The MM-50 will decide who wins and who loses.

Check out my article at Townhall.com, In the Abortion Debate, the Facts Matter.

There is a place to rate the article, so please let Townhall know what you think.  Look for the graphic just below the Townhall article and sound off!  Leave comments, too.

The column answers the standard arguments against abortion victim photos (AVPs).

To see what I mean by the MM-50, see the graphic at upper right.  As a movement, we give way too much weight to the opinions of (a) our friends, e.g., the pro-lifers who like our stuff on Facebook, and (b) our opponents, i.e., the people who hate us no matter what we do or say.

We should pay more attention to the MM-50, because they ultimately decide who wins and who loses.  They don’t come to our debates, watch our videos, read our essays, or anything else.  For these millions of ignorant and apathetic people, we have only 3 seconds to tell our story and prove it, before they figure out who we are and look away.  Only pictures can prove our case in 3 seconds or less.

Don’t forget to rate the article! Also, please share it on social media.

Photos awaken the moral conscience of our audience, opening their minds to understanding.

by Jane Bullington

Although words may say that abortion is evil, photos actually show just how evil abortion really is.  Big difference.

Made them look.  At our Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) at East Carolina University, a female student said it best, “I didn’t want to look but I had to look.”  She was pro-life but had never seen the evil on display.  Now, when a friend says, “I am pregnant,” she will be more likely to step forward to offer counsel and assistance.

“It (GAP) opened my eyes … ”

I have just changed my mind!  Another student started by saying abortion might be a viable choice for other women, “They are little human beings; I wouldn’t do it, but…”  A few minutes later, after seeing how slavery was a “choice” in the 1800’s, she exclaimed, “Well, when you put it like that, I have just changed my mind!  I understand what you are saying.”

I had no idea.  A male student expressed the sentiments of most college students when he said, “I had no idea this is what abortion was. They are so tiny, and that is a hand!”

College students are a microcosm of Americans in general.  The vast majority have never seen and do not want to see the gruesome reality of abortion.  We must confront that ignorance with real abortion pictures.

The need to see.  Another student said “It’s gruesome.  I didn’t know how developed it is so early.”  She went on to say, “People do need to see this; maybe they will make different decisions.”

Opened my eyes.  A communications major was quoted in the school paper, “It (GAP) opened my eyes to the situation; it gave viewers a different way to see it.  The pictures were graphic but sometimes it may take that to get a point across, especially for something as big as life.”  Common sense from a college student!

The smoking gun.  Do you see a common thread?  Disturbing photos of abortion victims pierce through the lies and deception to inform common sense and conscience.

Victim images have been the smoking gun for every successful social reform movement in our history.  We must continue to put them in front of Americans, over and over and over.

Jane Bullington is a CBR project director and a first-time FAB contributor.

CBR volunteer Debbie Picarello on the public sidewalk near a pro-life rally in Tennessee.  CBR cooperated with rally organizers to select reasonable display locations.

It’s a source of conflict and it won’t go away.  What do you think?  Please comment.

More and more, pro-life activists are showing up at political events, Tea Party functions, Christian assemblies, and even pro-life rallies to display abortion victim photos (AVPs).  We at CBR do it, and so do others.

Event organizers routinely take exception to this, asserting that we are being disrespectful, divisive, disruptive, etc.  They ask us to put away our signs.  “This isn’t the time or place,” they say.

We do it anyway.  It is our duty to expose injustice.  Yet, over and over again, it is never the disaster that rally organizers fear.  Maybe it’s because we always respect the rights of organizers to reserve space for their own exclusive use, and we never disrupt or interfere with any of their activities.  Here is how we do it:

1. We communicate our intent to display AVPs near the subject event.
2. We assure the organizers that we will keep our signs out of whatever space they have reserved for their own exclusive use.
3. We promise that we will not go near the podium nor interfere with the event in any way.
4. We make it clear that we are not there to protest their event, but to deliver our message to an important audience.  We come as friends and co-laborers, albeit determined to fulfill our own particular mission.
5. We even let the event organizers tell us where they want us to stand, within reason.  When they see that we are reasonable, then they are reasonable (most of the time).
6. We send a letter or e-mail to the police notifying them of our intent to display AVPs; we offer to meet with them to discuss locations, rules of conduct, etc.

