by Tom | Apr 23, 2015 | Uncategorized |
The organization called Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) is now well known for its vocal condemnation of the pro-life movement seeking to pass laws which will save only some babies from abortion. From their perspective, any legislation which does not ban all abortions is a compromise with the abortion industry, sends some number of babies to their deaths, and is therefore to be vehemently opposed and decried as immoral. Under this logic, parental notification laws, waiting periods, health codes, bans on late term abortions are all incremental measures and, on principle, not to be supported. From AHA’s website: “You cannot abolish any evil by justifying or allowing it to continue in some cases. Any strategy for ending abortion in this country which allows for the continued occurrence of some abortions for the sake of eventually outlawing the rest, though seemingly pragmatic, is compromise and it’s [sic] promises of effectiveness are false.” A recent meme developed by AHA and shared on Facebook attacks Fr. Frank Pavone, founder and director of Priests for Life, for promoting legislation in Montana which would provide anesthesia to preborn babies who are at least 20 weeks old and about to be aborted. I made the following response in the same Facebook thread: “To rip off the arm or leg of a 20-week-old-or-more unborn baby is barbaric; to do it without at least giving the child an anesthetic beforehand is just plain sadistic,” said Fr. Pavone. AHA falsely portrays Pavone as someone who simply wants babies sedated before they are butchered. What AHA fails to see is that fighting over legislation to numb the baby’s pain makes...
by Tom | Feb 21, 2015 | Uncategorized |
What follows is an exchange of ideas that took place on Facebook between ACP Co-director Tom Herring and a Catholic woman named Rachel. “I fundamentally don’t agree with the position that including the picture of a murdered baby on a poster “humanizes” that baby. It isn’t a power struggle in which one side has destroyed the humanity of a child and the other is restoring it. That’s not our job and we can’t do it–God grants human dignity, we either honor it, or we don’t. We can’t destroy the God-given dignity of another human being, no matter what we do. We can’t destroy the image of God in them.” -Rachel It sounds like you are confusing two separate issues. The issue you are speaking to here is whether or not unborn children possess intrinsic human dignity, and of course we would agree that they do, and that there is nothing anyone could ever do to strip it away from them. The issue I was speaking to in a post above was in response to your argument that “these images objectify the babies they portray.” I pointed out that, on the contrary, these children were objectified during the rationalization of their slaughter, and that exposing the truth about what happened to them forces all of us to recognize these were more than clumps of cells — these were human beings. And in that sense, the pictures of victims humanize a baby that was aborted, often for the first time, in the minds of those with a functioning conscience. “So when I ask what using images of these babies in this...
by Tom | Nov 26, 2014 | Uncategorized |
We recently received this thoughtful letter from Fr. Marion. We are grateful to him, and to all our supporters who keep this life-saving ministry in...
by Tom | Jan 28, 2013 | Uncategorized |
What follows is a response by ACP Co-founder, Tom Herring, to the objections made by Simcha Fisher in her article about the public display of abortion pictures which was published January 22, 2013 by the National Catholic Register. This question of graphic abortion photos used in public needs to be settled because it is so critically important to the success of our pro-life activism. First, I find it remarkable—perplexing even—that Ms. Fisher opens by stating: “Many of us remember seeing those bloody images for the first time, and can recall being shaken out of a vague, fuzzy support for the pro-life cause into the realization that this is a life-and-death struggle—real life, and real death.” She’s absolutely right, of course. Most of us can remember the first time we saw the pictures. Twenty years later, I can still remember vividly the moment in my life when I first saw them: I was at home, in the 8th grade (13 years old) when my dad showed them to me. I could not believe that what I was seeing was perfectly legal in America. If, as Simcha Fisher notes, the pictures are what shook many [all?] of us out of a “vague, fuzzy support for the pro-life cause” into the full realization and appreciation for what was at stake, and the effort which would be required to stop it, then she has just torpedoed every subsequent argument for hiding the truth and covering up abortion images. “But a public place is not the place to use these images—ever, I’m convinced.” Ok, let’s examine her reasons why. First Objection: Children will be at...
