Anti-abortion groups parade graphic images in 'free speech zone' at KU / LJWorld.com

Archive for Wednesday, September 3, 2008

An anti-abortion group brought its message to the KU campus on Wednesday.

September 3, 2008

Kansas University passers-by catch a glimpse of billboard-size pro-life signs Wednesday in front of Strong Hall. The signs showed graphic results of abortions. Several Catholic and pro-life groups, including KU Students for Life, held the demonstration. The demonstration will continue Thursday.

Tammy Cook wants students to know what effect abortion has on society.

And Cook, director of field operations for the Wichita-based anti-abortion group Justice for All, has visual aids.

"We brought an outdoor exhibit to help people more fully understand what abortion is," she said. "Most people in this country are having a disconnect about what abortion is and what it really means."

Students milled around large panels Wednesday on the front lawn of Strong Hall at Kansas University. On the front were large, graphic photos of aborted fetuses at different stages of development.

Justice for All, KU Students for Life, the Benedictine College Ministry Office, Benedictine's Ravens Respect Life and several national anti-abortion groups presented what they called a "free speech zone" in front of the panels.

Several large boards, soggy from the rain, had messages supporting both sides scrawled across them. Nearby, a small group of student protesters held signs speaking out against the anti-abortion activists and the images they presented.

Cook said the goal of the exhibit was to encourage an open and civil discussion between two very different sides of a volatile issue.

However, not everyone was pleased with the use of graphic images to start the discussion.

Elise Higgins, president of the Commission on the Status of Women, said her group thought the way the discussion was framed was inappropriate.

"We believe the images that this group presents are graphic and disturbing," she said. "We believe that they're unfair to women who have had abortions."

Higgins said her group thought it was important for the other side of the issue to be heard.

Both Higgins and Cook said the interaction between the two groups had remained civil.

"We've had some great dialogue with the people out here," Higgins said. "They've been very respectful."

The exhibit will be up again from 9:30 a.m. to 3:15 p.m. Thursday.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

3 September 2008
at 3:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sonshyne2002 (Anonymous) says…

I think it is important for people to know the truth about abortion. Unfortunately, the truth is not visually appealing!
3 September 2008
at 3:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kam_Fong_as_Chin_Ho (Anonymous) says…

I don't like seeing Peta protesters distributing pictures of animals being tortured but, hey, freedom of speech is freedom of speech.
3 September 2008
at 3:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

creamygnome (Anonymous) says…

Show some pictures of actual childbirth. Now THAT is disturbing.
3 September 2008
at 3:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

hujiko (Anonymous) says…

Graphic nature aside, no one truly ever wishes to have an abortion, it isnt something you HAVE to have, so if you dont agree with it, then dont have one. Another question I have had is what would happen to women who have an abortion if it is illegal and they are caught in the act? Would they go to prison?
3 September 2008
at 3:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mom_of_three (Anonymous) says…

I don't think I could ever have an abortion, and I don't know if it is right or wrong. but I don't think it's right to tell someone else what they can or can't do with their bodies. It's a personal decision that every woman has a right to make.
3 September 2008
at 3:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

“”We believe the images that this group presents are graphic and disturbing,” she said. “We believe that they're unfair to women who have had abortions.”Why? Did they think the little tykes floated up to heaven in a fluffy cloud? Does the truth hurt?
3 September 2008
at 4:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says…

“Another question I have had is what would happen to women who have an abortion if it is illegal and they are caught in the act? Would they go to prison?” -hujikoNo. The abortion doctor goes to prison. The woman is a victim, like the child is, of a society where Planned Parenthood, NOW and NARAL have lied to two generations of women about the horrors of “choice.”

3 September 2008
at 4:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Tammy Cook was probably undergoing severe physical arousal when she was showing off these graphic photos. “Shock & awe” is the main reason these folks do this; deep down, they couldn't give a rat's keister about “babies” or “life” or anything else. Truth be told, the last thing they want is for abortion to disappear.Of course, if it did, they'd probably just turn to regular ol' pornography like other addicts. ;)The big question: What has Tammy Cook and her bunch ever really done to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies… the #1 cause of abortion?Probably not a damn thing.Agnostickagnostick@excite.comhttp://contraception.comhttp://marciaford.blogspot.com
3 September 2008
at 4:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Navin_R_Johnson (Anonymous) says…

i hope the three hundred pound guy down the street with tree trunks for arms and the neck the size of a barrel doesn't decide to commit homicide and go on a rampage with “his body.”not to mention that wiry teenager on the corner. i hope he doesn't decide he wants old ladies' purses and starts using “his body” to clobber 'em on the head.
3 September 2008
at 4:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Navin_R_Johnson (Anonymous) says…

so agnostic what's the centrist postition on abortion?
3 September 2008
at 4:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says…

