Did he hear what he just said? For the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.
While arguing for abortion at an event hosted by the school’s pro-life club, Purdue professor David Sanders condemned those who display images of aborted fetuses. Usually, when a pro-choicer argues against graphic depictions of abortion, they’ll say it’s “disturbing,” or “traumatizing to women.”
Sanders approach was, well, more creative, you might say. He claimed that photos of abortion’s aftermath was “child pornography,” because they show photos of naked, dead children.
Uhh, professor—did you hear what you just said? Because you just used a word abortion-supporters usually don’t. Do you really think showing photos of dead children is wrong, but killing them isn’t?
Look, this argument is ridiculous. And sobering images of atrocities have played an important role throughout history in changing public perceptions of evils, from slavery, to Emmett Till, to the Holocaust. And if the unborn are children—which he seems to admit—it’s appropriate, in some settings, to show the public the reality of that evil.