"Abortionists profit from human trafficking." This is a reference to recent revelations about Planned Parenthood.

Media.  It was another awesome day.  Unbelievable coverage on the front page of the student newspaper.  You can’t see it online, but they published a whole 2-page spread of photos that included some of our best GAP signs.  On the paper’s website, I noted that this was the first mention of abortion since 2008!  Yikes!

Southern Hospitality, in the North?  We were really struck by how polite everybody at Rhode Island has been, regardless of whether they agree with us or not.  Not sure why.  Perhaps the people of Rhode Island are just naturally polite.  Perhaps Rhode Island promotes a small-state, small-town culture.  Perhaps the presence of 4 police officers put everybody on their best behavior.  Perhaps Rhode Island is so blue (left-wing), they viewed us as more of a curiosity than a threat to their “rights.”

Opportunities.  Regardless of the reasons, we had many, many opportunities to present the pro-life message to students.  We had 10 or 15 staff and volunteers who never stopped handing out pro-life literature and speaking with students all day long.

Calm down?  The pro-abortion protesters gathered, but were relatively quiet.  Still, I overheard one student complain as she walked between their group and our display.  She said, “Why can’t both sides just calm down?!”  I had to laugh as I thought, “This is as calm as it gets!”

Don’t forget us!  As usually happens, some Jewish people complain because we compare abortion to the Holocaust.  On the other hand, a Ukrainian employee of the University approached me and suggested we add the Ukrainian genocide to our display.  A few years ago, a gentleman who was interested in the history of Native American oppression actually praised our inclusion of the Wounded Knee massacre.  Go figure.

More to come?  We’ll do more of this, but only if you help.  If only 8 people give $100 per month, we can add another major university to our schedule every year.  Perhaps you can’t give $100, but you can give something.  The best way to maintain the status quo is to do nothing.  Please do something.

Silent No More at the University of Rhode Island: "I regret my abortion; Please ask me about it."

At the University of Rhode Island (URI) yesterday, 4 women and 1 man wore t-shirts identifiying themselves as “Silent No More” (SNM).  This outreach has a powerful effect on students.

URI student “Adam” asked if most abortions are performed very early in pregnancy.  GAP/SNM volunteer Hannah explained that she didn’t even know she was pregnant until late in the first trimester.

Nicole added that after being raped and convinced by her pastor to abort, she called an abortion clinic.  “When I called, I was at 3-1/2 weeks.  The clinic told me to wait until 6 weeks because it would be safer for me.  What they didn’t tell me was that in 3 more weeks, my baby would have arms and legs.  What made the abortion ‘safe’ was their ability to count body parts.  When I learned this after the abortion, I was devastated.”

Adam winced as Nicole told her story and took our literature to read more about the genocide comparison.  He also returned later in the day to talk to Hannah further.

The most dramatic witness came later in the afternoon from another rape victim who taped the words “RAPE VICTIM, PRO LIFE” on a black shirt, stood defiantly in front of the abortion pictures, and faced the protestors across the street.  They gaped at her, and half of them immediately abandoned their protest.

A dramatic witness for life at URI.

Bubba Gene Garrett explains prenatal development to a student at James Madison University.

Where can Christians learn the message not to kill their own children?

Not at church, apparently.  That’s why 1 in 5 women who have abortions identify themselves as “born again” or “evangelical” Christians.

The secular campus is a great place to reach these good people with the truth that the pro-life church is covering up.  This was also true at James Madison University.

Joe had recently become a Christian, but had never considered abortion in any form or fashion.  He spoke with CBR GAPper Bubba Garrett.

As they looked over the pictures and discussed the implications of abortion in terms of the genocide comparison, his heart was deeply moved.  Bubba helped him to understand that authentic Christianity must include protecting the helpless from systematic slaughter (Proverbs 24:11-12).

Joe asked Bubba to pray with him that more Christians would get involved in stopping abortion.  Afterwards, he told him that his spiritual mentor was nearby and also needed to learn about abortion.  As a result both young men experienced a change of heart concerning the consequences of abortion and a newfound determination to do something about it.