Why do we show up at pro-life events?  Because the abortion industry is chopping up little babies and selling them for parts, and somebody needs make that point clearly visible and undeniable.

Pro-lifers are an important audience for our message.  We want them to see how serious abortion is.  Almost every full-time pro-life activist can trace his activism back to that day he first saw an abortion photo.

We want to demonstrate how AVPs can be displayed in a respectful way.

Finally, we want to invite pro-lifers to become more active in the movement, perhaps as a vocation.  That’s vocation, not vacation!  The other side has made killing babies a full-time profession, but we have made saving them a part-time hobby.

Yes, pro-lifers are often our most important audience, but there are others.  For example, we want news reporters to know that abortion decapitates and dismembers its victims.  Whether they decide to report that fact is another thing, but at least they will know.

Passersby will wonder what the rally is all about.  We want them to see that the rally isn’t about the abstract notion of “choice,” but instead is about the decapitation and dismemberment of little human beings.

So what happens?  Nothing bad.  In the end, we have never caused a problem for event organizers, despite their initial fear and trepidation at our presence.  They did their thing, we did ours, and we all sang Kumbaya at sunset.  Well, maybe everyone didn’t sing Kumbaya, but nobody has ever claimed that we disrupted their event.

May we respectfully offer the following Rules for Rallies for your consideration:

1. People who organize rallies have every right to set their own agendas.
2. People who organize rallies have every right to control the space they reserve for their own exclusive use.  They get to decide what signs get brought into that space and what signs don’t.
3. People who organize rallies don’t get to control everything within visible sight, however.  Spaces that are still available for general use (i.e., still available for use by the general public while the event is being held) may not be claimed by the organizers as off-limits to AVPs.
4. People who display AVPs have every right to do so on the public sidewalk and in public spaces that are not being used by rally organizers.
5. People who display AVPs have every right to target whatever audience they choose, including people who are going to or leaving a rally, with whatever message they choose.  Just as the pro-life movement (PLM) is fighting against the status quo of abortion in society, some in the PLM are challenging the status quo of the PLM itself.
6. People who display AVPs have as much right to engage people walking toward a rally as pro-lifers have a right to engage people walking toward an abortion facility.
7. Nobody has the right to veto the proclamation of truth.
8. Displaying AVPs near a rally does not disrupt a rally.
9. People who display AVPs should, as a courtesy, notify the rally organizers of the plan to respectfully display AVPs on a nearby public space in a way that does not interfere with the rally itself.
10. Under most circumstances, it is not unreasonable for the rally organizers to ask for a 5-foot buffer between their crowd and the people holding AVPs.

As a matter of course, we always notify the police that we intent to display AVPs.  In our letter or e-mail, we normally offer to meet with them to answer questions and discuss specifics.  This gives the police managers a chance to tell the street officers that we do indeed have the right to be there.

That’s what FAB thinks, but you might change our minds.  What do you think?

CBR Volunteer Gary Johnson and the AVPs that saved Suzanne’s baby in Knoxville.

Occasionally, we encounter the pro-lifer who supports the use of abortion victim photos (AVPs) on college campuses (in an academic setting), but not outside abortion clinics (where they might be seen by pre-abortive or post-abortive women).

To support their position, they cite the observations of former abortion clinic workers who say that such violent photos often frighten and upset women rather than lead them to change their minds.  Abby Johnson’s has stated that women who came into her Planned Parenthood clinic for abortions were not dissuaded by pro-lifers displaying AVPs.

We love Abby Johnson, but these former clinic workers miss the main point.  First of all, we have heard from countless women who did not abort because they saw AVIs (www.AbortionNo.org).  The babies saved by AVPs are very real.

Second, we should bear in mind that clinic workers inside these clinics spoke only to the mothers who decided to go through with their abortions.  Yes, these mothers did decide to walk past the pictures and come in anyway.  That is obvious.  But these former clinic workers fail to consider the mothers they did not talk to, the mothers who did not say to these clinic workers, “I decided to save my child,” because they turned around and left before they had a chance to say anything at all to the clinic workers.

