• Mon, Nov 18 - 1:00 pm ET

Ridiculously Offensive Anti-Abortion Postcards Compare Abortion To The Rwandan Genocide

woman-mailbox-abortion

Residents of Chilliwack, British Columbia are rightfully pissed after graphic anti-abortion propaganda postcards were delivered, unsolicited, to their homes last week.

Kim Mallory, a mom and photographer, was home with her family when she received a postcard showing a Rwandan child hacked to death with a machete juxtaposed with the body of a fetus reportedly injured from abortion. The caption? “Butchered children in Rwanda and Canada,” complete with a quote from a Rwandan woman: “Abortion is worse. Because at least my family could try to run away.” (To see the image, click here. But beware.)

God, this kind of rhetoric makes my blood just boil. Comparing abortion to genocide is patently ridiculous, as well as offensive to those who are actual victims of genocide from racial, ethnic or cultural persecution (Hear that, Jim Bob Duggar?). A woman (or, in many cases, a couple or a family) making an individual informed choice about her body and her life is not the same as thousands of children being slaughtered violently because of their ethnicity. It’s not. It’s just not. It never will be, no matter how many slippery parallels anti-abortion people try to draw between senseless murder and the myriad of circumstances that might cause a woman to have an abortion. It’s insulting to the Rwandan people that their tragedy is being exploited for political gain. Honestly, I also think it’s insulting to the intelligence of the general public, that this virulent anti-abortion group believes they can scare and shock citizens into changing views on a woman’s right to choose.

Using graphic images for pure shock value is nothing new for anti-abortion groups, nor is offensive direct mail. This happens regularly in the United States, too; Most recently, the group in favor of banning 20+ week abortions in the city of Albuquerque, NM, sent mailings that looked they were were from the city clerk’s office. Because the way to get people to believe that abortion is terrible and immoral is by assaulting them via postal mail!

Chilliwack residents are, understandably, concerned about their children seeing these violent images. But the group that distributed the postcards, Valley Against Abortion, claims that the campaign is geared towards “adults and teenagers.” Leader Rachel Slootweg said:

“Our number one goal is to save these children, save them from being aborted. Feelings (of people who receive the cards) are less important than the lives of an actual person.”

The postcards were ordered from the group The Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform. Mallory, as well as several other parents, complained about the images, but were told groups have a right to produce and distribute them under the protection of free speech. Luckily, abortion in Canada is also protected; it’s legal and fetuses are not considered people until they exit the womb.

Photo: Shutterstock

Share This Post:
  • CMJ
  • pixie

    “Feelings (of people who receive the cards) are less important than the lives of an actual person”
    What the actual fuck? Thank the mighty Odin that abortion is protected up here, because these people need to go jump in the ocean wearing straight-jackets.

    • Muggle

      If you’re trying to convince people that abortion is bad, then yes, their feelings are rather important. If they say that your postcards are offensive and disgusting, it’s time to re-evaluate your position and change tactics.

  • keelhaulrose

    I. Can’t. Even.
    If you supposedly respect the sanctity of life respect it. That is a child. A once living, breathing, loving child. Don’t exploit it’s death. It deserves dignity.

    • NYBondLady

      Yes, but please ignore the dead baby! That was never a living, breathing, loving baby. Just a fetus.

    • Beth

      (technically not breathing or loving since it hadn’t been born yet…but I digress…)

    • keelhaulrose

      Unless you know the circumstances that lead to that abortion, you have no right to judge the mother. Perhaps it was a wanted baby, but it was shown to be growing without a brain. Or it had a debilitating disease that would cause it to live in pain. Do you know what it’s like to see babies that were born with those kinds of diseases, with no fucking quality of life, because I have. I have seen kids whose lives are nothing but pain and suffering, who can’t hear, see, or control a single muscle in their body. I’d never let my child come to this world knowing that was waiting for it, and you if say you would you’ve never experienced it or you have no heart. Either way, it’s none of your fucking business, because you aren’t that mother! You have no right to judge.
      And you have no right to send this stuff to my home. I’m against war, should I be able to send you pictures of victims of bombings? I’m for gay rights, should I show you the mutilated body of a transgendered murder victim? I’m for universal healthcare, should I be able to send you pictures of a child who died of cancer because their insurance wouldn’t cover the treatments?