Many, many students at Radford were NOT closed-minded; Virginia Director Nicole Cooley speaks with two of them.

The President of Radford University’s Young Democrats took exception to the presentation of abortion pictures on his campus.  Of course, he agrees with us that abortion is ugly, disgusting, distasteful, etc.  But he believes abortion is perfectly acceptable to do, even though it’s too horrifying to see.  You can read his letter here.

Here is my online response:

Fletcher Armstrong here. I am the Southeast Director of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, the human rights advocacy group that brought the Genocide Awareness Group (GAP) to Radford University.

I am heartened to see that you agree with us on the most important aspect of our display. You describe abortion pictures as ugly, disgusting, distasteful, etc. Those are your words and we agree. Abortion is all of those and more. But here is a fundamental question: How can pictures of abortion be too horrific to see, but the act of abortion is OK to do? Please explain that to all of us; we can’t wait to hear your explanation.

I should perhaps clarify for you what we were doing on the Radford campus. You refer to it as a “protest.” Not really. We were merely showing you the violence that you advocate. The Democratic party has for many years advocated that rights of personhood be denied to preborn human beings.

You say that our display was “hate-filled.” You should know that name-calling and ad hominem attacks are no substitutes for reasoned arguments.

You say that Radford University was a “victim” of the pictures, and that we were insulting and disrespectful to show them. Please explain how it is that Radford is more of a victim by seeing pictures of abortion than are the children who are being killed by the act of abortion. Who is more disrespected, the born person who is being confronted with a picture of abortion, or a preborn child who is being killed by the act of abortion?

You ask for dialogue, understanding, and a willingness to respect differing viewpoints. I have to wonder where you were hiding while we were on your campus. For two full days, I observed people on both sides of the abortion debate engaged in civil discourse all around the GAP display.

It is clear that you did not want us to be on the public spaces outside the Student Center. You wanted us to choose another time and place, presumably a location that you and other abortion advocates can avoid. In that regard, you are like those who wanted Dr. Martin Luther King to confine his activities to the Black church. They didn’t mind if he spoke about racism, but he should speak about it only in the Black church, among people who cared about racism. They didn’t want to be bothered with it. But Dr. King knew that in order to effect change, it was necessary to expose evil and thus make people uncomfortable with the status quo. He intended to bother them as much as he could.

Your letter suggests that abortion pictures bother you plenty. Congratulations, you still have a functioning conscience. Prepare to see these pictures over and over again, because we won’t stop showing pictures of abortion until the killing stops.

You say that “less controversial slogans could have been chanted.” I can assure you that we have no interest in chanting slogans. But please tell me, why is saving babies so controversial, and killing them is not?

You say that we should have found less troublesome ways of “adequately express[ing]” our views. Please let me clarify one point. Our views about abortion are really of little importance. What is much more important are the facts about abortion. The photos of abortion demonstrate for all to see that the preborn child is really a baby, even in the first trimester, and abortion is an act of violence. It is these facts about abortion that will lead many people to change their views, and that is much more important than us simply expressing our own views.

Regarding the First Amendment, you are correct that Radford University fully respected the First Amendment rights of the College Republicans. But it would be incorrect to say that Radford understands the First Amendment “better than a majority of other institutions of higher education.” We have displayed this project nearly 200 times at more than 50 public universities around the country. Only 2 universities resisted, both were sued, and both were forced to back down.

Liberty University is a unique case because they are a private university, and the students give up some of their expressive rights by attending a private school. It is true that the Liberty administration did not allow us to set up on campus. The students invited us and the administration cancelled our visit. CBR comes in many different sizes and shapes. There’s the 5-minute version, the 2-day version, and the “we-never-quit-coming” version. Liberty has chosen the “we-never-quit-coming” version, which is their prerogative.

If you really seek dialogue and differing viewpoints, may I suggest a debate on your campus?

