My entries on this blog normally describe the struggles and achievements of African women. While I will continue to advocate for the recognition of African women in future blog posts, I’m going to have to diverge from my usual topic this week.
I’m sure you either saw or heard about the latest campus controversy. JMU students were blessed with an opportunity to encounter the Genocide Awareness Project on the commons yesterday. The title of the movement sounds great, right? Who wouldn’t want to learn more about the Genocide Awareness Project? As a justice studies major, I’ll admit I was inclined to learn more about this seemingly-inspiring movement.
I was completely wrong. As it turns out, the Genocide Awareness Project, or GAP, is a right-wing conservative movement that travels across university campuses in the United States and Canada with a movable display of pro-life propaganda.
While I have some, although admittedly limited, tolerance for pro-life movements, this movement without a doubt contains the most distasteful means of expressing their views I have ever seen. Not only did they have a myriad of horrific and bloody images of aborted fetuses, but they had those pictures juxtaposed with human beings victimized by genocide.
I would post the pictures here, but I don’t want to force people to see the pictures if they choose to avoid images and the commons altogether. To view the pictures, check out their anti-abortion website or read the coverage of the event in The Breeze. They’ll also be on the commons until the end of the day today for your up-close viewing pleasure.
GAP has a few things wrong with their argument and their methods. First and foremost, choosing to have an abortion is NOT equivalent to genocide. Second, the bloody fetuses depicted on the commons were results from abortions completed in the third trimester—something that is illegal and rarely practiced. Third, this isn’t the way to voice their beliefs; it is totally unacceptable . Period. The First Amendment obviously gives them the right to do whatever they want. Decency, however, shouldn’t be left to the wayside.
To have abortion compared with the horrors of genocide is absurd. Aborted fetuses aren’t “killed” based on religious, ethnic, racial nor gender related reasons. Millions of human beings were tortured and killed in genocides in the 20th century alone by oppressive governments and leaders for superficial reasons. Following the analogy, GAP believes women can be compared to Nazi’s of the holocaust. To compare these atrocities to the choice a woman makes about her future and the possible future of a child is wildly inappropriate.
In addition, the images they were showing were abortions that took place in the third trimester—a commonly known illegal form of abortion. As reported by the Center for Disease Control, an unbiased source for health information, found that 62 percent of abortions take place within the first 8 weeks of pregnancy and 92 percent of abortions take place within the first 12 weeks (the first trimester). Displaying images of aborted fetuses in the third trimester is a completely skewed perception of the reality of the situation.
To have a radical view graphically shoved in faces of people merely passing by isn’t the way to advocate for social change. Not only will they be totally unsuccessful in changing the minds of people who are pro-choice, but they will also embarrass the level-headed pro-life supporters. Radical movements like this one do not further the cause; they merely push the issue farther and farther away from mainstream controversy.
I’m in disbelief that such an organization would disregard a woman’s right to choose so much they reduce us to the level of mass-murderers. Organizers of this movement should go to the countries where genocide has wiped out and is currently wiping out entire populations. Perhaps they would garner the difference between a legalized practice and the wide-scale dehumanization of human beings.
Join the movement to fight against the hatred.
ShoutOut! James Madison University 
This post is spot on. I couldn’t believe my eyes yesterday when I saw this– its atrocious, offensive, and just plain disrespectful. I agree, I think its a terrible misrepresentation of abortion when you show partial birth abortions and abortions done in the 3rd trimester, while comparing them to the size of coins and victims of genocide. This type of behavior makes me so sad about how freedom on speech is being used in our country.
LikeLike
I completely avoided the Commons yesterday just so I wouldn’t have to witness such idiocy.
LikeLike
I agree with you to a point, but (as a pro-lifer myself) I’d like to explain where the abortion/Holocaust comparisons are coming from.
First, I definitely think that people should see pictures of abortions. They should know what’s going on when they undergo this surgery; it should be no different from watching a video of a hip replacement or a gastric bypass. Abortion in general seems to be shrouded in mystery, with only pro-life websites (covered in blood) advertising links to videos of actual abortions. However, placing those pictures on a public sidewalk is very different from, say, sharing a link with a warning or handing out pamphlets with the pictures inside. Seeing such violent images with no warning (or even with one) can send people into panic attacks or plain old rage, neither of which do anything to advance the pro-life cause. At the same time, the huge pictures are an extremely effective conversation starter, so I won’t say they should all be taken down. I’m ambivalent on them.
As far as the comparisons to the Holocaust and various other genocides, I first thought that they were going WAY too far. However, the more I think about it, the more I find the comparison disturbingly appropriate. The first thing everyone has to grasp is that the fetus is not PART of its mother’s body. It is inside its mother’s body, and it is attached to its mother’s body, but it has its own DNA and develops independently of her. The second issue many pro-choicers bring up is personhood–we’ve established that it’s a human, but is it a person? I have yet to hear any definition of personhood that is more than an arbitrary point in the development of a fetal human. These definitions (“It’s not a person until it has brainwaves,” for example) serve no purpose but to dehumanize the unborn, making it seem acceptable to kill them.