    • NYBondLady

      You have to assume that this group was targeting babies that were aborted out of convenience and not some extraordinary circumstances.
      And yes, you have the right to do all of those things. People may disagree with you but at least you have the right.

    • Blueathena623

      How can you assume that? I thought it was pretty well known that pro-life groups often use pictures of fetuses that are aborted for medical reasons.

    • http://carrie-murphy.com/ Carrie Murphy

      I wonder how photographs of aborted fetuses for NON medical reasons are even obtained? It seems like it would be way easier for these groups to get photos that might have had to be taken for medical purposes.

    • keelhaulrose

      Abortion, even if the anti-choice folk don’t like to see it like this, is a medical procedure, covered by HIPAA. The mother has to give permission to take pictures after, and I don’t think many ‘convenience abortions’ happen that late.

    • Blueathena623

      Exactly. Also, a key trick of the pro-life is to take a picture of a fetus in the 2nd or even 3rd trimester and label it as a much younger fetus. Almost all late(r) term abortions are for medical reasons and are therefore well-documented.
      I sincerely doubt that this image is of a 10 wk old fetus. There just seems to be too much development of the arms.

    • Muggle

      I thought a lot of those “aborted” fetuses were in fact miscarried? Perhaps not all, but a lot of them.

    • Blueathena623

      Yup. And sometimes miscarriages still require abortion-type procedures. I had a d&c after my body failed to naturally miscarry. Also, i know that doctors sometimes run tests on the fetal tissue to try and see what caused the miscarriage, so that can result in pictures as well.

    • Muggle

      That’s what I thought. And while I’m no expert on fetal development the fetus in the picture is well past 10 weeks.

    • AlexMMR

      I lost mine at 19 weeks. My body tried to miscarry but I was able to get to the hospital and stop labor. Then we discovered that I went into labor because of an infection and the twins simply had to be removed if I were to survive. I opted for surgical removal rather than delivery because I did not want the images of my dead babies burned into my brain forever. I had a D&E which, well to be delicate, is not respectful of the bodies of the babies. And if I ever learned that my girls mutilated bodies were being used for pro-life fodder, hoooooo Nelly, there would be some pro-life mangled bodies to get pictures of!

    • gothicgaelicgirl

      I’m so sorry you went through that, and I applaud you on your honesty.
      I know a few friends who sadly went through the same thing and feel ashamed to tell people what had to be done.
      If nothing can be done, nothing, then why risk your life?

      My thoughts are with you and your babies.

    • C.J.

      I wonder how using photos of aborted fetuses for propaganda is even legal. I doubt anyone is giving consent for these photos to be used in this way. Wouldn’t the parents or the owners of the pictures have to give consent?

    • EmmaFromÉire

      Or, more frequently again, stillborn babies. I mean, without trying to be crass, a 10 week old foetus looks like one of those jelly alien toys that come in eggs…

    • keelhaulrose

      You know what they say about making assumptions. I refuse to do so.
      Ok, send me your address. I have pictures ready.

    • keelhaulrose

      BTW, you do know only about 1.5% of abortions are done after 21 weeks? 61.8% of abortions are done in the first 9 weeks, where you wouldn’t get a fetus at the stage in the picture. Women aren’t going in at that stage for an abortion for convenience, they’re going because there’s something medically wrong with the fetus.
      Source: The Guttmacher Institute.

    • NYBondLady

      Yes, I know this. But did you know that many pro-choicers would allow a woman to abort at ANY time? For whatever reason?
      I think we all can agree that a baby/fetus is a living thing; we all started out as one. Aborting at 9 weeks versus 29 weeks is a matter of deciding at which point is something worth saving.

    • keelhaulrose

      Again with you assumptions.
      Every pro-choicer I know is in favor of safe, legal, and RARE abortion, which can and has been achieved through comprehensive sex education that includes proper contraceptive use, contraceptive coverage for all women, legal, affordable and safe abortion services when needed, and family planning services so women can make a better choice as to when she is comfortable having a child. Countries that offer these services, including legal abortion, have lower abortion rates than countries with more abortion restrictions. You’d think if it were illegal, people wouldn’t be doing it, but just the opposite is true.

      60% of women who get abortions wished they got it earlier in their pregnancy. 60% of THOSE waited to get their abortion because of the cost or the lack of services in their area. It’s not easy to get an abortion when the nearest clinic is an eight hour drive, and you have to wait 48 hours between consultation and procedure, and you’re a poor woman.