And yes, mothers who went ahead with their abortions might have been “frightened” and “upset” by the truth, but so what?  They were having their own children decapitated and dismembered, perhaps even tortured to death.  The problem isn’t that they were upset; the problem is that they were not upset enough.

Thankfully, we know that some women were upset enough, and their babies are alive today.

Kendra Wright explains how genocide victims are denied rights of personhood.

Although East Carolina University (ECU) has an undergraduate enrollment of >21,000, this was our first-ever GAP at ECU.  By God’s grace and with your support, it won’t be our last.

ECU has no pro-life student group—we are taking steps to fix that problem—but their policies allow outside groups to reserve space on campus, so we did!  Although our location was a good one (outside the Student Center), ECU is a huge campus and there is no one collection point for all of the pedestrian traffic.  That made our Truth Truck all the more important, allowing us to reach many thousands of students who may not have seen GAP in person.

The campus newspaper coverage was excellent, and included a photo of our best GAP signs on page 1, above the fold!  Items in the campus paper:

• Pro-life organization holds protests on campus
• Officials talk free speech on campus

Here is a copy of the first news article, as seen, with abortion photos clearly visible on page 1 above the fold!  See original here.

The second article was factually incorrect about one point.  We did not pay a service fee to use the space.  First, ECU did not set up the display nor clean up afterward, as implied by the article.  Second, ECU officials asked us to move our event from the designated public forum (near the Cupola) to the location outside the Student Center.  Since the designated public forum space is available free of charge, we incurred no additional fee by agreeing to ECU’s request.  Finally, we would never agree to pay any security fee (to cover the cost of policing violent pro-abortion protesters), because that is a violation of the Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement decision of the US Supreme Court.

Ruby Nicdao

by Ruby Nicdao

We overlook flippant comments, because it is critical to engage people with opposing or dismissive views and help them reason.

As one couple walked hand-in-hand past our display, I offered a brochure and asked what they thought.  The guy answered, “I’m an art student, so I’m indifferent to this.”  His girlfriend smiled at the retort.

Ignoring his dismissive attitude, I asked, “Okay, so what do you think of our artistic layout?  Do you agree with our comparisons?”

He responded, “Yes, I would agree with the comparison.”  He pointed to the dismembered baby’s hands and feet wrapped around the top of a quarter (an obvious national symbol) and remarked, “That looks like America stands behind abortion.”  Even though he was saying it in jest, there was truth in what he was saying.

I pressed further, “Okay, I know you are being facetious, but do you think the the pre-born is a human life?”  He said he did, but that he is not a female and this was not his choice to make.

I pushed further, “If this were a toddler and her mother tried to kill this toddler, would you stand up for this child?”  He said he would.  [This is a variant of the trot out the toddler argument.]

I continued, “Okay.  So if your girlfriend became pregnant and she wanted an abortion—and you just admitted that the pre-born is a human life—would you stand up and speak up for your child?”

He then said, “Yes, yes.  I guess I would.”

This one man’s shift of attitude won’t change the world tomorrow, but he did begin to think of abortion as a serious human injustice.  He saw the need to stand up for one child about to be killed, especially if it were his own.

Ruby Nicdao is a CBR Project Director in Virginia and is a frequent FAB contributor.

Virginia Project Director Maggie Egger explains how abortion decapitates and dismembers little human beings.

by Maggie Egger

Abortion photos don’t just make converts; they educate and energize people who are already pro-life.

At Radford University, a young man approached me and asked, “Are you the people I’m supposed to interview?”

“I don’t know,” I replied.  “We’ve had a good number of people interview us for their classes.”

“OK, great!  I must be in the right place!”  As he pulled out a notepad, he said, “I’m Catholic.  So I’m, ya know, pro-life.”

I told him I was excited to hear that, but from the way he said it, I could tell he was not strongly committed.  It seemed like he was raised in a pro-life house, but he didn’t necessarily buy all of it.

“Jacob” began to ask questions about the display, e.g., what was our purpose in being there, what kind of reactions did we get, what did we think of the protesters, etc.  He appeared to believe that the preborn are human beings, but he didn’t know much about abortion in general.  He knew the answer to “What is the preborn?” but he didn’t yet fully understand the answer to “What is abortion and what does it do?”