And that is where the Holocaust comes in.
It is well known that many of the people who perpetrated the horrors of that genocide (and other genocides) did not consider those they kill to be “people.” In the same way, Planned Parenthood and othe abortion providers tell women in crisis pregnancies that their amazingly complex babies are just lumps of cells, that they’re not people.
Ray Comfort puts it far better than I could in his documentary “180.” He interviews several people, asking them whether, if a Nazi had a gun to their heads, they would shoot several Jews. Some said yes, some said no. Then he asked whether, if a Nazi had a gun to their heads, they would drive a bulldozer forward and bury several Jews alive. Far more people said yes to this question because it is easier to do horrendous things when we don’t have to look at them.
Many pro-lifers say that this is why Planned Parenthood has no pictures of embryos on their website and why their section on prenatal development is woefully incomplete. They don’t want women to see what they’re killing, don’t want them to realize that what is going on in the abortion industry is actually a LOT like a genocide.
LikeLike
Kelsey,
Not only do I find your argument deeply offensive, I also think it is quite flawed. While I feel that anti-choicers should be able to express their opinion just as freely as pro-choicers, the fact that you would in any way shape or form defend the comparison of women who have abortions to Nazis and the orchestrators of the Rwanda genocide troubles me greatly.
Your claim that abortion is shrouded in “mystery” is entirely inaccurate. When you type in the quick google search of “How do first trimester abortions work?” the second link that appears is to this Planned Parenthood website, “What Happens During Abortion” (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures-4359.asp) which literally spells out for you exactly how the different forms of abortion work step-by-step. To say that abortion is “shrouded in mystery” basically means that you didn’t care enough to do the research on the subject and instead chose to use anti-choice propaganda as your main argument. Secondly, a look into any medical literature will show you what an embryo looks like at the different stages of pregnancy. For instance, this link will take you to a photo of an embryo at seven weeks of pregnancy (61% of abortions occur before 9 weeks of pregnancy and 88% occur in the first 12 weeks): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tubal_Pregnancy_with_embryo.jpg.
Another issue I have is your claim that Planned Parenthood “tell women that their ‘babies’ are just lumps of cells.” Guess what? Abortion is legal. A woman’s right to choose is protected by Roe vs. Wade. These “lumps of cells” are not, legally speaking, humans. Don’t agree with this? That’s fine. Don’t have an abortion.
To say that Planned Parenthood has no pictures of embryos on its website because it wants to “hide” from women from to see “what they’re killing” makes a couple of huge assumptions. 1) That women are stupid and cannot make informed decisions without outside organizations shoving information down their throats, and 2) That if all women “knew what the pro-lifers knew about abortion” then they wouldn’t have one. The idea that Planned Parenthood should post pictures of aborted fetuses is ridiculous. When you have any other medical procedure, such as getting your wisdom teeth out, or your tonsils removed, are you first shown pictures of the surgery? No. Because the doctors know that is irresponsible and would only serve as a fear tactic for the patient. Why should abortion be any different? Maybe, just maybe, some women are smart enough to do research on abortions, know what is going on inside their bodies, and still decide to go through with an abortion because it is the best option for them at the moment. Essentially your argument claims that women are too dumb to realize they’re carrying out genocide.
Coming from a Jewish background myself, I find it hard to even articulate what to say to you in regards to your comparison with abortions to the Holocaust. I think to undermine the torture and mass murder (not to mention cases of rape and brutal medical experiments) of 6 million plus human beings of all ages is horrifying and irresponsible. Mass murdering millions of people for their religious beliefs, sexual orientation, and race is not in any way comparable to the abortions of embryos. Not only does this further reduce Jewish people to the equivalent of an unborn embryo, it does the same to every victim of genocide. Please, think about who you may offend when making such huge arguments.
Bottom line: if you don’t agree with abortion and you think it’s wrong, don’t have one. No one will force you to. But please do your research in order to make an accurate comment.
LikeLike
First and foremost, I would like to thank you for not only allowing my comment to be posted but for replying to it so thoroughly. I understand that contrary view can be upsetting, and I’ve seen a few things even on this blog that were offensive to me. Free discourse is a staple of a healthy society and I appreciate your willingness to discuss despite our strongly opposing views. I will also apologize in advance for the length of my reply. In an effort to address all your points, I’m afraid I became rather wordy. Please take your time in replying; I look forward to what you have to say.
I would also like to address a few inferences you made about my post. You understood things from my comments that I did not intend to convey:
1) That women who have abortions are analogous to Nazis or those who perpetrated other genocides. I would never suggest such a thing about any woman facing an unintended pregnancy. What to do in such a crisis is a huge decision, and many women who find themselves in this situation are under tremendous stress to make one or another decision. One girl in Comfort’s documentary asked, referring to the Holocaust, “Where was the world?” meaning that people should have been raising an outcry to stop the horrors that the Jews were suffering. I would suggest that women and lobbyists who support abortion are more nearly analogous to “the world” that did nothing to stop what was going on. If anyone can be compared to the Nazis, I suppose those who actually perform abortions would fill that role.
