Youth Protecting Youth

Defending the Dignity of All Human Life

Why “Choice” Chain?

13 Comments

Dear UVic Students and Community Members,

If you’re on campus today or tomorrow, you may see YPY members standing with signs displaying images of aborted babies, as well as images of healthy developing preborn babies. More information about the project, “Choice” Chain, is available on the CCBR website.

It would be much easier not to do “Choice” Chain. It would be easier not to stand outside and encourage dialogue on such a controversial issue. It would be easier to keep hidden the images that we know will upset and offend our classmates and peers. It would be easier, but it would be irresponsible.

If someone you cared about believed a lie, what would you do? Would you let them go on believing that lie, even if it was the cover up of the deaths of your fellow human beings, or would you tell them the truth, and face the hostility that might cause? What would you want someone to do for you? Would you rather believe a lie, or have someone love you enough to tell you the truth, even if the truth was shocking and perhaps overwhelming?

Why are we doing this? Why are we standing outside with images that we know are disturbing to look at? Ultimately, because we care about you. We care enough to tell you the truth, even though this truth is one that’s easier to ignore. The truth is that when we talk about “choice” in the context of abortion, we are talking about the choice to kill a human being. This is a choice that ends the lives of around three hundred preborn babies every day in Canada. The idea that abortion is in any way justice is a lie. We hope that you will feel comfortable coming to talk with us about the truth.

Sincerely,

Youth Protecting Youth

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Why “Choice” Chain?

  1. thank you for bringing the “choice” chain to my place of study. i am totally anti-abortion now. you know, i saw some really graphic pictures of heart surgery the other day. i think i’ll go protest triple bypasses at the hospital. down with life-saving prodcedures! (because they’re so GROSS!)

  2. The point of “Choice” Chain is not that abortion looks gross. The point of “Choice” Chain is that abortion kills human beings. The pictures, while obviously upsetting to look at, are an accurate depiction of what abortion does to pre-born human beings.

    There’s a link in the post to CCBR’s page on “Choice” Chain.
    Further details on why some pro-life people choose to use graphic abortion images can be found here: http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/strategy/graphic

    • actually, they’re not accurate representations. the point of my post was that most medical procedures can be made to look gross, that doesn’t negate their necessity.
      and are you really going to use CCBR’s website to defend your point? it’s a completely biased site, FULL of misrepresentations and inaccurate information.
      let’s try and rise above these petty, useless shock-tactics to try and get our points across. i noticed srj wasn’t out there with enlarged pictures gerri santoro, or other graphic images depicting women who have died as a result of illegal abortions.

      • I used CCBR’s site because pro-life websites accurately portray why pro-life people choose to use graphic images. If you’ve found inaccurate information on their site, I’m sure they’d appreciate hearing from you about it so it can be corrected.

        As for the images, it’s up to you whether or not you believe they’re accurate representations, but there is quite a lot of evidence from people fully familiar with the abortion procedure who say the pictures are accurate, for example:

        “Those pictures pro-life activists flash are real. That is what a fetus looks like when its head is crushed.
        When you see the procedure, you must decide, as a pro-choice person, whether you are in or out. … I have never been more in….
        Doing them underground is a major last resort. I would be willing to, if things came to that.
        ~ Abortion doula Mary Mahoney (pictured), as quoted by Observer.com, November 14, 2011” (original source here: http://www.observer.com/2011/11/the-rise-of-the-abortion-doula/?show=print)

  3. All of you are so brave. Thank you for speaking on behalf of those who do not have a voice.

  4. You have offended myself and a great deal of others with your obscenely violent posters and cowardly displays. Even if I was anti-abortion I would not wish to associate with the likes of students such as yourselves! The three stages of truth argument you allude to above is merely a smoke screen. You are not being ridiculed or violently opposed from what I have seen, you are being loathed. People see what you’re pedaling for exactly what it is; utter and complete bullshit. There are not too many things which bother me but this is one of them, perhaps you could try a more compassionate and loving approach to try and gain support for your ideas, however whacky and absurd they may appear to folks such as myself.

    I wish you luck whatever the case!

  5. Are human beings the same as persons in your definition of Human Beings or are there differences? Just wondering. Maybe help me clear things with the choice chain I saw this week?

    • Yes, our definition of human beings is “organisms of the human species”, and our position is that all human beings should be recognized as persons. I hope that answers your question. Feel free to ask any more questions you may have.