Then he asked me why we compared abortion to genocide.  Before talking about personhood, dehumanization, and all of that, I simply said,

“A lot of people say that our comparing abortion to genocide is ludicrous and offensive.  And you know what?  They’re absolutely right, if the preborn are not human beings, in the same way that you and I are human beings.  If they are not human beings, then (a) abortion doesn’t kill them, (b) abortion is no different from getting a tooth pulled, and (c) any comparison with genocide is absolutely insane.  But, as you and I both know (because science tells us), that every human life begins at fertilization.  So, abortion kills 1.2 million human beings every year in the U.S. alone.  I don’t know any word for that, other than genocide.”

“Wait, what?  How many abortions a year?”

“1.2 million.”

His eyes grew wide in disbelief.  He shook his head.  “Wow!  Yeah, you’re right.  That’s what it is … a genocide!”

We walked around the rest of the display so he could see all the different pictures, and he asked a few more questions.  When we finished he said, “Thank you so much for taking the time to explain all this to me. I’ve learned a lot.”

Yes, he had learned a lot.  And that knowledge left him more committed to the pro-life position.  That’s why you send us.  There are many more like Jacob, so please send us more places, more often.  And ask your Christian friends to do the same.

Maggie Egger is a CBR Project Director in Virginia and was the Project Manager for CBR’s recent GAP visit to the Commonwealth.

Rio Hondo College welcomes GAP to campus.  (Click on photo to enlarge; see yellow sign in background.)

When we expose abortion, two things happen.  People who have aborted feel the pain of knowing, but babies are saved because of knowing.

“I might be pregnant now and I’ve been thinking about having an abortion.”

CBR was at Rio Hondo College in November when a 32-year-old student approached our Genocide Awareness Project (GAP).  She had aborted her child some years ago and now lives with regret.  She is married but unable to conceive.  She told volunteer “Carol” that she thinks she is being punished by God for having aborted her only child.  Carol sought to encourage her by telling her how God works in our lives and by bringing up the possibility of adoption.

“Rhonda,” the wife/girlfriend of a campus security guard, asked Carol about people’s response to GAP.  As they talked, Carol shared her own testimony of having aborted, the deep regret, and how it has affected her life.   Then Rhonda told her own situation to Carol, “I might be pregnant now and I’ve been thinking about having an abortion.”

Carol told her about the student who aborted and now cannot have children.  Rhonda had never thought of that possible consequence.  She was worried about the economics of raising a child, citing a $400,000 figure she had read.  Carol helped her understand that those numbers do not reflect most people’s needs; Carol had been raised without her parents having much money, but there was always love in the home.  At the end of the conversation Rhonda said, “I don’t think I’ll have that abortion now.”

Three women came up to CBR’s Lois Cunningham and one asked what Lois would tell a woman who was contemplating abortion.  Lois told her we would (1) show the abortion pictures to educate her, (2) be sure the woman has adequate support in her life, including supportive family and friends, if at all possible, and (3) take her to a pregnancy help center/clinic for services.  The lead woman than told Lois that she has a friend who is pregnant and planning to abort, but she was now going to show her friend our photo brochure and tell her about pregnancy help clinics.

These are only two of the babies who may have been saved as a result of CBR’s presence on campus.  If you will help us, we are committed to showing students the truth about abortion so we can spare them and their children from the brutality of abortion.

Cristina Lauria displays a “Choice” sign at the U at Buffalo, which creates more opportunities to discuss abortion with her classmates than anything else she can do. What’s more, the pictures make the discussions productive because they force students to see the brutal truth of what abortion is and does.

Because you support CBR. the University at Buffalo Students for Life (UB SFL) are displaying abortion victim photos at strategic locations around campus.

UB SFL member Cristina Lauria reports

We get lots of positive comments from people walking by. Although, of course, there are those who get angry at the pictures and stomp on by them. Interesting how they won’t look at what they support.

Way to go!!!!  Keep up the good work!

To support Cristina and other brave pro-life students, please partner with CBR to give them strategies and tools that work!!!!  Link here to support CBR.

