Debate over graphic images.
I was pleased to a speaker at the Students for Life of America (SFLA) conference in DC yesterday. There were four of us on a panel discussing the use of graphic images. I spoke first and used some of that time to talk about the history of social reform. Successful reformers have always used pictures to help people see (1) the humanity of the victims and (2) the horror if the injustice they sought to correct. Here are my slides.
Two of the speakers who followed me raised objections that easily could have been rebutted, but I was given no opportunity to do so. I had actually anticipated their objections and addressed them fair adequately in my opening statement, but I still wanted to reemphasize some of the main points in the face of factual inaccuracies and logical fallacies advanced by my debate partners. Some of their objections:
- Because some people who use pictures are not compassionate to women, then showing pictures is not compassionate — An obvious logical fallacy. Further, Dr. Alveda King, who has had 2 abortions, said she is glad photos are being shown so that other women won’t have to experience the pain that she has endured.
- Pictures hurt children because it upsets them — Violent photos are routinely seen on magazine covers that children see at the supermarket. Schindler’s List was shown on NBC and PBS during prime family viewing hours; few people complained. An emergency siren will terrify young children, but we still put sirens on fire trucks.
- Some people see the pictures and think we might be violent — Racists and civil rights moderates tried to associate Dr. King with the violent tactics of the Black Panthers. CBR condemns violence and will not associate with anybody who fails to condemn violence.
- Other methods can save babies — True, but many women have reported that they didn’t have abortions because of abortion photos and that nothing else but those pictures had dissuaded them. Also, our goal shouldn’t be just to save a few, but to get rid of the whole bloody mess.
- GAP was a failure because some people objected to the genocide comparisons and used it to change the subject — Pro-aborts always try to change the subject, no matter what you do.
- GAP was a failure because a lot of people didn’t stop to talk and therefore didn’t learn facts —The pictures convey at a glance the facts that matter most: the preborn child is a baby and abortion is an act of violence.
- Most people like arguments more than pictures — Most people don’t care about philosophy, arguments, etc.. They are trying very hard to ignore or trivialize abortions, and pictures don’t let them do it. We have show pictures and be prepared to debate.
- There was more but I can’t remember.
I hope we get to do this again. I am going to ask for more opportunity to rebut arguments.
This entry was posted on Monday, January 24th, 2011 at 2:36 am and is filed under Pro Life Strategy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.