    • Blueathena623

      Define “many” and provide sources to back that up. I can’t really think of any pro-choice people I know who would advocate for (non-medically related) abortions after the fetus becomes viable.
      And a 9 week old fetus can’t be saved because it is not viable. 29 weeks, yes.

    • NYBondLady

      I’ve been reading here long enough to know that many commenters feel that way here. So if the difference between 9 weeks and 29 weeks is only viability, then I guess the arguments about a “woman’s body/woman’s choice” go away after 24 weeks or so?

    • Blueathena623

      24 weeks is still iffy. I think at that point a woman and her physician should have a serious discussion. For late, late abortions, I believe they stop the fetus’s heart using medication and then induce the woman. At 29, 30 weeks, I don’t think it would be wrong to just induce labor without stoping the heart and put the baby up for adoption (assuming there aren’t medical reasons for the sbortion).
      But at the end of the day, its not up to me, because I’m not adopting this kid. I’m not paying its medical bills or supporting it.

    • NYBondLady

      Lame argument. I’m not supporting your kids, or my neighbors kids, but I still wouldn’t want them to abort/kill them.
      Hypothetical: a woman goes into premature labor on shortly before her scheduled abortion at 24 weeks. Do you attempt to save the baby? Is she allowed to let it die?

    • Blueathena623

      Its not a lame argument, its the truth. Your taxes, however, will go, in theory, to help my kid go to school, etc.
      At that point, yes, the mother is allowed to decide how much doctors intervene. Some parents decide to take all steps possible, and some parents allow their baby to pass away.

    • NYBondLady

      Meteor echo, for one

    • AlexMMR

      You have no idea what we pro-choicers believe.

    • CMJ

      You and your logic!

    • Kay_Sue

      We don’t have to assume that at all without any evidence to the contrary. In fact, I prefer not to assume anything except that sending photos of aborted fetuses to homes that potentially have children (my seven year old gets the mail at our house) and other sensitives (I can’t imagine what this would do to my mentally ill sister) is sick and out of line. Not exactly a way to attract people to support a cause.

    • CrazyLogic

      I also seriously doubt the parents of both consented at all to having these images used for this propaganda.

    • gothicgaelicgirl

      I am firmly pro-choice, for the simple reason that my little cousin was born with his brain outside his body. My aunt chose to haver him in order to spend a tiny amount of time with him. she says she regrets it because she knew the whole time he was living, he was in pain. that was a decision she made and now she still feels guilt over it, twelve years later. she has said before if she was given the choice again she would choose to abort, purely because she couldnt go through it again, knowing that the few minutes of joy she has with her child is suffering for the child
      No child should be born to feel agony then die.
      it is the height of selfishness, to make a baby go through minutes? hours/ days? or excruciating pain before slipping away. that is no life.

      I realise I am going to get a lot of abuse for this post but to be honest, I do not care.
      Every individual is different. Unless you’ve had to go through it, you can never EVER presume to know “exactly” what a woman, a mother feels in regards to a child.
      The child may have been wanted but would have died shortly after birth.
      It may be a product of rape or incest.

      You can never know the full story of someone’s decision and the sooner we accept that, the sooner we can all LEARN to be more accepting of other people’s choices.

    • gothicgaelicgirl

      sorry for double posting but I do have to say I agree totally.
      If you find out that your child is severely disabled and will have no/poor quality of life, how can you decide for others what they should do?
      A close family friend had a little boy with cerebral palsy.
      He was a beautiful little boy, but spent most of his life confined to a wheelchair in a hospital.
      He had a massive seizure and died at home.

      He was four years old.

      I saw how it tore that family apart. Their older son felt neglected. Their daughter is estranged from them. Their marriage broke up- all over the one argument- The husband said she should have aborted when they found out.

      How on earth can someone else judge a family’s decision, when that family themselves cannot be sure what to do?

      We need to shut up about other’s decisions that we think are “wrong”and leave religion out of it, because as far as I’m concerned, unless Jesus comes down and lectures me, religion has no part in any decision-making in my life.

      We all have to stop pointing fingers, playing the blame game and the sooner we do that, the sooner we can focus on our own families.