People in this tour group of parents and prospective students were trying not to look at the GAP display, but eventually, they couldn’t help but see. (Click to enlarge.)

by Mick Hunt

Fall is coming and classes have begun at the major universities in the United States and Canada. Which means it’s the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) season again. I hope you will consider joining the team for the GAP nearest you. At least come out to observe. There’s a need for every kind of personality and set of interests and abilities.

We just need to show up, and that’s where we fail most often.

Some people are really good at speaking to crowds. Fletcher Armstrong is one of the best at this. Every group that gathers becomes his class and he is the professor. Stephanie Grey of CBR Canada is best at give and take in a crowd. I prefer the one-on-one, off-script, creative, philosophical discussion.

All of us struggle with the angry, bright, loud, combative student or professor. Sometimes the most you can do is listen, and let the pictures speak for themselves. I enjoy talking or debating with really smart people, and invariably they know more about certain subjects than I do, in which case I’m usually quiet while listening and asking questions. I look at these times as an opportunity to learn.

The one thing that makes it all easier is the fact that our position is right. We represent truth, fact, and reason. And no matter how smart or educated you are, no matter how polished your PhD looks, or how many peer-reviewed publications you have, or how many academic honors you’ve received, if you are trying to defend the indefensible, you will have a hard time, especially if you believe too many things that aren’t true. We pro-lifers, on the other hand, win the debate without saying a word. We just need to show up, and that’s where we fail most often.  Very few pro-life people are involved when needed (or as often).

Showing up. Let me tell you about a classic confrontation during our Genocide Awareness Project at North Carolina State University (NCSU) last spring.

I was standing at the corner of the GAP display nearest the student center where most of the traffic was. Between me and the main walking lane was a line of pro-abortion-choice students holding signs. All of a sudden someone started shouting. He was a rather nice looking student with a clear baritone voice in an Australian accent. He had been talking with one of the GAP volunteers, another man about my age. Something apparently ticked the student off, which set him hurling insults at the volunteer.

He then said, “Who’s in charge here, who is the mastermind? Who can answer my questions?”

He then shouted a few of the usual derogatory remarks about GAP. A few people around cheered.

True, he was angry, but he obviously was clear-headed, fearless, and bright. Capable of sarcastic, winsome insight. I was intimidated. So, when he looked directly at me and asked loudly if I was the mastermind, I was relieved when an attractive girl just then spoke to me out of the blue from my left when I had been looking toward the commotion on the right. She had asked a question, an easy one. So, I was saved from being drawn into a public spectacle in which I had a clear disadvantage. No way I could look good and respond to this guy in front of a crowd. I just can’t yell and be winsome.

Things quieted down and I took a break and sat on a brick wall away from the action. Then I noticed our Australian friend was talking quietly with Starla, a pro-life acquaintance of mine from Asheville. I joined them just as the young man asked her about the classic “Famous Violinist” thought-experiment of Judith Jarvis Thomson, the scenario taught in every introductory liberal rhetoric class.

In a few moments I could tell Starla wasn’t prepared for this question, and I joined in. She left after a minute. (She said later it was fine for me to butt in.) Then I talked with the young man for the next hour. It turned out that he had been a war paramedic in Afghanistan and had seen more than his share of blood, death, and mangled bodies. Also, he said his mother was strongly pro-life and had often debated with him about abortion. So, he was good at this.

I believe (for the reasons given above) I won the debate. He could only assert but not defend his claim that it’s OK to kill a prenatal child and not OK to kill a born child, but he wouldn’t admit it, of course. His argument was built around “agency” or the mother’s right to “bodily integrity”, which means a woman is morally permitted to repel a person who “invades” her body, even if the person is her own child whose very existence came into being by the child’s mother’s actions, actions which are by nature those bringing people into existence. And even if society ordinarily places a burden on parents, even unwilling parents, to either provide for a child or safely turn the child over to another agent.

My conclusion was to say his position was “brutal”. He said it wasn’t, and basically that’s where we ended the debate. If a person can’t see how it is brutal to kill a child in the womb when looking at the photographs of brutally killed children, I don’t know what else to say. My conversation with him took place on our first day we were at NCSU, and I saw him again the second day when we spoke again briefly.