For those of you who did not see the display, may I suggest you visit http://www.AbortionNo.org.

By the way, I will retract everything I have said and abandon my pro-life postion if you can provide compelling scientific and philosophic evidence to show that the preborn child is not human.  I look forward to hearing that evidence.

GAP at Radford University

Does the possibility of adverse economic circumstances justify killing your child?  One student at Radford University thought so.  Read his letter here.

Here is my response:

Responding to Mr. Schall, would you be stunned to learn that millions and millions of Americans have children and don’t go on welfare?

A few years ago, a student asked me “What about a woman who gets pregnant and has to drop out of school, so she and her baby are doomed to a life of poverty?”

Another student overheard and jumped in, “Hey, I know a woman just like that. She was waiting tables and got pregnant and had that baby.” He paused, then said, “And boy am I glad, because I’m the baby.” He said that after his mother had him, she got serious about her life, went back to school, and got a nursing degree. Now she’s the head nurse at a hospital and makes $90,000 per year. He made one final observation, “You know, I think that if my mother had aborted me, she’d still be waiting tables.”

Mr Schall, this student’s mother was not a weakling, and you don’t have to be, either. Part of being an adult is taking care of your responsibilities.

You are justifying killing another human being—your own child, in fact—because that child will be inconvenient to you. You might have to rearrange your life a bit. Yes, parenthood does have it’s responsibilities. It’s always been like that. Others have done it; you can, too.

Fear of poverty is no excuse for killing your child. If you think that’s a good justification, imagine what the judge and jury would say if you tried it on your born child. Tell the judge that your child was getting in the way of your career. If he’s not sympathetic, say “I feel really bad about my choice.” See if that works.

Look, if you can’t take care of your child, there are many couples willing to adopt her and provide the loving home that you are unable (or unwilling) to provide. I speak for many pro-lifers all over the country when I say, “Bring that child to me; I’ll take care of her.”

We never said a woman should be forced to have a child; we said a woman shouldn’t kill a child she already has. If you don’t want to have a baby, that is your choice. Don’t get drunk and don’t have sex. Millions of people wait until marriage to have sex. It doesn’t ruin their lives.

Bottom line: Grow up.

If anybody wants to see what Mr. Schall thinks is such a great idea, see the video at http://www.AbortionNo.org.

GAP stimulates informed dialogue.

After our appearance at Radford University earlier this fall, Radford freshman Joan Laguzza wrote a letter to the RU Tartan, the student newspaper, commenting on GAP.  In her letter, she complained about our presence, but actually agreed with us about one of the most important aspects of the project.  Read her letter here.

Here is my response:

Responding to Ms. Laguzza, my name is Fletcher Armstrong and I am the Southeast Director of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, the group that brought the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) to Radford University.

First of all, we agree with you about the most important aspect of the project. You say that the photos were assaulting, violent, difficult to look at, nauseating, shocking, traumatizing, etc. Those are your words and we agree. Abortion is all of those things. But here is a fundamental question: How is it that pictures of abortion are too horrific to see, but the act of abortion is OK to do?

You say that the pictures “assaulted” you, and that you had no choice but to look at them. I would point out that had you desired, you could have turned your head away from the pictures and walked right on by. We watched many people doing exactly that. Apparently, you didn’t turn your head; in fact, the details in your letter suggest that you studied the images very carefully. We’re glad you decided to study the images, but it was clearly your choice to study them or not.

You apparently claim the right not to be offended by anything you see, that Radford University should prevent you from seeing anything that offends you. Have you considered the implications of your claim? Would you grant to pro-life students the power to remove anything on campus that offends them?

You wonder if Radford is anti-abortion. No, they are not. But as a public institution, Radford has no ability to censor the speech of its students. The right of pro-life students to present their views and, just as importantly, their right to present the facts upon which those views are based, are protected by the US Constitution. That right extends to all citizens, not just those who go along with the ideology of those in power. During your time at Radford, you will be exposed to many ideas. Some of them will offend you; some of them will offend others who disagree with those ideas. That’s just part of living in a free society.

