Stewart: Aborted fetuses on giant signs distract from actual issue
No double standards, no giant aborted fetuses on signs, no more distractions from real issues, no debate about it.
By Ross Stewart (Contact)
Wednesday, April 16th, 2008
What keeps me from going onto campus or Mass Street with giant signs of men having sex with a horse, my soap box under my feet, proclaiming how bestiality is ruining our children along with our families and core value systems?
It’s the realization that it doesn’t get people to focus on the problem; it gets people to focus on the way I’m protesting the problem.
This is my basic parallel to anti-abortion signs that display giant aborted fetuses.
I’m not here to discuss whether or not abortion is wrong—if you want to read an article about that please look at college newspapers from the past 20 years.
I’m here to discuss giant aborted fetuses on protest signs.
I should point out that fetuses aren’t that large in real life. Fetuses aren’t 20 feet tall. I know you’re thinking I’m a liar. I know, I’m no scientist, but I think I’m right.
These signs make me uncomfortable. But I’m not going to argue with those who would reply, “Well, since their appearance on a sign makes you uncomfortable maybe that means you have a problem with abortion.”
I’m going to stick with what I came to this page to discuss: no double standards, no giant aborted fetuses on signs, no more distractions from real issues, no debate about it.
Instead of discussing abortion, we find ourselves discussing the means to protesting abortion. These aren’t conversations we should be having. This column shouldn’t have ever needed to be written.
I shouldn’t have had to sit at my desk thinking of a polite way to say “to have sex with a duck.”
These signs do not add anything to the debate; they only distract us from the real issue. Instead of discussing the obvious moral problems and the overall ramifications of abortion, we discuss the use of giant dead fetuses on signs.
If I were to protest gun violence with signs of dead men shot to pieces, there would be an uproar. If I were to protest homosexuality with signs of men sodomizing one another, there would be an uproar. There’s a double standard here, and it should no longer be allowed.
I needn’t go to the extreme of getting a sign of a woman pleasuring a goat to prove my point.
The use of signs that incorporate aborted fetuses must stop in order for our society to discuss abortion appropriately—until then nothing of importance will be said and no debate will be worthwhile.
Stewart is a Wichita junior in journalism.
Discussion
All comments are moderated by Kansan.com staff. For our full user policy, click here.
Actually, I think that if you protested gun violence with pictures of people post-ventilation you would get a sympathetic response. Sexuality, however, is a different animal altogether.
Unfortunately, the abortion debate exists at a level of abstraction that is unrealistic. The pictures, while they may be graphic and in some settings (in the open at a college campus) inappropriate, remove that abstraction. They illustrate that abortion has a result and a consequence, regardless of whether you are for or against it.
There are a lot of demonstrations that we don't need on campus, and the abortion pictures might be one of them. I don't think we need brownbag drag either but it went without mention, other than being applauded.
vladislav- Brown bag drag is not a demonstration but a performance. Other than the comedic banter of the host, BBD is pure fun that displays one subculture in queer culture. If you consider it a demonstration then I feel sorry for your discomfort with the queer community.
Share your 2¢
Requires free registration.