  6. Ben, you’ve made it quite clear that you find our tactics objectionable and very offensive. What I haven’t gotten from your post is why you think we’re wrong. If you’re interested in discussing this I’d be curious to know why you think the unborn aren’t human and/or persons, or just generally why you think being anti-abortion is the wrong position to take.

    If you were simply informing us of your opinions on our display, consider your opinion noted.

    Thanks for wishing us luck!

    • Well, as someone who was raised to value the choices and beliefs of all beings, I apologize for my initial harsh reaction. The main issue I have is not with the idea that abortion is wrong or immoral, it is how folks can be so one-sided in being against something. It reminds me more of fascism than rational thinking. But this whole thing is all about personal opinions and beliefs. That’s the point. My opinion is that abortions in certain circumstances have the potential to alleviate and/or reduce human suffering and violence, even if they are in themselves seemingly violent medical procedures. In a perfect world there would be no need, however, it seems this world is full of imperfections and unknowns. Makes for much more interesting debates don’t you say?

      PS below is an interesting article I found which touches on the moral dilemmas of pro-life women who end up getting abortions.

    • Being correct or not is secondary to the tactics.

      For example. Say it was a fact that your group was wrong and that your disturbing signs are negatively affecting specific individuals on the campus.

      Confronting you violently and using physical threats would not be an appropriate tactic to get you to quiet down.

      On the same note, even if Pro-choice proponents could be demonstrated as absolutely wrong, using disturbing graphic images, singling out individuals, making comments about their lack of morality, etc. would not be appropriate.

      In a university setting you should be able to logically discuss the positions, and do so critically and try to remove your personal biases. Making a scene solves nothing, it just perpetuates an ongoing circle of name calling and false assumptions.

      The Graphics were rude and disrespectful to the other students on campus. It was out in the public, in their faces in a high traffic area. The images made a number of people uneasy.

      A respectful way to do this would have been to rent a room to hold a seminar about it, warn people that graphic images would be shown there, and have the people out on the public direct interested individuals to the seminar should the images be necessary.

      Heck, do something unique. open up the opportunity for people not only to critique your approach, but to offer constructive criticism on how to improve your methods.

  7. Catherine,
    i have contacted ccbr in the past regarding the misinformation on their site. i’ve provided them with pictures and links to academic articles that refute much of the ‘information’ they display as true. they have refused to respond to my emails or engage in any kind of a dialogue. i’m not sure why.
    i do not object to seeing factual pictures of what abortion looks like. to be honest, you can make it seem as gross as you want and it won’t make it any less necessary. mostly i think it’s sad that the anti-abortion side feels they have to resort to these shock-tactics in order to get people’s attention. to me it shows desperation.
    there are a few reasons i say these are not accurate representations. first of all (and this may be obvious), they are quite enlarged. now, you may say this is necessary in order to make a statement, but fetuses aborted in the first trimester (which is when the majority of them are) are not three feet high. if you were commited to showing accurate represenations, they would be in actual size.
    second of all, ccbr claims these are pictures of first-trimester abortions. as i said, the majority of abortions take place in the first trimester, and the majority of those are in the first 9 weeks. by week nine the embryo (not even a fetus yet) is only an inch long. if you were truly concerned about showing people the ‘truth’ you would be showing them pictures of indiscernible tissue that is one inch long AT THE MOST (let’s not forget, the embryo is only one inch at 9 weeks and the majority of abortions are performed at less than 9 weeks, when the embryo is smaller than one inch).
    of course, ccbr does claim these are first-trimester fetuses (a little vague, amirite?!), so technically they could be from anywhere up to 12 weeks (and i’d wager that they’re choosing to display images from around that upper 12 week marker).
    however, this doesn’t seem very honest, since the majority of abortions are performed, like i said, at less than nine weeks. if they/you are so concerned with revealing the ‘truth’, shouldn’t the pictures be from the time when the majority of pregnant people have their abortions?
    now, i know this won’t change your views on abortion, since you probably believe that a zygote is a human being; however, if you are so concerned about showing people the truth of abortion, then at least find some accurate pictures that represent when most pregant people have abortions. either that or be honest about what it is you’re displaying. that is, very enlarged photos of very late term, first-trimester (possibly second trimester) fetuses.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s