This type of educational campaign is wonderful. The target audience is the young women and men most likely to consider abortion. Hopefully the effect dual effect will be fewer abortions as well as many more students ready to fight for laws that will protect developing human life.
3 September 2008
at 4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mom_of_three (Anonymous) says…

I can't say that it is wrong either….
3 September 2008
at 4:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Navin_R_Johnson (Anonymous) says…

correction: “position”
3 September 2008
at 4:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says…

“…reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies: the #1 cause of abortion.” -agnostickSo pregnancies cause abortions, agnostick? Or are you saying that unwanted pregnancies actually cause the abortions? Either way, your logic is way off. Your comment doesn't even make sense as a bumper sticker.
3 September 2008
at 4:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

geniusmannumber1 (Anonymous) says…

Yawn. Same sex-obsessed stuff I saw on campus ten years ago.

3 September 2008
at 4:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Navin_R_Johnson (Anonymous) says…

STRS,that would be know as the “centrist” position on abortion.
3 September 2008
at 4:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

I don't speak for “centrists,” or any other political party. I only speak for myself.http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/sep/19/disqualification/#c210940
3 September 2008
at 4:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mom_of_three (Anonymous) says…

I can't determine if it is wrong or right, because I won't be judge and jury for someone else, who is in the position and feels it's necessary to have one. It's an individual decision, and I won't take away the right for someone to make that decision. Even if I thought abortion was wrong, I am not going to take that decision away from someone else. It's their decision to make, and it's something they have to deal with, not me.
3 September 2008
at 4:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

STRS:Show me a woman who is **not** pregnant… who gets an abortion.No doubt, you'll make one up.No fault in my logic… only your complete and utter lack of logic is holding you back.Navin, meanwhile, continues to ride the “short bus” to school… and will most likely never catch up…
3 September 2008
at 4:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

STRS and Navin, gasping and flopping around like fish, stranded on the sands of logic…
3 September 2008
at 4:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ReadingSports (Anonymous) says…

“so agnostic what's the centrist postition on abortion?”oh, oh… can I answer?That anyone that disagrees with agnostic is a theocrat. Isn't that right Ag?
3 September 2008
at 4:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Navin_R_Johnson (Anonymous) says…

agnostic:”I don't speak for “centrists,” or any other political party. I only speak for myself.”since when? didn't you used to evangelize with hyperlinks for US Centrists or centrists.org or some such organization propagating an unachievable philosophy?oh, and in speaking for “yourself,” we couldn't help but notice that you were pro-choice.have a nice day :)
3 September 2008
at 4:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Not **anyone**, ReadingSports…Just you. ;)See? And you thought you weren't “special”…

3 September 2008
at 4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Navin…I'll use small words… with plenty of spacing… so you can take your time.Ready?Yes, I am pro-choice.Yes, I also think it's admirable to reduce the number of abortions in this country… including a complete shutdown of George TIller's clinic.You have a nice day, too, Navin… with your crayons and little abortion pictures. ;)Happy coloring!—Ag
3 September 2008
at 4:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says…

“The woman is a victim”This view of abortion, where a woman who has made the decision to undergo a medical procedure, is the most patronizing, patriarchal nonsense.The centrist position on abortion is “safe, legal, and rare.” The minute any of the twits in front of Strong today works on reducing the number of teen pregnancies through comprehensive sex ed, they will start to have a glimmer of credibility on reproductive issues. Instead, they seek to shock, disgust, bully, and shame.
3 September 2008
at 4:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Why should any “pro-choice” person be bothered by so-called “graphic images” of the results of abortion?After all, the consensus among that lot is that the babies aren't realy alive anyway!
3 September 2008
at 4:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

towanda54 (Anonymous) says…

Marion Lynn-I don't particularly want to see pictures of an appendectomy either, but doesn't mean I'd turn one down to save my life.
3 September 2008
at 4:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mom_of_three (Anonymous) says…

very well said, logic. Bubarubu has a good point, too. Work on prevention measures, and then the abortions won't be needed.
3 September 2008
at 5:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

ReadingSports… fwiw… When it comes to matters of faith, religion, etc. you're not **nearly** as fanatical as some others I've run across over the years.Bubarubu, you said it better than I did… and with only @ 5% of the words!Tiller would be a lot easier to handle if Cook and her bunch would stop thinking about Tiller as a “murderer”… and start thinking about him as a “business owner.”—Ag
3 September 2008
at 5:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ReadingSports (Anonymous) says…

ReadingSports: fwiw: When it comes to matters of faith, religion, etc. you're not **nearly** as fanatical as some others I've run across over the years.Now I'm insulted!You've been using and abusing that word quite a bit lately. Bit hypocritical, don't you think?
3 September 2008
at 5:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

hujiko (Anonymous) says…

STRS: Sending only the doctor to prison doesnt make sense, that is like saying a drug dealer would go to jail but the person he is dealing to wouldnt, even if they had drugs on them. They were not “victims of society” only to their own flaws. So if the government criminalizes the action of abortion, and a woman has the procedure, then technically she should go to prison because it is illegal.