Pro-lifers and conservatives have the right to get their message to those who want to receive it. You have the equal right to get your message out. You and everyone else also have the right to listen or not. What you don’t have is the right to interfere with people who want to offer a message, nor with those who want to receive it. What you witnessed earlier this month was an interchange of information from people who had a message they wanted to offer and other people who wanted to examine that message and consider its meaning.

You said you wanted a more balanced approach. You said you want more diversity. You should confer with your pro-choice friends on the faculty before you say that again, because that’s the last thing they want. In much of academia today, college professors represent the “full range” of political views, from the far left to the extreme far left. The Washington Post reported that on college faculty today, 72% are “liberal” and only 15% are “conservative” (www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html). In practice, it’s even worse than that, because most of the conservatives are teaching engineering, science, etc., where abortion is not a topic of interest. Trust me, in your time in academia, you will hear more pro-abortion propaganda than most fair-minded people can stomach.

You wanted an opportunity for intelligent and reasoned thought. You wanted inspired debate. I can tell you that we saw debates about abortion taking place all around the GAP display. The difference between those debates and most debates about abortion is that once people have seen abortion pictures, abortion apologists can no longer get away with asserting the myth that the preborn child is not a baby, but just a blob of tissue. People can no longer pretend that abortion is anything less than an act of violence that kills a growing child.

You say you welcome the opportunity to be exposed to different views. Perhaps you found this presentation so disturbing because we pro-lifers not only presented our views, but also the facts about abortion that make those views compelling.

You wanted filers on a table, so that you could ignore them. Your complaint reminds us of what they said to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., when he marched against racial injustice. They wanted him to confine his activities to the Black church, where he could talk about racism among people who cared about racism. Everyone else didn’t want to be bothered. But Dr. King knew that in order to change the status quo, he had to show people that racism was much worse than they imagined. It was pictures of Black men and women being attacked with dogs and water cannons—those picture appearing on TV and in magazines reaching millions of American households—that turned the tide against segregation in the South.

Our operating principle actually comes from the King family. Dr. Martin Luther King said that, “America will not reject racism until America sees racism.” His niece, Dr. Alveda King, now says that “America will not reject abortion until America sees abortion.” That’s why we are working to make sure that every American sees abortion for what it is, an act of violence that destroys a growing child.

For more information about abortion—no matter what you decide, you want your decision to be informed by the facts—visit www.AbortionNo.org.

Nicole Cooley

So many students we meet on campus are really hurting.  Most of us have no idea what some of these folks have been put through.  This story is from Nicole Cooley, our Virginia Project Director.  She encountered a student on a recent GAP excursion.  We are changing his name and withholding the name of the school.

A desperate need for healing.

Stewart approached our poll table and declared his belief that abortion should remain legal.  Standing next to a large visual exhibit comparing abortion to other forms of historical genocide, I asked Stewart why he felt that way.

At first, he told me he was a “Darwinian Christian” and said that a person’s inner strength is vitally important.  We explored his views for quite a while as I struggled to understand them.  He admitted to a personal childhood of abuse, and given my own experience with rape, I found a link.

I silently prayed for God to help me reach Stewart and then these words came out:  “Stewart, you don’t believe a woman should have the right to abort her child, you believe an unborn child should have the ability to abort himself.”  He looked at me and the tears began to fall down his face.

He told me, “You don’t understand what I went through … for ten years!”  When I asked him if I could give him a hug, he willingly came into my arms and sobbed while I held him.  I spoke quietly to him until he calmed down and then I looked deep into his eyes.

When he affirmed that he could hear the voice of the Holy Spirit as a born-again believer, I told him how to be healed.  I told him that the only way out of the pit of despair was to allow the “Wonderful Counselor,” Jesus, to peel away the layers one at a time.  I understood that at a moment of trauma, how Satan had lied to him and told him that he would have been better off dead.  That lie, spoken into his subconscious in the midst of abuse, now led him to accept abortion.