      I was accosted by a pro-lifer the other day. My 8 year old stepdaughter was with me. This woman handed my little one a leaflet with a dead fetus on it and started screaming at her that if you think this is right, you’re going to hell.

      I told her to stay away, that I was pro-choice, and that my stepdaughter could make her own decisions when she got older. I handed the leaflet back, and as we were walking away, she started roaring at us, saying I was a murdering bitch.

      Lots of fun explaining that to the 8 year old…

    • EmmaFromÉire

      Jaysus, was that here in Ireland? I’m yet to encounter of YD or the likes who are THAT obnoxious :O

    • gothicgaelicgirl

      Unfortunately it was in Ireland, in Kildare. They pop up every few weeks or so, and this one woman is notorious for targeting young girls and terrifying them.
      She is a horrendous excuse for a human being and I have told her on several occasions that if she wants to win people over, shouting at them and calling them names sure wasn’t going to help!

      (I seem to get targeted a lot due to my appearance) “She wears black and has piercings, she must be a Satanist! She murders babies!”

      We’re still very backward here…

    • NoGoJoe

      None of us are judging mothers, we don’t ‘judge’ anyone. That’s not our place. We are merely trying to save children. Also, I’m for gay rights, and won’t show you the mutilated body of a transgendered murder victim because there death has zilch to do with their marriage rights. Also because no one looks at an adult transgender and says “he can die because he ain’t human.”

    • keelhaulrose

      Sorry, but I’m calling bullshit on this.
      Not judging? Then why is it I hear things from anti choice advocate like women should not have sex unless they’re ready to be a parent (a nice way to call women who have sex purely for fun whores)? Or calling them immoral or sinners? Or saying they don’t value human life because they throw it away for convenience (even though very few women have abortions for convenience)? The very premise of your movement is that allowing women autonomy over their bodies shouldn’t happen, which is saying ALL women cannot be trusted to make a decision you don’t like, which is, in fact, judging them.
      You’re trying to protect life? Awesome. March to support funding for programs that help feed and house poor children and vote politicians who vote to cut food stamps, TANF, unemployment, housing assistance, and Medicaid out of office, because all those programs support life. Start making a dent in the half million or so older and/or disabled children (mostly minority) who are waiting for adoption.
      As for transgender people getting murdered, where the hell do you live, because transgender people are being attacked all the time, and some of them are killed, simply for being transgender. Why would anyone feel justified in attacking them for only that reason if they DIDN’T think they were less human?

    • Gangle

      And that was just a child that was murdered with a machete. But please. Use a photo of that child, even though it may be cruel an painful to the family. After all, advertising your cause justifies exploiting a families grief in the most horrific and public way possible. If you think using a picture (and I bet the farm on the family not signing a release form for that image) of a victim of war to promote your personal vendetta is acceptable then you are cruel and sick and there is not reasoning with you.

    • meteor_echo

      Oh, honey, you tried so hard and got so far, but in the end you fucked it up anyway. A+ for denigrating the death an an already born child because somewhere, someone decided to exercise the right to their bodily autonomy.
      http://i.imgur.com/G8FCVj0.gif

    • NYBondLady

      Yoo hoo everyone here is your example- someone who could give 2 craps about viability- 39 weeks and the “body” argument still holds for her.

    • meteor_echo

      Oh, it sure as heck does. The “body” argument will hold for me 5ever.
      And here’s someone who doesn’t give a single twitch about a kid that was hacked to death with a machete, or about this kid’s family. That child was also a fetus once, in case you forgot.

      But then again, like George Carlin said – “if you’re pre-born, you’re fine; if you’re pre-school, you’re fucked”.

    • Pappy

      Carlin FTW, every time!

    • meteor_echo

      Yup. The guy was a genius.

    • Gangle

      At least meteor doesn’t think that using violent imagery of a child that has died in a war illegally and without consent for advertising purposes is ok. You obviously don’t give 2 craps about exploiting the victims of genocide. Because why would you care? You will accept the sacrifice of anyone to your cause. Classy.

    • NYBondLady

      I’m sorry, when did I say that?

    • Gangle

      You clearly don’t have a problem with the postcards in question, or you would have stated so at some point in your comments. The subject of the article was that exploiting real imagery of war atrocities and comparing the genocide of a people to something completely different just to promote a completely different cause is wrong. So far you have only defended it.