3 September 2008
at 5:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jcjayhawk1 (Anonymous) says…

Just a few thoughts.If DNA is present does that constitute a human being? If I am not mistaken within the first division of cells DNA and chromosomes are present. (I could be wrong)I do believe that Partial birth at the very least should be banned. I think that partial birth abortions are barbaric. Basically the legs are hanging out and kicking because it's still alive..that is until the “doctor” scrambles and sucks the brains out.
3 September 2008
at 5:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Okay, ReadingSports… so, I guess you're gonna be insulted, from here on out, by pretty much anything I say.*shrug*C'est la vi…
3 September 2008
at 5:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says…

Yes, abortion doctors should go to jail. If I favored the death penalty, which I don't, I would ask that they be executed first. Women (and men) who choose abortion have been failed by society and lied to by the abortion industry and its miserable, stinking allies. agnostick, you're in rare form today. Any shred of credibility you ever earned by pretending to be a reasonable centrist flies out the window when you resort to your typical, liberal elitist demagoguery. Your loathesome condescension makes you anything but a man of the people. How do you look in the mirror?Gotta go to a meeting. To all my pro-life sisters and brothers: Peace begins in the womb!
3 September 2008
at 5:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Mr_Nancy_Boy_To_You (Tom Shewmon) says…

“…Mark Vierthaler first worked for the Lawrence Journal-World in 2006 as an intern covering youth sports. He took on the mantle of full-time Kansas University reporter in 2008 after spending a year working for his hometown newspaper doing a little bit of everything.”Please tell me he tagged the headline, Mr. LJW Editor……….”parade graphic images”……..”Parade”?LJW is getting more undigestable each and every day. Bartender, bring me a double!
3 September 2008
at 5:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Mr_Nancy_Boy_To_You (Tom Shewmon) says…

Oddly, the same crowd who is offended by these graphic images JFA “paraded' around in this free speech zone would likely be very same ones who would dutifully set up and “parade” graphic photos of wounded combat soldiers.Am I wrong here? Help me out lefties. Agnostick, can you too possibly shed your infinitely centered and wisdomful light on this? I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks-Tom
3 September 2008
at 5:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

skinny (Anonymous) says…

What a bunch of loosers!!
3 September 2008
at 6:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cait48 (Anonymous) says…

I haven't seen anyone mention the fact that almost (if not all ) of the so called “abortion” pictures of “fetuses” circulated by these groups have either been artificially “enhanced” or are outright false. It was proven that one of them was a picture of a monkey fetus.But hey, the ends justify the means, right? Right?
3 September 2008
at 6:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

foodboy (Anonymous) says…

How about some pictures of abused or neglected kids born to parents who didn't want them.

3 September 2008
at 7:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

1029 (Anonymous) says…

It seems like abortions have been getting progressively more expensive over the last three years. They need to open another place here in town to create some competition, which will hopefully causes prices to go down and shrink these ridiculously long lines.
3 September 2008
at 7:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

idarastar (Anonymous) says…

foodboy (Anonymous) says:How about some pictures of abused or neglected kids born to parents who didn't want them.++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++That's what I think. Many of the people who get abortions is because they are mentally, emotionally or financially unstable and unable to care for another life. Of course, people will argue that if you're not able to care for a child, don't have sex or you should use protection. There are many reasons out there why one might not use protection. In this case, abstinence if not an answer. It's human nature to want sex.Women and men both should have they choice of what to do with her body. If she created the fetus, it's hers to keep, abort or adopt. But if you look at the statistics, white children are the most adopted children. When it comes to socioeconomics, brown-skinned women are ones that are needing a reject a child/fetus through adoption or abortion.Looking at the foster care rate: Approximately 64% of children waiting in foster care are of minority background; 32% are White. 51% of all foster children waiting for adoption are Black, 11% are Hispanic, 1% are American Indian, 1% are Asian/Pacific Islander, and 5% are unknown/unable to determine.And 53% of these children are supported through federal funds. http://statistics.adoption.com/inform… known kids in foster care. They are hurt souls that feel rejected. They were born into a world where no one wants them. It's been said that a healthy child can not be found in a home without a loving mom and dad. Although I've known some happy adopted kids, there are still those psychological hangups in the back of their minds.The focus of these groups should not be to criminalize abortion, rather, it should be to help women get to a point where they are able to birth children by supporting them before sex even becomes part of their life. If young women and men are taught positive messages about their role as adults and what relationships, parenthood and safe sex practices are all about, some of the abortion rate would decrease. There are far too many children in the world that are in need of loving parents. Why should a woman only have the choice of life for a fetus if she has no intentions of keeping it? Should she just to toss another child into the state system for your tax dollars to support?There's far more to the abortion story than a right for a fetus to live. I just wanted to share my thoughts.
3 September 2008
at 7:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