I have prayed for Stewart ever since that day and I will never forget him.

Darius Hardwick and GAP at Liberty University

This story is from Darius Hardwick, CBR’s Midwest Director.

“Are you more pro-laundry now?” Greg said as he pushed his sweaty gym shorts under my nose. “We don’t need to see this, we are already pro-life!”

This was the almost unanimous statement we heard from students at Liberty University (LU) when we brought our Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) there this fall.

Greg is one of the many students at LU who were upset by seeing abortion photos at their university. He stayed and debated for well over an hour about how our abortion photo signs were ineffective at getting peoples’ attention, forming relationships, and getting people engaged in the abortion battle.

After an hour of lively on-camera debate, we all shook hands and exchanged contact info. He even offered to edit the video for us, because that is a part of his major! He admitted he would not have met us had it not been for the pictures.

LU is the largest private non-profit university in the nation, the largest university in Virginia, and the largest Christian university in the world. According to the LU website, “[Liberty] is designed to develop Christ-centered men and women with the values, knowledge and skills essential to impact tomorrow’s world.” We went to LU because those are the types of people who need to engage the culture on abortion.

We talked to many great kids who were growing in their relationship with God, and had high hopes of serving Him with their educations. When the inevitable question came from every student, “Why are you here?” We replied, “Because Christians are the only ones who will stop abortion, and you are the cream-of-the-crop.” All week long, our plea for help was met with blank stares. It had not occurred to them that they should personally do something to stop abortion.

God said to the Israelites through the prophet Jeremiah, “For if you truly amend your ways and your deeds, if you truly practice justice between a man and his neighbor, if you do not oppress the alien, the orphan, or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place, nor walk after other gods to your own ruin, then I will let you dwell in this place, in the land that I gave to your fathers forever and ever.” (Jeremiah 7:5-7) God said to “amend your ways.” We as a nation are guilty of all of this, but note that God reserved His harshest words of judgement against Israel for their practice of killing innocent children. Here in America, we have killed more than 54 million innocent preborn children.

“As for you, [Jeremiah] do not pray for this people, and do not lift up a cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you. “Do you not see what they are doing in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem?” (Jeremiah 7:16-17)

We must not say, “Look what they did.” We need only drive through our cities to see the neon signs for the establishments of drunkenness, fornication, and pride in homosexuality. Finally we will come to the “clinics” where innocent blood is shed. When will God tell America, “I don’t want to hear your prayers until you amend your ways?”

Let us amend our ways before it is too late.

FAB is coming to you today from Macon, Georgia, where CBR is co-sponsoring a state-wide conference of the Students for Life of Georgia.  Pro-life students have come from all over Georgia for a day of leadership training and networking.  In fact, a few interlopers from South Carolina may have snuck in as well.  All-told, there are about 50 students in the crowd.

As one of the speakers for this conference, your humble correspondent addressed the students on the history of social reform, and how that history can guide us as pro-lifers.  We are not the first social reform movement, and we can learn a great deal from successful reformers like William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, the abolitionists in America, Lewis Hine, and Dr. Martin Luther King.

CBR Project Director Jane Bullington speaks to a student at UT Knoxville.

I found out for sure what I had always known — my mom aborted 2 children before me.

CBR staffer Jane Bullington met a young man at the UT Knoxville GAP.  Steve had a cocky look on his face.  Jane asked him what he thought — it’s our standard way of breaking the ice.

Steve started out with all the same stuff we’ve heard before:  shock value, misused use of the term genocide, pictures don’t change minds, you are turning people away from your cause, etc., etc., etc.

But then they actually started talking and Steve began to verbalize some of the bad consequences of abortion, the damage to women, the effects on families, the mental stress on women, etc.  He got tears in his eyes.  He said, “In recent months, I have been drawn to everything I see or read about abortion.  I found out for sure what I had always known: my mom aborted 2 children before me.  She treated me … well … different.  She and my dad had troubles.  My home was tense.”