    • ted3553

      no, no. It’s ok as long as you’re pro-life. How can you possibly be outraged at a photo of an aborted fetus used like this and still be pro-choice.

      The incredible sanctimony and self-righteousness of too many pro-lifers makes me irate. I’m all for people being allowed to have a different opinion than I do but this mailout is a disgusting use of freedom of speech since it went to people’s homes rather than these people being allowed to seek out the information if they had so chosen.

  • Tea

    Either the browser tab title is mangled, or my screen reader just had a nervous breakdown.

    “Off-en-ice”

    That aside, what the hell, and oh hell no. No. Nononono. And on postcards, seriuously? I have no words, just rage.

  • brebay

    I read a blog post today and changed by stance on abortion, said nobody ever.

    • Kay_Sue

      I have to disagree slightly. While I’ve never read a post that completely changed my view, I have read things that encouraged me to do more research, which actually resulted in an abrupt about-face in my case, at least. It’s a personal anecdote, but one that I have encountered on a number of issues.

    • meteor_echo

      Not really. I’ve known a couple people who actually read themselves into becoming pro-choice.

  • C.J.

    I don’t personally believe in abortion except for medical reasons and rape and I find this so offensive. Comparing kinds of death is just wrong. Publishing pictures of aborted fetuses is just wrong. Exploiting victims of war is just wrong. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, people are not entitled to shove their opinions down other people throats. I also think abortion should be legal even though it is not something I would likely ever consider. People are going to get abortions whether they are legal or not. It is better that people are able to have safe abortions. I have an elderly aunt that had an abortion as a teenager and was never able to have children after that. How is that better?

    • AlexMMR

      An elderly aunt who had an abortion – if she’s elderly, she was probably pregnant when abortions were difficult to get and unregulated, thus very dangerous. Like the back alley abortion that killed my grandmothers best friend.

      Also, how is a fetus different when it’s conceived by rape than it is when it’s conceived by consensual sex? If one is ok to abort but it’s wrong to abort the other, what exactly is it about the fetus that’s different? Or are you just confirming that it’s not about protecting the baby but rather that it’s important that a woman live with the consequences of her naughty decisions?

    • Lindsey

      Alex-
      That is my biggest complaint as well. So, it’s a person, unless of course it is caused by rape…um, okay, great logic.

    • brebay

      exactly, either it’s your dominion over your own body, or it’s murder. The matter of conception weakens both arguments. You’re either in favor of a woman’s right to medical decisions regarding her own body, or you’re not.

    • C.J.

      No abortions were not legal then. If abortion was legal them she likely could have had the children she wanted later. That was my point why abortion should be legal. It is different if a child is conceived by rape because many women would be hurt mentally and emotionally if forced to carry a rapists baby. Mental health is a medical condition. If the mothers health is in jeopardy, including mental health, they shouldn’t be forced to carry a baby. I personally feel the mothers health needs to come first. Again, I said these are my personal beliefs. What I would do in my own life. It has nothing to do with peoples “naughty decisions”. I don’t expect everyone should believe the same as I do. I would never try to change someone else’s beliefs .I don’t like propaganda that tries to change peoples beliefs. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs. I have friends that have had abortions. I don’t judge them even if I wouldn’t have made the same choice. I haven’t walked in their shoes. I supported the in their choice, they did what they felt was best for them. I don’t agree with those that try to ban abortion. I can personally not believe in something but still think it should be available. It doesn’t mean I think other people’s choices are wrong. My point was that as someone who doesn’t believe in abortion I was disgusted by this and think it is wrong to send that in the mail.

    • Blueathena623

      You know what? You say you believe that abortions should be legal for everyone, so I don’t care what you would personally do. And I mean that in a nice way. You support the cause, so I don’t see a reason to nitpick.

    • C.J.

      Thank you, I’m just disturbed that anyone thinks it is ok to send that to people in the mail.

    • gothicgaelicgirl

      How is rape a “naughty decision?”

  • wonderstruck

    WTF. I sadly would not be surprised to see this pop-up on my FB news feed thanks to moronic family members of mine. The other day my cousin posted something that said, “Back when I studied the Holocaust in school I remember wondering how Hitler got over 6 million people to follow along blindly and not fight back. Then I realized I’m watching my fellow Americans do the same thing.” This was prompted by him being mad about the ACA because he doesn’t want health insurance. Sure dude, being forced to buy health insurance and being gassed to death is totally the same thing. That comparison is definitely going to strengthen your argument.