Was Phil KKK-Kline there to get all hot and sweaty while looking at these pics? Don't forget that this is his adult material. Actually, I'm sure a lot of you posters really get off on this stuff.
3 September 2008
at 7:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

situveux1 (Anonymous) says…

“We believe the images that this group presents are graphic and disturbing”Yea, that's what abortion is genius. Tell me why showing what abortion is is unfair?
3 September 2008
at 8:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

beatrice (Anonymous) says…

Tom, let's flip your senario. I'll bet there are many who want these abortion images shown are the same people who object when images of dead American soldiers in Iraq are shown to the public. Yes, disturbing images can be effective in getting a point across. War — horrifying = bad thing; aborted fetus — horrifying = bad thing. However, we know that soldiers are sent into war, and if you don't agree with the reason, that means it is cause to stop the war. However, we don't always know what the story is of an aborted fetus — was it brain dead and would it have been still-born? Was it a developing fetus by a rape? Is it a monkey fetus? We don't know. Just something to think on.
3 September 2008
at 8:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Hawk6643 (Anonymous) says…

Jcjayhawk1, Just because something has DNA doesn't mean it is a “human being.” Your hair has DNA even after it has detached from your scalp and fallen to the ground, it is not considered living or has DNA.I don't consider a fetus to be alive until it can fully survive outside the mother's womb. I just think these people could have presented their ideas in a educated way, instead of using graphic images which in the end will probably do no good.
3 September 2008
at 8:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

coltrane (Anonymous) says…

these characters are bloody gross (intentional comment).
3 September 2008
at 9:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Tom ShewmonTom Shewmon (Tom Shewmon) says:Oddly, the same crowd who is offended by these graphic images JFA “paraded' around in this free speech zone would likely be very same ones who would dutifully set up and “parade” graphic photos of wounded combat soldiers.Am I wrong here? Help me out lefties. Agnostick, can you too possibly shed your infinitely centered and wisdomful light on this? I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks-Tom_____________________________________________________First paragraph: Can you back this up with anything? A Youtube clip, a newspaper article, **anything** credible that documents such an event? Anti-war protestors “parading” graphic photos of wounded American soldiers?Consider this: Groups like KFL and ORW love to boast about their “undercover operatives” working in places like Planned Parenthood and Tiller's clinic.Under what scenario would you propose a “peace activist” enlist in the Army or Marines, get assigned overseas, **take pictures** while on active duty, out on patrol… and then get said pictures to the other activists?I'm not saying it's impossible; I'm just saying, “Think about it.”Abu Ghraib? Those photos were taken by the participants, under the auspices of “Look at us! We're badasses!!” It was wrong, and the Army applied the appropriate penalties.Again: I would not support, nor would I gaze upon graphic pictures of wounded or dead American soliders.That being said… why the big fuss about this?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nightline_(US_news_program)#Reading_of_the_nameshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcasting_Group#Nightline_controversyI watched the first of the three “Nightline” broadcasts. It was tastefully done, with some soldiers pictured in their dress uniforms.One last time: I would encourage any demonstration or protest that involved or included graphic pictures of wounded or dead American service men and women.On the other hand…Show me Osama bin Laden's severed head on a pole… and I might spring for a 12-pack!—Ag