Jane asked him, “Do you have other siblings besides those 2 your mom aborted?”

Steve looked at her with surprise, “I never thought of them as my siblings, but they are.  Yes, I have an older brother.”

Later in the conversation, his position began to move, “I still think women should have a choice, but so many other people get hurt that I want them to know the truth, the truth about what they are doing, and the consequences they will endure, they and their families.  I guess education like yours would be good for women.”

Jane asked Steve if his mom would go to a post-abortion healing ministry like Deeper Still.   He chuckled and said, “Absolutely no.  She believes the ends justifies the means, and she wanted what she wanted.”

Jane suggested he might want to talk to someone else later on in his journey and told him that Deeper Still could be of help to him, as a son, too.

At the end of the conversation, Steve thanked Jane for her time and she gave him a hug — Jane is a mom and moms like that sort of thing.  Steve left, but as he walked away, his eyes never left the pictures.

Dialogue with pro-abortion student. (I got the shade; I was there first.)

This is our 8th day of GAP in the last 3 weeks.  If you count our Pro Life Training Academy, travel, and prep work, it’s my 16th day of hard labor in 19 days.  By hard labor I mean up at 6:00 am and to bed at midnight or later on GAP days … with only slightly more sleep on the other days.  There would be 3 more days after this one.

But God is good.  He knew that we were all tired.  He didn’t test us.  After we got the exhibit set up, I propped myself up on a wall underneath a shade tree, right near the poll table.  They would have to come to me.

At the poll table, students answer the question, “Should abortion remain legal?”  A “no” response means pro-life; we sign them up for the Pro Life Collegians.  A “yes” response means pro-abortion; we initiate dialogue with the goal of helping them rethink their position.  For most of the day, I just quietly asked the “yes” responders, one at a time, “May I ask why you responded that way?”  If they answer, we’re off to the races.

For a nice change of pace, God didn’t send any combative people over to the table this day.  The combative types can offer awesome opportunities, especially if they draw a crowd.  But they are rarely thoughtful and it is hard work to be reasonable with somebody who is unreasonable.  I just wasn’t up to it.

So God sent to me (and all the rest of us) a steady stream of people who were willing to have civil discourse.  He also sent a number of pro-lifers who gave us encouragement.  It was very different from most GAPs, including most GAPs at UT.

Of course, a few passersby gave us the “flying buzzard” as they rushed on past, but the drive-by’s can be easily ignored.  We should aways remember that such people are often facing struggles that we probably can’t imagine.  We should also remember that God loves each and every one of them, too.  But God would have had a hard time loving them through us on this day.  The civil ones got all we had to give.

UTC student Madi Rose Taff stating the obvious. Nobody want's to see pictures of violence. But even fewer people want to be tortured to death.

Day 2 at UT Chattanooga (UTC) was another awesome day of GAP.  Come to think of it, I’ve participated in perhaps 150 days of GAP, and every single one of them was awesome.  Maybe that’s why we want to do even more of it.

It was another hot, hot day at UTC.  Before this week would be over, the heat would take it’s toll.  In fact, I’m typing this a full 2 weeks later, and my body hasn’t fully recovered, yet.  Please pray for healing and recovery.

We were greeted by protesters, which is always a plus.  They attracted the newspaper to come and do a story on our project.  The pro-aborts really don’t know what to do about us.  If they don’t respond at all, then we dominate the landscape.  If they do respond, they look silly.

For example, this group didn’t try to argue that abortion is OK.  No they took a very nuanced view of the First Amendment:

1. Free speech is important and should be protected.
2. We shouldn’t be allowed to show abortion pictures because it made them uncomfortable.

Oooohhhh kay.

One guy, who was not even pro-life, came by to protest the protesters.  He was there on behalf of the First Amendment.  Like we always say, “GAP is like a box of chock-lits; ya neva know WATT your gonna gay-et.”

