Images of abortion are helpful in the abortion debate

One of the reasons many on the Pro-choice side do not find images of abortion helpful is not simply because they may upset people but because they change minds. I know a number of people involved in such displays (Universities, free-speech areas etc) and there are too many people to count everyday of those who change their minds after viewing the imagery. But this objection isn't primarily to do with being helpful or not this is to do with objecting to something that could make people change their position. Yet the imagery could and is certainly helpful to many people who view it. The main reason those who support abortion do not want abortion imagery shown is that they expose the violent nature of the act. However, if abortion is truly defensible then it can still be helpful for those people because it forces those holding that position to confront its violent nature and build a case for the legitimacy and need for abortion regardless of its violent nature. Whatever our position on abortion, images confront both sides and encourage people to either defend or confront the images which are true representations of abortion. I was not comparing abortion to slavery although there are certain parallels in regards to the dehumanization of certain human beings. What I was showing was how images can be powerful in the context of social justice to expose the reality of certain actions so that they can suitably addressed. As I mentioned above in regards to how the images do confront people on both sides to change their minds. Your claim that they are not going to change minds is simply false. I understand what you are saying about upsetting people and that is certainly a risk, this is why where they are shown and how are equally important (Warning signs etc). Universities are certainly great places to have displays, a place where we should be able to discuss, challenge and debate what we think about the moral legitimacy of abortion and the moral nature of the unborn. However, I should point out that by stating that we shouldn't show images that risk upsetting people does assume something about the ontological nature of the unborn. This is because if the unborn are human beings with sufficient moral value that warrants them not being intentionally killed then like the images of slavery they could and should be shown even if they have the potential to upset those involved. A few points why images may be warranted outside or near abortion clinics: 1. Despite how much I value women and sadness that I feel for those are taken advantage of by the abortion industry, the images have the potential to stop women from killing the unborn human being residing within them. 2. In Britain 33% of women who had an abortion last year had had at least one previous abortion, sometimes many more. It can be helpful to see the reality of the act so that they don't repeat the same mistake again. 3. Viewing the images presents women with validation for their guilt and the impetus to make use of alternative options such as adoption and keeping the child themselves. 4. If they do change women's minds the images actually help protect women from the well documented psychiatric risks related to having an abortion [1]. If we care about women we should care about them doing something that may result in serious future psychiatric problems and these risks should be discussed with women by those providing abortion services. Images as I said earlier can be helpful in the abortion debate and it is shameful for those who support the practice of abortion to be so vehemently against their use. Of course you haven't, you have only very patiently and clearly provided your own objections which I appreciate. [1] - http://www.cmaj.ca...