At least I gave him an amicable, cogent presentation, but conversations like this point out the price we are paying for 47 years of legal child killing by abortion since 1967. The brutality of it isn’t so raw anymore. Over time, some people have become so accustomed to the violence that they don’t believe it is violence. Which is all the more reason to reach as many people as possible as soon as possible before it’s too late to turn things around.

So, we need to show up. We need to stand and talk.

Mick Hunt is a regular contributor to FAB.

A typical scene at our UNC GAP. (Click to enlarge.)

by Mick Hunt

Earlier this month, a woman verbally and physically abused Created Equal (CE) staffers who were showing abortion victim photos in Columbus, Ohio.  The incident was caught on tape and received extensive news coverage, including an interview on the Sean Hannity show (link here).

The attacker repeatedly called CE staffers misogynist and racist.  If you are engaged in important work like CE and CBR, it won’t be long before someone says those things about you … if you are white and male.

But when women and people of minority races express pro-life views, it proves the issues of race and gender to be irrelevant to the argument.

The pro-life movement has a number of prominent African-American leaders like Dr. Alveda King (niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.) and Rev. Clenard Childress (a CBR director).  To help complete the picture, however, I’d like to share a few black voices.  These are stories written by staff and volunteers who helped with our recent GAPs in North Carolina, but they might have come from any state.

UNC-Chapel Hill  (March 31-April 1, 2014)

p A black female student told me her brother was supposed to be aborted, but her mother went through with the pregnancy and her brother turned out fine.  She was glad we were showing the truth.

p I gave a brochure to a black man and asked if he would like to know how we make the genocide comparison.  He took the brochure and said emphatically, “It is genocide!”

p A black male student said, “I thought it was OK until maybe 3 months, until I saw these pictures.  I had no idea!”

p Black male psychology student said, “Human fetus = person.”

p Conversation with an older black female:  Q: Would you like some information?  A: No, because I agree with you.

p Tony, a black student, was staring at the signs, listening to the crazy NARAL woman, and asked her, pointing to the signs, “How is that hate?” (This was in response to a comment she had made repeatedly.)  She said, “I’ve had an abortion, and I’m not ashamed of it, but their signs are trying to shame me for my choice.”  Tony was not buying any of it.  I was standing right there, so we began talking, along with two other black women.  Tony said, among other things, “It seems like anything pro-God, pro-morality, pro-creation, etc. gets stifled on this campus.  It’s ironic that they try to profess tolerance, and yet with their appeal to the Dean, they are trying to shut you up, and take away your rights.  That’s what is hate.  If we don’t have the First Amendment, we don’t have anything.  Them trying to get you guys off campus, we might as well be back in the 50’s.  It’s just like the racist saying, ‘Get in the back, n***’”

North Carolina State University (April 2-3, 2014)

p A black female student was raised in a pro-life church and family; she didn’t know about the NCSU Students for Life group and immediately signed up.  She came back to volunteer the next day.  Her Bishop came as well and we encouraged him as a black pro-life pastor.  Four of our folks went to his church on Friday to support their work.

Next time: African-American performance artist Shawn Welcome’s poem “Civil War.”

………………………….
Mick Hunt (Meredith Eugene Hunt) is a FAB contributor.  He has helped organize more than 50 Genocide Awareness Projects (GAPs) all over the Southeast and elsewhere.

.

Here are just some random comments made by passersby at Oakland University:

“It’s crazy; can I take a picture?”
***
“I appreciate what you are doing.”
***
“I want to punch you in the face.”
***
“I am disturbed; I don’t know what to think.”
***
“They are freaking terrible.”
***
“You should have been aborted.”
***
“That’s really blunt.”
***
“Thank you.”
***
“It’s just really disturbing.”
***
“You guys are just disgusting.”
***
“It’s all God’s creation…I don’t know how people can say this is normal, but we have a pretty crazy humanity right now.”
***
“Not allowing abortion legally won’t stop it.”
***
“I am glad you are doing this and I pray it gets changed in your country.” (Muslim woman)
***
“If my girlfriend gets pregnant, she’s going to have an abortion.”  [CBR: “That doesn’t sound like ‘choice’ to me.”]  “I don’t care.  I would make sure she had an abortion.”
***
“[Abortion is a] very bad thing; I think it is a loss.”

