Too Graphic???

From here:

Illinois Newspaper Rejects Sonogram Ads as 'Too Graphic'
By Dawn Rizzoni
CNSNews.com Correspondent
February 09, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - A pro-life group in Illinois said a local newspaper refused to publish advertisements featuring sonogram images because executives at the paper considered the ads to be "too graphic."

When contacted by Cybercast News Service, the advertising manager of the Joliet-based Herald News did not deny using that description, but he said his newspaper reserves the right to reject any ad for any reason.

Jill Stanek, president of the Will County, Ill., chapter of the National Right to Life Committee, told Cybercast News Service that she contacted the advertising department at the Herald News in hopes of buying space to depict a sonogram photo and a box of tissues with text reading, "Excuse me America, this is tissue, this (the unborn child) is not."

According to Stanek, after the newspaper refused the ad, she offered a different ad reading, "She's a child, not a choice," along with a different sonogram photo, but that also was rejected.

A third submission was made with an ad reading, "I am an American," again with a different sonogram photo. Once again, the paper refused to run the ad, Stanek said, for the same reason - that it was "too graphic."

Each ad was created by The National Right to Life Committee and included various statistics and information about abortion and fetal development.

"In exasperation, we asked which ads the newspaper would accept," Stanek said, "and they said they would accept (ads with babies already born). But we determined those ads did not portray the message we wanted to portray. After all, Roe versus Wade is all about the rights of pre-born babies, not post-born babies."

You can see all of the pictures in the ads in question, as well as the story behind them here.

But here is one of them:

(click on image to enlarge)

A picture of a live baby too graphic?? My arse!

The only thing striking me as graphic is the total disingenuousness and not-so veiled agenda involved with The Herald News.

In an era when the "dinosaur media" decries media censorship and attacks on their freedoms, it is a sorry state of affairs indeed when
a political agenda prevents them from practicing what they preach.


****UPDATE****

As expected, the pro-death crowd is heartened by this paper's decision:

Marjorie Signer, director of communications and policy for the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (gads--if that isn't the most oxymoronic name for an organization, nothing is) agreed with the decision by the Herald News not to run the ads.

"The Herald News has shown good judgment in sparing the general public from this inappropriate material," Signer said. "National Right to Life has offended community standards for years with its vicious political propaganda.

"The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice acknowledges that there is a wide diversity of sincere views about abortion, and we promote understanding and respect for these views," Signer said. "But the Right to Life ads are intended to inflame public opinion and create shame and fear about abortion, not to do anything compassionate to help women with unintended pregnancies."

Well, Ms. Signer, if your idea of "vicious political propaganda" is showing the practice of abortion for what it really is, and showing the pre-born baby as something other than a "blob of tissue", then let the "vicious political propaganda" continue.

I suppose that if Ms. Signer was alive in WWII Germany, she would consider the outrage over the goings on in Auschwitz or Treblinka as "vicious poltical propaganda" as well.


Unfortunately, Evil, like love, is blind.


(Filed under defense of life)