UTC students study the GAP pictures in front of the library.

Liberty students see abortion, many for the first time.

We were disturbed but not particularly surprised at some of the reaction from Liberty University students when we took GAP there a few weeks back.  So many of them wanted to live within the fiction that since they are “pro-life,” whatever that means, that’s all they need to know.  Not trying to pick on Liberty here; Liberty is simply a microcosm of the modern American church.

A particularly disturbing comment from “LU” (his pen-name) appeard on FAB.  It read, in part, as follows:

… Abortion has been in the light of public media for years now and I would say that most adults do know what takes place.  You are not showing us anything we haven’t seen or heard before, you only anger the students of this campus with your lack of tact.  Also, it pains me to see the young children with your group being involved in this protest.  These children are way too young to be seeing these images in the first place and are only being brought up into a lifestyle of intolerance; not a true life of love as we as Christians are called to live.  Children need to be taught both sides of an issue and allowed to develop their own opinions once they are capable to do so. … We need to be able to decide for ourselves through skeptical study of the Bible and beliefs we have been taught.  It is sad to see how Christianity is being portrayed to unbelievers through your work.  I pray for you, your family, and fellow campaigners.

Note how illogical his reasoning is:

1. We shouldn’t show the pictures because everbody has seen them when they were younger.
2. Younger people shouldn’t see the picture’s, either.
3. Showing the pictures is intolerant.
4. Leaving Christians ignorant allows them to figure out for themselves what side they are on.

But wait a minute, if we all followed his advice, none of his classmates would have ever seen the pictures before and the first premise would be invalidated.

I responded as follows:

LU Student, you are mistaken on many points.  Please read my Open Letter to Liberty University, which you can link to from our website, http://www.ProLifeOnCampus.com.

You said that “abortion has been in the light of public media for years now.”  Really? I watch public media all the time.  I see unborn children dehumanized as mere blobs of tissue, masses of cells, products of conception, parasites, etc.  I see abortion euphemized as a reproductive “choice.”  A mere picture would dispel those myths, but the myths are cherished by those in power, so the pictures are suppressed.  With all the talk about “choice,” I’ve almost never seen any attention paid to what is actually being chosen.  The rare exception is when we come into town and some of the local media outlets actually show the pictures we have put on display.  Without any presentation of the reality of abortion in the media, the education system, and even the Church, most people have no idea who the preborn baby is and what abortion does to her.

You say the “shock factor” is not as effective as we would like to believe.  Your argument is not with us.  Your argument is with the countless women and men who have let us know that our pictures changed their minds.  In many cases, they tell us that our pictures saved their own children from destruction at the hands of the abortionist.  You can see many testimonials on http://www.AbortionNo.org and on http://www.ProLifeOnCampus.com.

You say that children should never be shown these pictures, but that you and everybody else at Liberty has already seen them?  How can that be?  If only a few kooks like us are letting our children see the pictures, how can it be that by the time they are 18, everybody has seen them?  We have encountered many, many students who tell us that they grew up in “pro-life” churches, had never seen abortion pictures, had come to believe abortion should be a choice, and changed their minds only after seeing our pictures.

You say that “Children need to be taught both sides of an issue and allowed to develop their own opinions once they are capable to do so.”  Really?  Whatever happened to God’s side?  Whatever happened to “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6)?  We are commanded not to kill their own children (Mark 10:19).  We are commanded to protect and defend the defenseless (Proverbs 24:11-12).  And finally, we are commanded to teach other believers to do the same (Matthew 28:20).  These commands are not optional.

When Christians see the horror of abortion, they are more likely to obey God’s command not to kill their own children (Mark 10:19).  Furthermore, they are more motivated to protect and defend the defenseless (Proverbs 24:11-12).  And finally, they more fully understand their duty as Christian leaders to teach other believers to do the same (Matthew 28:20).

[Note: You can read the entire discussion stream here.]

