One picture is worth a thousand words.
Posted on 01/15/2002 7:29:08 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
MONROE, Wis. -- An abortion opponent who publicizes his protests with large scale pictures of aborted fetuses said he's ready to continue his fight against Monroe if the city adopts another sign ordinance.
The Common Council will hold a public hearing tonight on a second try at a sign ordinance.
The first one it adopted was declared unconstitutional after Pastor Ralph Ovadal (pictured last summer at a Mazomanie nude beach protest) and Christ the King Church challenged it.
The previous ordinance restricted the signs to 3 square feet, except for business signs.
Ovadal and his followers had taken their large signs to the city's business square where Planned Parenthood has an office.
City officials agreed to repeal the first ordinance and dismiss citations against Ovadal and his group to settle the federal lawsuit.
Ovadal says the new sign proposal is simply the old one dusted off.
Ovadal and other church members were cited earlier last year for placing literature on parked cars in Monroe that was critical of Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin and for displaying signs in a grassy area along side Highway 69 in Monroe.
How about a 'matter-of-fact' photograph of a medical waste bag full of dismembered unborn children taken from an abortion facility dumpster? Some of these abortion photos were actual taken by the abortionists themselves to reduce their medical malpractice liability. Apparently the body of the child sometimes needs to be reassembled after it's removal to make sure all of the "pieces" have been removed from the womb. It doesn't get any more 'matter-of-fact' than that.
Maybe they should hold up a mirror instead.
That is the case in all D & C abortions. The baby's body is usually reassembled on a table to make sure that no body parts are left inside which could lead to infection.
And apparently these people sleep at night.
Leni
I never said I didn't support the legality of it. Your characterization of anyone who doesn't support the wisdom of it as a coward is offensive.
But that's in keeping with your whole approach to the issue, isn't it? Win people to your side by being offensive. Charming.
659 votes cast
52%.....Yes
48%.....No
YES!
Why, of course not, darling.
It's simply a dead body, dead as a result of a conscious decision made by a person that was too irresponsible to conduct themselves in a manner which would not have resulted in it being a dead body in the first place, had they not been irresponsible.
That dead body, which incidently, is a dead human body, had no choice either way.
But again, it's not disgusting. It is, after all, a human being, a human body, one that was not given a chance to decide his/her own fate, but one that had a callous, irresponsible, immature person, decide their fate for them.
No, darling, it's not disgusting. No murdered human is disgusting.
Don't see the difference between murdered and perhaps executed? Then get out your Funky Wagnalls, darling, 'cause you are flying blind.
Abortion is the murder of a person that had no choice in the matter. You may insist upon your choice, your constitutional rights, but if turnabout is fair play, then may I insist upon mine, to simply end your life, as you are an inconvenience?
Isn't that what it boils down to? That life growing in your body, it's just an inconvenience.
The disgusting thing here is not the pictures of the aborted babies, but the attitude of someone such as yourself.
You have no conscience. I suspect you have no soul, either.
What has our country come to when we take polls to see if people's constitutional rights should be respected. :-(
now, that's what I call disgusting!
Wrong. The difference between you and me is that you think offending people is an effective tactic. I don't.
The fact that you find that disgusting is ironic, to say the least.
If a large sign supporting gay rights or condemming school vouchers went up Tammy would be championing the right to free-speech.
And someone smarter than I, please, post this to the abortion lists.
I guess for me one of the scary things the Holocaust Museum showed was the ease with which millions of people could be swept under the rug. I would posit that an ad which showed an ultrasound of a fetus followed by the sight of some blood and indistinct ground-up gore running down a drain would be more horrifying than the type of graphic ads discussed here.
On a related note, compare the shower scene in Hitchcock's Psycho with scenes from more recent slasher flicks. The latter are far more graphic, and yet the former is far more effectively horrifying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.