3 September 2008
at 10:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

( Seems I'm always arriving late to the forums, these days… one of the drawbacks of having life, I suppose… unlike those lucky aborted feti. ) mom_of_three: “I can't determine if it is wrong or right, because I won't be judge and jury for someone else, who is in the position and feels it's necessary to have one. It's an individual decision, and I won't take away the right for someone to make that decision.”If you can appreciate the problem inherent in “judging and jurying” someone else, then why tolerate it from those who would render the ultimate( i.e., existential ) judgment regarding the most vulnerable among us?And you're right about it being an “individual” decision… a *unilateral* verdict impacting two-count 'em-unique individuals. 1029: “It seems like abortions have been getting progressively more expensive over the last three years. They need to open another place here in town to create some competition, which will hopefully causes prices to go down and shrink these ridiculously long lines.”1029, I trust you're being sarcastic, here. ( If not, then you've just experienced an unprecedented loss of love… I'd say… amounting to the loss of a significant digit… 029…. ) Hawk6643: “I don't consider a fetus to be alive until it can fully survive outside the mother's womb.”Hawk-less-than-zero… we won't consider you alive until you can survive outside of that fragile nexus which sustains you.
3 September 2008
at 10:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

davidnta (Anonymous) says…

Oh how we all love to control others. Conservatives are very hypocritical in how they want to deal with family issues in private, but legislate onto others.I would say let the families decides whether or not it's right. It's a woman's choice to choose to be pro-life or pro-choice. If she's pro-life, that's her choice, good for her and her family, but DO NOT tell me what to do in my family.
3 September 2008
at 10:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

davidnta: In a nutshell…Democrats/liberals can't keep their hands out of your wallets, purses, bank accounts etc.Republicans/conservatives can't keep their eyes out of your bedrooms, bathrooms, living rooms, dining rooms, video games, music collections, televisions, movie collections, book shelves, computers etc.—Ag
3 September 2008
at 10:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

davidnta: “I would say let the families decides whether or not it's right. It's a woman's choice to choose to be pro-life or pro-choice. If she's pro-life, that's her choice, good for her and her family, but DO NOT tell me what to do in my family.”I don't think the issue is so much what you do in your family… it's what is to become of that individual whom you would *exclude* from your family and, indeed, from the family of man.
3 September 2008
at 10:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

towanda54 (Anonymous) says: Marion Lynn-I don't particularly want to see pictures of an appendectomy either, but doesn't mean I'd turn one down to save my life.”Marion writes:And nor do I think you should!Problem is this in abortion statistics:25.5% Want to postpone childbearing 21.3% Cannot afford a baby 14.1% Has relationship problem or partner does not want pregnancy 12.2% Too young; parent(s) or other(s) object to pregnancy 10.8% Having a child will disrupt education or job 7.9% Want no (more) children 3.3% Risk to fetal health 2.8% Risk to maternal health 2.1% Other http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A090450… kill babies primarily to evade personal responsibility.”Choice” kills.
3 September 2008
at 11:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

And, regarding “choice”… I say, Let women choose! Absolutely.With “choice” comes responsibility. And, if a woman makes a choice which can result in the conception of a human being-even probabilistically so-then let her respect “choice” with an equal measure of responsibility to the life to which she has given expression.Abortion contradicts “choice”… there is no “choosing” for that life which is in the (un)balance.
3 September 2008
at 11:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

Whoa, Marion… like minds… scary.
3 September 2008
at 11:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says: Whoa, Marion: like minds: scary”Marion writes:Don't confuse the message with the messenger!

4 September 2008
at 12:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ReadingSports (Anonymous) says…

“Tiller would be a lot easier to handle if Cook and her bunch would stop thinking about Tiller as a “murderer”: and start thinking about him as a “business owner.”Yes, someone whose business is death!Marion, if you're thinking like tra, be afraid, be very, very, very, very, afraid. Or just plain silly. either one. :-)
4 September 2008
at 12:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ReadingSports (Anonymous) says…

“Many children are alive today because their mothers saw an ugly, brutal, graphic picture of an aborted baby.”True, and this is changing the debate:http://www.prolifeamerica.com/4D-Ultrasound-pictures/Science is on the side of the baby!
4 September 2008
at 2:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TheSychophant (Anonymous) says…

Great idea, wingnuts. Let's carry the debate farther. Lets show videos and pictures from Iraq of soldiers and civiliians, and women and children being blown apart , , as well as the grisly images of their dsmembered and shattered corpses. Now, that would be a great anti-war pitch.
4 September 2008
at 5:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bondmen (Anonymous) says…

How might the German people have behaved differently during Hitler's reign of terror had they seen pictures of the death camps and their unfortunate victims? Would it not have been more difficult to pretend it was not happening had large graphic signs been available of the showers, ovens and bodies piled like cord wood?
4 September 2008
at 9:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ReadingSports (Anonymous) says…

TheSychophant,Just like a liberal, call the opposition names and change the subject.
4 September 2008
at 11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

storm (Anonymous) says…

Both sides shouldn't be offended, an aborted fetus will be reincarnated into some other creature.