    • CrazyLogic

      Isn’t the ACA totally optional?

    • wonderstruck

      Yes and no…not to take this in a totally political direction I just thought the comparison was similar, but yeah starting next year you can be fined for not having health insurance, but there are a ton of exceptions to make sure that people who truly can’t afford it won’t be penalized, as well as subsidies to help them if they do want it. I find it to be especially funny because he’s totally fine with his girlfriend being on Medicaid, so the taxpayers paid tens of thousands for her pregnancy, labor/delivery, the baby’s care, etc. The state even pays for their daycare! But god forbid he pay some money every month for healthcare (and he can totally afford it.)

    • Pappy

      I saw a thing on Facebook the other day… Fat guy saying “When I was on foodstamps, I never took any help from the government!”
      The stupid… It burns!!

  • AP

    I oppose genocide, and yet I do not want to see pictures of children murdered in a genocide. Why would they think that someone who does not support abortion would want to see pictures of dismembered fetuses?

  • SusannahJoy

    Wow, these people clearly have NO respect for the lives of children, otherwise they would never use the death of that poor child is such a callous way.

  • Momma425

    Do we have confirmation that the quote on the postcard is actually real? Because I have a feeling someone who escaped in Rwanda would not have said somerandom person’s abortion was worse than what her children had to go through. Call me crazy, but I’m thinking THAT was made up.

    I would be so upset if I found that in my mailbox.

    • CrazyLogic

      Yeah, calling bullshit on that quote. If it were real, they WOULD have used her name.

    • Gangle

      You aren’t crazy. I don’t think anyone could possibly think that a survivor of atrocity would even think of saying that.

    • keelhaulrose

      They probably got ‘some other random person’ who knows how to find Rwanda on the map to say the quote, and said “That’s good enough”.
      They’re comfortable pulling facts out of their rears, so a quote is no big deal.

    • http://carrie-murphy.com/ Carrie Murphy

      I think the chances of that quote being real are like, .001%

  • CrazyLogic

    Stop trying to shove your religious dogma by shoving disgusting propaganda down my throat. ESPECIALLY keep it out of my goddamned mailbox.

  • mamazee

    The Rwandan massacres lasted less than 5years and had less than a million victims. Abortion in Canada has no limits (up to the day you deliver, it’s legal and free), and has killed many, many millions of babies with not even any anesthesia. Just torn limb from limb, or burned alive in saline solution.

    • http://anniedeezy.tumblr.com/ Annie

      Proof.

    • mamazee

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada (their numbers for abortion in Canada are misleading, since no province requires records tobe kept of how many abortions were performed, and most provinces don’t submit numbers to Statscan….)

    • mamazee

      Or, were you wondering about methods of abortion? Chemical abortions aren’t generally used after 12 weeks. http://www.lifesitenews.com/abortiontypes/

    • http://anniedeezy.tumblr.com/ Annie

      I wouldn’t cite “life site news” as proof.

    • mamazee

      For some reason, Planned Parenthood doesn’t really go into a lot of detail…http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures-4359.asp

    • http://anniedeezy.tumblr.com/ Annie

      I didn’t say that Planned Parenthood was a good source, either. Aside from horribly offensive, you are also showing an inability to be reasonable.

    • mamazee

      Totally not trying to troll! It’s just really hard to find sources that are not very biased toward or against abortion. The ones that are pro abortion tend to describe the procedure as this empties your uterus. Not a lot of informed consent going on.
      Here’s a Canadian website: https://www.optionsforsexualhealth.org/birth-control-pregnancy/pregnancy/surgical-abortion
      Honestly, i can’t find any that are not very pro (ie describes the tools used and the post care, but not one word about the baby, not even “contents of the uterus” – nada. Or very prolife, with detailed descriptions that make my heart ache. Babies are viable so much earlier now, and we’ve watched a tiny baby be operated on and returned to the uterus to complete his growth. Babies have all their organ systems and a beating heart far earlier than most people guess. By twelve weeks, baby is mostly just getting bigger. http://www.babycentre.co.uk/12-weeks-pregnant. Having lost a little baby to miscarriage, i understand how moms would have a protective urge not to show their baby’s body. But i do have a few friends who took pictures of their lost babies, and found comfort showing that picture to people who would care. And in a way, that’s what is happening with those images. When i was little, the flyers would have horrible pictures of scalded preborn, aborted babies. Now, mostly they are cleaned up, and more to give people an idea of just how detailed and complete these little people are before birth.