The “pro-life” church is massively uninvolved in activities that have any chance at all to end abortion.  When we approach church leaders about doing much of anything, they reel in horror, hands over both hears, as if trying to keep their heads from exploding.  They exclaim, “Why are you bothering us?  We’re already pro-life.  We checked that box years ago.  Leave us alone!”

In reality, they don’t do much because they fear controversy within the church.  They say just enough to satisfy the pro-lifers in the pews—“We are a pro-life church”—but little else.  They know if they actually organize pro-life activities or even show members a brief video of what abortion is and does, they will hear complaints from people who don’t want to be reminded.  Members might leave the church.  Donations might go down.  The building program might be jeopardized.

Controversy is bad for business if your business is to appeal to the widest possible audience.  Which brings us to our “Quote of the Week”, by Gregg Cunningham of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform:

Alas, if only killing babies were as controversial as saving them.

.

We often get comments from people who don’t want us to show abortion pictures in the public square because children will see them.  We get one such message from “Briana Richards”, who saw our trucks operating near Liberty University in Lynchburg.  She wrote:

To whom it may concern,

Let me begin by saying I am completely anti-abortion and support that cause.  However, I do not agree with the manner in which the organization is displaying the signs in areas that are heavily traveled by young children.  I do not think that it is necessary to take away my young child’s innocence by showing them graphic images of fetuses.  The only thing that is going to promote is questions too early regarding what is abortion, why are some babies not wanted and killed.  Why do YOU get to choose when the right time is to talk to MY child about abortion?

I understand making people aware of what abortion truly is so they do not make that choice, I just disagree with the method in which you are getting your point across.  After school yesterday I had to stop short of the stop light and drive up next to 2 cars just so my 6 year old wouldn’t have that image in his mind for the rest of his life!  You are not using a plane this year (from what I’ve seen) but what 18-month-old kid, or 10-year-old, does not look up at the cool airplane going over, only to be accosted with an image they have no idea about but know it’s scary looking?  I mean would you really want to have a conversation with your 6-year-old about abortion?  They don’t even understand all the ins and outs of how babies are born yet but we’re showing them what people do when they don’t want them.

I am requesting that you please take into account the large amount of parents that are driving their young children by these signs daily near the Liberty University campus and that you rethink the location of your displays for the future.  I disagree with your methods but I know it is your right to display them.  It seems there could be better ways to get your point across without effecting our innocent children.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Briana Richard
Sent from my iPad

I responded as follows:

Dear Ms. Richards,

Thank you for registering your comment about our work at Liberty University last week.

We don’t target young children with our pictures, but with all the institutions of society (including the Church) covering up the truth of abortion, we have no choice but to take to the public square.  Otherwise, the killing will never stop.

Children are exposed to graphic images of violence all the time … on newspaper front pages, on magazine covers that are visible in the supermarket checkout lines, etc.  They even showed Schindler’s List on TV during family viewing hours a few years back.  Nobody objects because nobody feels guilty about their own complicity or complacency with respect to those acts of violence.  Many are guilty of complicity or complacency with respect to abortion.

What is worse, a born child being horrified by a picture of abortion or a preborn child being killed by the act of abortion?

You might ask if Jesus would ever put a graphic image on display where children could see them.  In fact, He did just that.  Jesus controlled every aspect of his arrest, trial and execution.  He arranged to have Himself beaten nearly to death before stumbling through the most crowed part of Jerusalem on the most crowded day of the year.  His bloody body horrified throngs of Passover pilgrims which included large numbers of families with young children.

He then permitted himself to be stripped naked and tortured to death in full view of still more passersby, including more children.  The Romans used executions to intimidate subjugated peoples.  They located crucifixion cites for maximum public exposure.  Our Lord accommodated Cesar by going out of His way to make this disturbing spectacle of His death as public as possible.  And in the process, He chose as the very symbol of our faith, a bloody instrument of torture.  His point was to disturb us with the gravity of our sin but bless us with the grace of His forgiveness, despite the fact that many children would be traumatized in the process.  Did He get this wrong?

.