2) Planned Parenthood should display aborted fetsus in its clinics. Again, I would never intentionally suggest this, and I apologize that I gave that impression. Those images are distressing and extremely polarizing, and while they may serve a purpose as a conversation starter, they do not belong in a place designed to help women in crisis pregnancies. Even pro-life pregnancy centers do not display dead fetus parts on their walls (and if I found one that did, I would do everything in my power to get those images taken down), but rather show vivid pictures of the fetus alive and whole within its mother’s womb. Many find these images beautiful and informative, as they convey far more information than a simple description of fetal development ever could. It is not the lack of dead babies on Planned Parenthood’s website that disturbs me, but the complete lack of images—I could not find even a basic textbook-style diagram that showed what women should expect.
Now I would like to discuss my understanding of your response.
I will gladly concede that the Planned Parenthood website has more information than I had remembered when I typed my first comment. The mystery, then, no longer revolves around the surgery but around the fetus.
You mention that “a look into any medical literature will show you what an embryo looks like at the different stages of pregnancy” and that I think women are too stupid to look up this information. On the contrary, I know that women who undergo abortions come from every walk of life. Many are well-educated and know exactly how to find relevant information on the Internet or in libraries. However, these women are facing a very stressful time. People facing high levels of stress often do not think as clearly as they normally would, and moreover a 2004 report from the Guttmacher Institute shows that at the very least 20% of women feel pressured to choose abortion: 14% respoded “Husband or partner wants me to have an abortion” plus 6% responded “parents want me to have an abortion” (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf ). However, a 2004 study published in the Medical Science Monitor found that up to 64% of American women feel pressured to choose abortion. (http://www.medscimonit.com/fulltxt_free.php?ICID=11784). Even splitting the difference between these two numbers—leaving us somewhere above 40%–suggests that huge numbers of women feel pressure to choose abortion.
Given that forty-something percent of American women might be under pressure to abort, I don’t think it unreasonable to suppose that those women are also not encouraged to independently and rationally weight all their options. Rather, those who are creating the pressure might look up the local Planned Parenthood and repeat everything it says about how normal and safe abortion is—regardless of whether the woman truly wants that for herself. You may think I’m playing Chicken Little here, but this kind of thing really can happen. Just this week pro-lifers praying outside a Wisconsin abortion facility saw a young girl, probably in her early teens, forcibly pulled back into the clinic despite her audible requests to talk to those outside. The police said they could do nothing because the girl’s guardian was the one pulling her back inside.
You also mention my belief that if women knew more details about abortion they wouldn’t have one. This is completely true, and has been proven again and again. A pro-life group in my area has converted a Greyhound bus into a moblie Crisis Pregnancy Center which they keep parked outside of our local Planned Parenthood as much as possible. Inside, they offer free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds, and I’ve seen many women’s faces light up when they see their babies bounding around on the big-screen TV displaying the sonogram. One woman told me that she had also had an ultrasound from Planned Parenthood, and when they showed her the image it was only a white blob. She was about twelve weeks along, so the only conclusion we could draw was that they had positioned the probe to display her baby from above—she could only see the top of its head! I suppose this was to support their line that the baby is a lump of cells.
In your post, you point out that under Roe v. Wade, those lumps of cells are not legally human. I would argue that laws do not define morality, but should strive to uphold it. That is, not everything that is legal ought to be. Laws can be changed. Interestingly, one of the points that Ray Comfort (also Jewish) makes in his documentary is that the Holocaust, technically, was also legal because German laws allowed Hitler to impose more and more restrictions on the Jewish citizens and, eventually, have them arrested and sent to concentration camps. Other horrors that were once considered legal include infanticide (in ancient Greece, for example) and slavery. The fact that something is legal does not make it acceptable. It could be argued that your point (abortion is legal and therefore acceptable) actually supports my argument and Ray Comfort’s that abortion is disturbingly similar to the Holocaust. (As an aside, see what “Jane Roe” now says about her own court case. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_MUUvcvjEg)
“I think to undermine the torture and mass murder (not to mention cases of rape and brutal medical experiments) of 6 million plus human beings of all ages is horrifying and irresponsible.” I could not agree more. When approximately 3,700 humans are killed every day because they are inconvenient and less than twenty weeks old, horrifying and irresponsible are perfectly apt words. I seek not to “reduce Jewish people to the equivalent of an unborn embryo,” but to raise the embryo to the level it deserves in our eyes—that equal to a human of any other age.
I apologize for the length of this post, but I hope it clarifies a few points and perspectives of the pro-life movement. Thank you again for the conversation! I look forward to hearing from you.
LikeLike