Amazon.com Widgets

Should images about abortion be banned from public areas?

Asked by: Apruett
  • Let people be free from graphic images.

    Things like pictures with nudity, gore, violence, and hatred shouldn't be in places where children are. Parents should be able to raise their children without them being exposed to these things at young ages. Pictures of abortions are just disgusting, and don't need to be in places where people are trying to mind their own business.

    I understand that some who support a ban on abortion would like to get some points across by showing these pictures to people. I understand that they would like to peacefully protest abortions too. If you want to get people on your side of the argument, do it through words and evidence. If you have to, even do it through pictures to prove a point. But do it when talking to someone who supports abortion, and do it privately. Don't shove these pictures down everyone's throats.

    To put into perspective, imagine someone protesting with pictures of sex. They would be peacefully protesting, but they shouldn't do it in a public areas. We have laws against indecent exposure for good reason.

  • Of course they should.

    I know Anti-Choicers like to think they're doing a good thing by forcing people to view images of aborted fetuses (some of them are even edited so they look worse than they actually are) but to be honest, it's disgusting.

    Children could see them, and while Anti-choicers are all up for brainwashing them into believing abortion is wrong and painful and gory for purpose of 'educating on the horrors of abortion', it's wrong to do that to kids. This is for the same reason that they should be banned from protesting and showing these images in front of schools ( Third Graders don't want to see this stuff plastered everywhere.)

    It also provokes audiences into creating unfair judgement when seeing those pictures, and it spreads the Anti-Choice motive like an illness, and that isn't fair.

    So yes, images like this should be banned from public areas and people displaying them should receive a fine for trying to impose their own personal beliefs on other people through gross graphic means.

  • Yes, they should.

    Images surrounding abortion should be banned in public areas in the same way that images depicting nudity or violence should be. These pictures are graphic and many find them disturbing or unpleasant, regardless of their stance on abortion. Also, these images are not always what they claim to be, many are over dramatised or incorrect, and do not accurately reflect what exactly abortion entails.

  • Yes they should

    It is grandstanding. It is emotional. It is not the way to argue a point. I would think it is a HIPAA violation for the woman who had the procedure. Whoever dug up that little abortion should be charged with something and put in jail. It is not a humane thing to do. As long as abortion is legal this kind of muck raking should be cracked down on. It is the anti abortionists who are creating a much more unpleasant issue than is necessary.

  • We don't show photos of dead people, car accidents or other gruesome things to the public.

    Abortion is legal. People need to get over it and stop trying to change it by playing on the public's emotions with gruesome photos (that may or may not be real). Choose a more logical argument than a photo if you think your argument against abortion is reasonable. Perhaps those who support abortion's legality should show pictures of women living in poverty with the children they did not plan for or want.

  • That is just disgusting

    Regardless of whether you support abortion or not, those images are disgusting. For you pro-life people that want the "true horrors" of abortion to be seen, would you really subject your own children to this? Pictures of the procedure isn't going to change people's minds if they've already decided to get an abortion. Usually when they make that decision they weigh in other factors besides if the procedure is going to be painless or pretty. From what I've heard and seen, birth isn't so pain-free either and is just as gross looking, and we aren't showing pictures of that to the public. Nor are people explaining to girls that when you give birth there is tearing along your sciatic notch and your hips basically unhinge like the jaws of a viper. I've yet to see a procedure that is easy on the eyes. All procedures look painful and nasty, there should be a code of what is allowed to be seen by the public and what is not. I don't want to go along with my day and be faced with pictures of birth or abortion or any sort of medical procedure.

  • Why would you subject people to this?

    Look, your moral beliefs are YOUR subjective morals, don't foist them on others. Why make people view such gruesome images? Honestly, that's just sick and appalling. While I'm all for the freedom of speech, it must be balanced with serious and non-intrusive restrictions. Frankly, fetuses aren't people. When you buy a carton off eggs, you say that you're buying eggs, not "unborn chickens."

  • Legal Child Abuse!

    This is simply an adult issue that children should not be traumatized by. The people holding those signs don't expose their children to them. What gives them the right to expose other peoples children to these pictures? It is utterly abusive and uncalled for. Freedom of expression has limitations such as obscenities. In the Greek definition obscenity it includes murder, which is the basis of this argument and truthfully images NO child should ever be exposed to. In Canada one has the right to receive information, but when our children are in vehicles at stop lights and there are dozens of graphic images everywhere their rights are violated and they have no choice but to be exposed to them. As parents we have the right to protect our children but these rights are ignored and we are defenceless, causing mental harm to them and ripping away their innocence. If we exposed them to these materials in our homes we would be investigated for child abuse., but these protesters are not held accountable for any of the harm they cause, nor are they left dealing with the outcomes and effects it has. These protest are ALWAYS done at peak times of the day when children will be exposed to them. This is totally inexcusable! There are limitations to our rights and freedoms for a reason, yet our children, the foundation of our future, are being taught that abuse is right because of these types of acts. Shame on these "responsible" adults and shame on our political and justice system for not standing with concerns parents in attempt to protect our future.

  • Show the truth and the truth will set you free

    If we as a society are so blinded and so utterly brainwashed to think that abortion means nothing and that there aren't any images or evidence of what is being done, what should life mean to us then. Why kill someone who has not even had a chance to live?

  • Children should not be exposed to abortion pictures.

    We have ratings on movies, TV shows and video games to protect our children from graphic images yet my child is exposed to graphic images of aborted fetuses while we are driving down a public street. As a parent I am outraged and appalled. People have a right to freedom of speech however I feel they do not have a right to expose a child to these graphic images. My child covered his eyes and was upset because the pictures were so disturbing. This happened twice in one day. I am at a loss for words that some people find this acceptable.

