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.

Just now found this in my “Draft” folder.  For the record, here is the media coverage from our Fall 2011 Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) excursions to Liberty University, Radford University, and the U of Tennessee at Chattanooga.

GAP at Liberty University

• Abortion demonstrators share graphic message with local college students
• Pro-life group gets banned from Liberty University
• Anti-Abortion Group Demonstrates near LU
• Thinking Christian: Christians condemning Christians

Radford University

• Students react to graphic anti-abortion demonstration at Radford University
• Abortion protests manifest at Radford, Liberty
• Graphic abortion protest at Radford U
• Letter to Editor: Big images, big impact
• Feelings toward protest from Republican perspective
• Letter to the Editor: New student overwhelmed by club presentation
• Letter to the Editor: Demonstration opens eyes to opposite sex

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

• Abortion group at UTC draws demonstrators
• GAP Photo
• Anti-abortion images spark debate
• Students protest use of grotesque images
• Students defend use of disturbing photos
• Letter to the Editor

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.

Faithful volunteers like Debbie Picarello (right) make this project possible.

I got an e-mail from John Monaghan, the President of College Republicans at Radford University.  They hosted our GAP on their campus, which was a great success.  Here are a few of the things he told me:

I heard a great deal of positive feedback from both students and professors.  A friend of mine informed me that his Philosophy teacher was ecstatic we brought you all to campus and that everyone had a chance to be subject to the issue.  I really want to thank your staff and, of course, you for everything you did to make this happen.

It was a good thing most definitely and like I have told so many (who may have or may not have been in favor of the exhibit) that if only one person who saw that exhibit chooses life over abortion after seeing that exhibit and being more educated, then we have done our jobs and saved a one of God’s miracles, a child’s life.

***

The one thing I was appalled at was how unsupportive my fellow students and Radford professors are of the First Amendment.  Freedom of Speech is what makes this country great and many of my peers and professors fail to understand there is always a differing viewpoint.  In Academia, sadly, the liberal push and spin is spread daily and students must decipher what is to be believed and what is the liberal spin that most professors add on.

***

I was able to sign up an additional 38 names during Club Fair last Friday.  I think a lot of that was due to the GAP exhibit, so thank you for that.  My roommate will also be sending out an e-mail to all of the pro-lifers CBR signed up and either asking them to join College Republicans or asking one of them to step up and create Radford for Pro-Life Group.  I think either way, it would be a benefit to this campus.

Once again, thanks so much. Please tell your staff it was wonderful meeting them all.  If you are ever near Radford or Blacksburg, give me a call–I still owe you lunch!

Thanks, John.  You may owe me lunch, but we all owe you so much more!

Radford University announced our presence with this inscription etched in the wall of the Student Center, overlooking the GAP display.

Virginia Director Nicole Cooley can speak of her experience; the photos speak of the baby's experience.

On Thursday, we wrapped up our trip to Radford University in Radford, Virginia.  CBR Virginia Project Director Nicole Cooley spoke with many students who asked questions and concluded by saying that we had changed their minds.  She said she told her story of rape, abortion, and healing more often than ever before.

We were covered by the Roanoke Times, both here and here.

WDBJ-TV, which had reported earlier in the week on our visit to Liberty U, did a very slanted hit piece on our visit to Radford.  Although one-sided reporting is SOP for the national media, local media are usually much more even-handed in their reporting.  In all our years of being covered by local media, this was only the second story that could easily have been written by Planned Parenthood.  The other was in Des Moines, Iowa, in 2004, where a TV station covering our Key States Initiative referred to us as “anti-choice extremists.”

Perhaps we are naive at FAB, but we give you the benefit of the doubt.  You have to be really bad for us to notice.  This time, we noticed.  Not one of our people were interviewed for the WDBJ-TV story about our visit to Radford; only the pro-aborts were interviewed.  We offered to speak with them; they weren’t interested.  They also didn’t take note of our poll table, in which the results were fairly evenly divided between pro-life and pro-abortion.  Not good reporting … good comedy, though.

Meanwhile, back at Liberty U, we continued to reach students.  WSET-TV covered our continuing presence.  We placed several of our Scripture signs along a pedestrian route from dorms to the main part of campus.  More to come!

Signs at Liberty University Bookstore expose the reality of abortion.

GAP at Radford University

On Wednesday (yesterday), some of us slipped away from Lynchburg to take our Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) to Radford University.  We were invited by the Radford College Republicans.

This GAP was a bit unusual because we displayed during the very first week of classes.  We’ve never visited a school in August before, let alone two.  We have two more scheduled for week after next.

This is important for a couple of reasons.  First, we are reaching so many freshmen before they’ve even had a chance to get (or get a girlfriend) pregnant.  Also, by completing 4 GAPs this early, we still have time to visit even more schools later this semester … but only if we get the funding.  We depend solely on you, so please give generously; a baby’s life depends on it.

At Radford, nearly 30 pro-life students declared their support at our poll table.  We hope some of them will start a Students for Life club on campus.  The College Republicans were also busy, signing up at least 20 new members on Day 1.  GAP is an excellent membership recruiting platform, because it gets the attention of the most serious students and lets them know they can make a huge difference in the lives of others.

Work at Liberty University continues.  We’ve been joined by the Hardin Family GAP Team from White House, Tennessee, and the Hardwick Family GAP Team from Columbus, Ohio.  Darius Hardwick is CBR’s Midwest Region Director.  Several Liberty students have commented on earlier FAB postings.

More to come!  Please keep those cards and letters coming!