    • http://anniedeezy.tumblr.com/ Annie

      Many of these images are also doctored.

      I work for an organization that fights for reproductive freedom, and we place an emphasis on giving people the information they need to make whatever decision is right for them.

      The best place to find such information is geared towards medical students and doctors. Such journals cost an insane amount of money but you can search for articles and buy them on a non-subscription basis.

      Places like WebMD are also good. This is good: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/abortion.html

      However, my big beef here is the comparison to the genocide in Rwanda and the flippant comparison between the two. I have talked to people who couldn’t get the abortion they needed, who wanted to continue a pregnancy but were forced to abort either by their partners or health reasons. I have also, in my personal life, known someone who survived the Rwandan massacre and watched the people who cared for her as a child be hacked to pieces. Because reality is perception (as far as trauma goes), none of these things are more tragic than the other. To use such base, vulgar tactics is just awful for everyone involved.

    • mamazee

      I volunteer for a group of “babylost” women. The photos don’t need to be doctored. Human development is what it is, and it’s no longer the mystery it was a few decades ago. I hate that the Rwandan massacre happened. It shakes my desire to believe that there is good in everyone, to read those stories (and yet, to read the beautiful stories of forgiveness and redemption…). But this holocaust of brutal murder of tiny children has been ongoing for decades. No one is asking for anaesthesia for these little people who do feel pain and whose only crime was to be conceived in the wrong womb. We are better than abortion. We can do better, if we get out from behind the slogans and red herrings and say, “Is this really something i can defend, as a woman and as a human being? Does this mesh with the compassionate life I want to lead? I know pregnancy is hard sometimes – i have eight healthy children (and one lost to miscarriage in 2007). But it’s sacrifice for a short time, in order to not bring harm to an innocent. And contrary to a lot of the pro abortion comments, pro lifers have a ton of resources available to women in crisis pregnancies. My own parents gave up their bedroom in our two bedroom university housing rowhouse, sleeping on the hideabed so that we could help a 16 year old mom. Pro life groups have clothes, maternityand baby, cribs, diapers, formula, and most of all support for the moms who come through their doors. Here in Canada, they can’t offer tax receipts bcz only proabortion groups can have charity status, so they operate on a shoestring, and everyone who donates to them knows it will be unreceiptable, but used with care.

    • http://anniedeezy.tumblr.com/ Annie

      Do you know what happens when there is no safe, legal abortion? Because of the difficulty (especially financially) there is attaining them, women go so far as to douche with bleach.

      Pictures of aborted fetuses don’t have to be doctored, but they often are. Pictures of fetuses that are older than what they are claimed to be are used to conjure up images of horror when in actuality, anyone familiar with late-term abortion can see through the fetus’s state of decomposition or method of extraction that this was a procedure done to end a miscarriage which didn’t end in natural abortion.

      You are also overstating the help offered to pregnant women. You don’t know where they are socially, mentally, or physically. It is no small sacrifice, especially when social services or charity aren’t readily available. You also can’t expect a woman who doesn’t want to be pregnant to be a healthy host for a developing fetus. This cannot be overstated.

      As a woman and a human being, yes, I support abortion. I support it with every fiber of my being because it is a basic human right to choose whether to be pregnant or not.

    • mamazee

      Not overstating – just sharing my experiences. As for the desperate lengths women go to when they do not want to be mothers – we don’t legalize the murders Andrea Yates perpetrated. Why should we defend abortion? Abortion is an atrocity, and desperate people will always do horrible things. It does not mean that those acts need to be condoned. And why vilify pregnancy? It really isn’t the horror show the proabortion crowd make it out to be. This last one was the hardest – i was 40 when i gave birth, but what made it the hardest was that my parents divorced and went crazy, so i had the opposite of support from my mom. Being supported and believed in does so much more than the proabortion group gives it credit for.

    • http://anniedeezy.tumblr.com/ Annie

      Cool, so that non-English speaking illegal immigrant 14 year old whose adult boyfriend knocked her up can get by on happy feelings and familial support rather than getting one of those nasty abortions and an actual chance at life.