s family and it raises uncomfortable questions about the dividing line between voyeurism and reportage.” We are constantly being accused of violating privacy rights with our abortion photos privacy means nothing to anti-war activists.
“ … [T]heir [photos’] power to shape our collective consciousness is immense. Knowing this, the authorities that wage war have always sought to control the public image of warfare.” Image control is the factor which will also determine the outcome of the abortion wars.
“This desire to control the imagery of war reflects the capacity of photography to convey the blunt truth about conflict in a way that no other art form, including the written word, can achieve.” This is why the political left loves shocking photos when they can be used to make the public anti-war but hates them when we use them to make the public anti-abortion.
“Robert Capa’s photograph The Fallen Soldier similarly evokes the Spanish Civil War: it is irrelevant who the soldier was, and where he had fallen; nor does it matter that the photograph may have been faked, for its power lies in not in the literal evidence it offers, but the greater meaning it conveys.” We are constantly being accused of “faking” our photos but this writer says the symbolic significance of a faked photo can redeem it despite the fact that it literally untrue.
“The picture’s power lies less in its shock value than its demand for a response:” The element of our photos which makes everyone on all sides of this issue squirm is that these pictures demand a response.
“ … [D]aily, dirty, arbitrary violence.” It is the terrible, random, arbitrariness of abortion which makes its violence so “dirty.”
“[H]is [picture’s] influence on history is likely to be profound and lasting.” We are also using pictures to influence history in a profound an enduring way (as regards public opinion which dictates public policy).
OF COURSE, NONE OF THIS MATTERS TO A PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT IN WHICH STUPIDITY AND COWARDOUS ABOUND. IF ONLY OUR PRO-LIFE FRIENDS WERE AS BRIGHT AND BOLD AS THE ANTI-WAR CROWD.
A public service announcement in the UK is using a very disturbing and graphic commercial to teach about the dangers of text messaging while driving. While the commercial is very disturbing, few if any people are decrying this teaching technique. In fact one news source reporting on this controversy put it this way,
“The use of graphic images to dissuade people from reckless behavior behind the wheel is not a new technique. I remember seeing video in a drivers’ education class in the early 1970s that had a montage of broken cars and gory bodies, some of them still alive and in pain, to warn against bad driving habits.”
Words alone cannot communicate the horror of a traffic accident and the horrible consequences that too often result from driving in a careless manner. When teaching about abortion the same can be said in that it is impossible to teach in an intellectually honest way the horror of abortion without showing images of it. Lives are lost when we hide the horror of driving careless and lives are lost when we hide the horror of abortion.
This is another example of the double standard in our education networks and institutions today. We pray for the day when the same standard of eduction would be applied to education on abortion as is the standard in driver’s education. In the mean time CBR will do its best to educate the world on who the baby is and what abortion does to her. And yes we must do it visually like everyone else.
CBR Southeast in Knoxville, TN is making abortion impossible to ignore or trivialize. A few days ago we reported on the successful efforts of CBR in Knoxville to stop the expansion of Planned Parenthood in Knoxville. Click on the photo below to see a sample of what the pro-abortion movement is up against. When the debate is about “Choice” we lose. When the debate is about what is being chosen. We win.
THIS IS THE HORROR WE BRING TO THE SIDEWALKS OF BUSINESSES WHICH SUPPORT ABORTION
Dear Friends,
This is what Tiller’s patients should have been shown. It is an outrage that Dallas Morning News called it “Choosing Thomas,” as though a child is something to objectify and choose or reject at will. This short video is the heart of God where these little ones are concerned. It goes to the heart of why we do what we do.