Ric Dugan stands outside the Student Union while holding a cross to protest abortion Wednesday afternoon. Dugan and others later made multiple passes in a van emblazoned with the phrase "STOP ABORTION NOW!" and depicting an aborted fetus.
Students received a shock yesterday as a moving truck bearing a giant photo of an aborted fetus made several circles in front of Free Speech Alley.
Colin Sallinger, music education sophomore, organized the demonstration consisting of several Catholic students touting signs and chanting, "Abortion is murder," and "Pray for Virginia Tech."
The driver of the truck, anti-abortion activist Rich Mahoney, said he was told about the demonstration by a representative from Students for Life, an anti-abortion student organization.
Sallinger said he organized demonstrations to "bring the rosary to people" and to inspire more students to take action for their beliefs. He said that although students currently hold prayer meetings in the Quad at night and hand out pamphlets, "it’s much more intense when you’re out here in the daylight."
"Faith without works is dead," he said. "Even if we don’t affect one person, we’re still out here for God."
Sallinger said the signs were intended to help onlookers make a connection between a modern tragedy and an ongoing struggle. The shootings at Va. Tech and abortion, Sallinger said, are related because "they are both murder."
Many students said they were appalled by the graphic image of the fetus.
Joseph Bridge, international studies senior, said the image was "shocking and disturbing."
"For most people whose minds are already made up, it was just tasteless," he said.
My minds made up – don’t challenge me with reality! I do wonder how many of those who were shocked and disturbed also went out to watch torture porn like Hostel? Of course there can be true debate about the prudence of using these images, but I pretty much don’t believe in this culture that these images are truly so shocking to them – other than having to fight back their conscience from popping back up
Update: Paul at Alive and Young has more.
14 comments
This reminds me of my favorite platitude: If Liberals are open-minded, why do they all think alike?
Apparently what is “tasteless” is providing any information to a college student that will cause them to think.
Excellent post. You may want to do a little edit because you repeated part of the first paragraph.
So sawing someone apart is OK in public but abortion is not?
Delta
CCC – Part Three, Section Two, Chapter Two, Article 5, II. Respect for the Dignity of Persons – Respect for the dead
2300
The bodies of the dead must be treated with respect and charity, in faith and hope of the Resurrection. The burial of the dead is a corporal work of mercy; it honors the children of God, who are temples of the Holy Spirit.
The ends do not justify the means. Display of such images show a willful disregard for the dignity of the individual in the image, contributes to the objectification of that individual and all aborted babies as a mere tool to be used for a political end, and belies a lack of faith in the Lord to make all things right.
Tim, maybe you’re confused, but the images of the dead that the Pro-Life students used were taken by abortionists. The students didn’t dig up corpses and display them. They didn’t find intact corpses and chop them up to prove a point.
In fact, they used the images to show that it is society that shows “a willful disregard for the dignity of the individual in the image”. It’s not unlike when the Allies filmed the burial of the dead in the concentration camps. They didn’t do it to objectify those individuals. I remember seeing those films in history class, and that did more to squelch anti-Semitism in my high school than any verbal explanation.
“Of course there can be true debate about the prudence of using these images, but I pretty much don’t believe in this culture that these images are truly so shocking to them – other than having to fight back their conscience from popping back up”
Very well said!
No, I don’t think I’m confused. I don’t see how it matters who took the picture. They are pictures of individuals who are victims of a horrendous crime and their dignity as human persons is diminished every time the picture is displayed.
If the image was displayed as part of a class like the concentration camp images along with information and education then maybe it might not be an issue. But these are displayed in public as if they were billboards being used as a form of guerilla marketing. They objectify the individual just as much as a Victoria’s Secret ad does.
These images ARE part of an information and education compaign. They aren’t selling anything and they weren’t on billboards to elicit donations or anything of that nature.
Incidentally, “guerrilla marketing” just means unconventional marketing intended to get maximum results from minimal resources; e.g using e-mail spam to spread word about a new stock. It’s not the same as using shock value, which advertisers usually use for teenagers and pre-teens.
I go to LSU & I was at this rosary. There is a lot of misinformation about it in the article. I’ve explained it all in a post on my blog, which can be found here: http://forthegreaterglory.blogspot.com/2007/04/rosary-graphic-image-at-lsu.html
Please go check it out.
Miss Jean,
Thanks for the lesson in Guerilla Marketing 101.
I’m confused now though about your “Information and Education Campaign” comment. I said it might be okay in a “class”, as in an organized educational setting. Your use of the word “campaign” makes me think that “information and education” are just a euphamism for “marketing”, which I think points to how people think about this kind of thing. They feel they have to market the idea of pro-life and these pictures are just another way to penetrate the market. And when you start thinking of everything as a marketplace, everything and everybody becomes a commodity. I could be wrong, but that’s the way I see it.
I read Mr. Denton’s website post, mentioned above and applaud the witness of public prayer and understand better how the situation unfolded. I was glad to hear that the images were not part of the planned event. In my area I frequently drive by such images held up by abortion protesters and wish they would witness with prayer rather than exploiting the aborted.
Thanks, Mr. Denton.
While there may be certain times when it isn’t appropriate to display such photos, I generally support their use.
So does Fr. Frank Pavone:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/abortionimages/photosandsocialreform.htm
Marketing is not the purpose of showing the gruesome images of aborted children–reality is. In a society that refuses to acknowledge its own cruelty, and against an industry that thrives on the secrecy of its actions, the showing of graphic evidence is a last ditch effort to confront the evil that slaughters millions. Nobody LIKES to show or look at those pictures, but to leave education against abortion up to the choice of individuals may get us as far as leaving the abortion decision up to individuals, ie: selfishness will continue to rule and babies will continue to die by man’s permission.
TimC, I used “campaign” in the general sense of the word; e.g. to champion something worthy. I know that people use “ad campaign” when they speak of public-service announcements, but that wasn’t my intent. I meant “campaign” in the same way that one says “human rights campaign”.
Comments are closed.