In October 2009, The New York Times published an article focusing on the photography
of aborted foetuses by Mrs. Migliorino Miller. It’s interesting, I think, that she
changed her views on the type of image she considers suitable to display in public.
“Over time, however, her views on which images are appropriate have evolved. She
no longer sees gory pictures showing blood or organs as acceptable. She has tried
harder to shoot younger fetuses, because that’s when most abortions take place, and
she said she also believes that the most graphic images should not be deliberately
directed at children because “they can’t intellectualize what they’re seeing.” Her
pictures from last year reflect the new approach. They are shot with a purple background
of fine wrapping paper, without any blood visible. “I want to show there’s beauty
and humanity in the unborn child,” she said.” (http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/behind-19/
This is similar to how we have been thinking as we have developed Created4Life’s
Display Table for use in public places. She mentions two reasons for her change of
mind - abortions more frequently take the lives of younger foetuses and gory images
ought not to be directed at children. We go further:
Firstly, displaying images of foetuses aborted at later stages will simply urge proposals
suggesting that abortions are performed earlier. The UK government has already ensured
easier access to early abortions. Also, in the past few years, pro-life activists
here have been side-tracked into expending time, money, energy and enthusiasm in
an effort to lower the legal age for most abortions from 24 weeks to 12 weeks, ok
16 then? 18? No? How about 20? 22? No. It remains at 24 weeks and up till birth if
there is a suspicion of disability. The disastrous series of voting by MPs in the
British parliament, culminating on October 22nd 2008, ended a long campaign by UK’s
Live and Kicking consortium of Pro-life groups. Even if it had been successful, the
number of lives ended in the womb would probably not have been reduced, but just
the larger foetuses (the ones that elicit the response, “It looks like a real baby,
doesn’t it!”) thereby easing the consciences of some in Britain.
Secondly, the public display of gory abortion images will lead some in the pro-choice
camp to desire that abortions appear more ‘humane’, favouring medical rather than
surgical methods. Or, as I have heard suggested and even proposed by a local government
leader, anaesthetic for the foetus before the abortion.
Thirdly, for a sustained, long-term, regular presence in a public place, confrontation
with authorities and angry opponents is to be avoided if possible. In most societies,
anything that is seen as a cause of public disorder will not be permitted to continue.
Real, lasting impact on a community can be achieved with a small display table (Created4Life
style) if it is there every week or two.
Fourthly, displaying large graphic and gory images alienates many of the people we
are trying to reach. Instead of gritting teeth and heading down town as if looking
for confrontation, we have found that a friendly, winsome approach engages members
of the public and is sustainable.
Finally, anatomical foetal models, that can be held in the hand, and images of the
baby developing in the womb, such as those of Life Issues Institute, have a profound
and lasting impact on those who behold them. Amongst many other benefits, this method
changes minds and reduces the call for abortion.
Alan Thorne is Director and co-founder of UK’s Created4Life, “Face to face, in public,
engaging with people of all ages. Non political, non religious and not a protest.
Seeing positive results!”
...confrontation with authorities and angry opponents is to be avoided if possible.
~ Alan Thorne