Abortion apologists say that abortion is simply a “choice” and its victims are subhuman. This is one of many ways they mimic genocide apologists throughout history.

GAP highlights many ways in which abortion is comparable (although not identical) to other forms of historical genocide.  One similarity is the language used to justify the killing.

For example, pro-abortion protester Lauren Catoni was quoted in the Oakland Post (the OU student newspaper), “It’s actually horrifying that they’re comparing this to genocide because genocide is a widespread movement to eliminate people and abortion is a medical procedure people have when they need it.”

Perpetrators of genocide almost never “eliminate people.”  No, they exercise their “choice” because they “need” to.  Perhaps Ms. Catoni should complete her sentence: Genocide is a widespread movement to eliminate people and abortion is a widespread medical procedure people have when they need to eliminate people they don’t want.

OU SFL President Michelle Anderson changed her mind and brought GAP to Oakland University.  After GAP, she wrote to thank us, “GAP is the perfect project …”

The Oakland University (OU) Students for Life (SFL) opposed the use of abortion victim photos … until they attended the Students for Life of America (SFLA) National Conference in January.

They heard Stephanie Gray of the Canadian CBR describe how social movements have used victim images not only to change hearts and minds, but also to move people to action.  They called us, and because of your support, we were able to answer that call.

OU SFL President Michelle Anderson wrote:

My fears suddenly seemed so minuscule after hearing Stephanie’s talk.  We needed to do this at Oakland University.  There was no way around it.  We are extremely happy that we decided to go through with this campus-shaking project.  The large-scale influence that this project has had on our campus is immeasurable!  We are constantly doing pro-life activities on campus, but there hasn’t been something as grand as the GAP project.  It reached more students in two days than we would while tabling for one hour in the student center every day for two semesters.  Even then, we wouldn’t be able to tell students why abortion is wrong in 3 seconds.  With the GAP project, you don’t even need to use words because the “picture is worth a thousand words” cliché truly applies here.

With your support … only with your support … we can help pro-life student heroes like Michelle change the campus culture, win hearts, change minds, and save lives.

Awesome piece by Rolley Haggard at BreakPoint.  Excerpts:

Moral/spiritual matters are preeminently the domain of the church.  Political overtones notwithstanding, abortion is arguably the moral/spiritual issue of our day.  If we don’t speak to it, who will?
***
As heaven’s ambassadors, therefore, it is not only appropriate but obligatory that ministers address abortion.  Whatever political overtones may attach to preaching against the sin of abortion, silence is not an option for the church—unless the plan is just to quit preaching against sin altogether.  (emphasis added)
***
In answer to this we might well ask, “seekers of what?”  Seekers of a pleasant but shallow church experience, or seekers of the living Christ?  Seekers of a mere “form of godliness,” or seekers of “religion that is pure and undefiled”?

Entire article here.  Show it to your pastor.

One thing we wish Mr. Haggard had added to his piece, and that is the need for showing abortion photos or videos (e.g., Choice Blues) to people in the church.  Christians deserve to know the truth about abortion — what it is, what it does, and what God expects us to do about it.  Most Christians who have never seen abortion don’t understand how evil it really is.  Nor do they understand their own responsibility to “hold back those staggering toward slaughter (Proverbs 24:11-12).”

Before visiting your pastor, you should read this: Why This? Why Here?.  This brochure is designed to answer many questions that Christians leaders (including, perhaps, your pro-life pastor) are confused about.  You might also watch a video of how abortion imagery can be appropriately incorporated into a worship service at a large mega-church (with children removed, warning of content given, etc.).

Update: 27 May 2014, 4:45 pm

Got this comment from Roland Haggard:

Thanks, Fletcher, I totally agree we need to show abortion pix to folks in church, but you’re right I didn’t manage to fit it into the above article. I did, however, include it in these two:

• If the Ear Won’t Listen, Tell it to the Eye:  The Case for Proliferating Graphic Pictures of Abortion
• Picking Up the Gauntlet:  Challenging believers to be pro-life not only in belief, but in action:   (even mentioned CBR in this one)

Blessings, my friend