  • Don't Like Seeing The Truth? Coward.

    That's right, you're a coward if you think this should be banned. Are you going to say that the warnings on cigarette packs should be banned too? It's simply a warning of what abortion is.

    Fact, you chose to have sex without a condom.

    Fact, you chose to have sex without birth control.

    Fact, you are responsible for that new life.

    Fact, you need self-control.

  • Show them so we can see.

    I think we should just show people how harsh it is, and how painful is it going to be.
    People learn things visually. If we only hear or read from somewhere/someone. We are not gonna really understand the true definitions of "Abortion" (I mean like Philosophical way.)

    If we show people how painful it looks and going to be to both the mom and the children.
    I really believe that, the abortion rates are gonna be lower.

    But, nonetheless, I think we still have to understand not-ready-moms that sometimes they are really not ready to raise or look after a kid, or can't hang around with anyone knowing she's pregnant for some reasons. Don't disgust them, help them and care about them.

    Sometimes choices are not always available.

  • Not Right, What about the children?

    It really isn't the time for those types of techniques to be introduced to the kids, to the gruesome realities of the world. They have to be slowly moved to understanding of things. But it could scar and scare the child, depending on if the child is ready and/or wants to see them. Children may say that they aren't offended, but they young to understand what is going on, and to make those type of decision of becoming an a abolitionist. Children should have a right to access public spaces without being assaulted by gruesome images. Public Spaces are like the major networks on TV. Keep it clean for all people. The street is not the place for gruesome offensive images. Thats only if the Parent wants the child to view the photos. But the gruesome images should be in a place where people can go look if they want. Think of it as a TV channel you have to purchase. You purchased the channel because you chose to view it, not because you had to.

  • I'm pro choice

    But I think that the people should be allowed to make decisions for themselves, and thus should have the resources to decide for themselves. I think that articles about fetus development will help more then pictures, but to each their own right? If we did now allow doctors to view images of terrible diseases on the grounds that they are disgusting, there would be a lot of people dead by now.

  • How about no.

    Are you trying to discriminate images from the public? Why? So that people don't know about the reality of abortion? Yes, they are disgusting, and that's exactly why people must be shown such images - so that they know what really happens in an abortion. The pictures themselves are not disgusting; it is the reality they depict that's disgusting. In other words, abortion is disgusting. And wrong.

  • What would be next?

    What about freedom of speech? If we can ban speech because it's disgusting then what's next? What is and is not disgusting can not be proven empirically so it would be up for grabs by everyone. What if there is a war and pictures of carnage in the war are banned under the same pretenses? And what if it's a really bad war that we need to get out of.

  • Of course not.

    It's a cruel world. People deserve to know, and need to know, how cruel it really is. Sure not everybody is going to experience blood and gore in front of their face, but some things need to be publicly displayed. Like abortion. People have the right to know what those images depict, and if it's not liked, you have a choice whether or not to look.

  • Free speech needs to be defended

    As much as I hate anti-abortion groups using pictured of aborted fetuses, the right to free speech must be defended. If these images are restricted because they can be seen by children, this opens the gate for censorship to be imposed on what anyone might deem unfit for children. This is how the Russian government is currently restriction freedom of speech about homosexuality by labeling it gay propaganda that can damage children. So, the US should start down this slippery slope of banning any images, no matter how disgusting they may be.

  • How can you make a choice without the evidence?

    Pro choice is up for debate but surely those making the choice should be educated on the choice so they are less likely to make the wrong one. It may be unpleasant but if murder was legalised shouldn't we display pictures of dead bodies to make people realise what they are doing? Or would you say those doing the murdering have already shown their beyond putting reason before personal gain?

  • Conscience pricked? Good. Maybe it should be.

    Emmitt Till gave a face to the injustices against black people in the south. Vietnam footage showed the injustice of that war. The only reason to oppose abortion images is hypocrisy. People call it a 'choice' while ignoring that 50 million children have been brutally murdered. They call themselves 'pro-choice' as cowards who refuse to take a side, but whose ambivalence has resulted in more deaths than all wars and the Holocaust combined. Children are shown graphic images regularly on the news, in their video games and even at school when the topic is war, slavery, the Holocaust etc. When it's something they vocally oppose, it's suddenly not offensive at all.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
suttichart.denpruektham says2013-04-29T18:44:22.473
A fine example of how picture speaks louder than word
Anonymous says2013-05-03T21:01:33.840
Why does no one ever blame the man for 'spreading his legs'? Seriously, it does take two people to make a fetus. Is it just because people want a woman's (or trans-man's) choice reduced due to the fact that they have a uterus?
Anonymous says2013-05-25T18:31:37.213
The majority of the pictures Anti-Choicers show are that of dolls, late-term abortions (which make up to less than 2% of abortions), still-births, and miscarriages. The blood shown is usually often from the uterus. If Anti-Choicers want to be accurate, they should show the earlier ones. Like, hmmm, Four to Nine weeks, which is the majority. But of course, it's not as 'shocking' so they won't do that.

But think about that. If a women who has had a miscarriage or experienced a still-birth despite wanting a baby, if those pictures are public, she will see them and end up potentially triggered due to what she has gone through, and it's just cruel to put someone through that.
Anonymous says2013-06-03T16:25:59.693
The fact that Anti-choicers root through biological waste bins in hospitals, steal fetuses, douse them in fake blood and then take pictures of them disgusts me than the actual pictures themselves.