March for Life and Non-Graphic Images
Walking through the March for Life, I had a sort of internal checklist of all the things that people complain about. A few of them were confirmed or dispelled immediately, but it was not until I was almost back at work that I realized that I had not seen a single untasteful image.
The Washington Post reported that: “The most commonly carried posters simply said ‘Defend Life’ or showed a black and white photograph of a newborn infant, plump and healthy-looking. Posters with graphic images of aborted fetuses were rare.”
I would think that there had to be something like that, somewhere, given the number of people, but it is also the sort of image that the media (including much of the pro-life media) gravitates to, and I have not seen any photographs depicting people with those images at the march, so that says something.
I heard chants that “Roe v. Wade has got to go” which is focusing on the negative in one sense, but is also perfectly consistent with the theme of change which young people so love.
And, speaking of love, I heard even more about how people love babies.
There were handwritten signs that I could not actually read as I hurried by.
Sometimes the signs were one-sided in the sense that you could not see what they said when turned the wrong way.
But sometimes they were double-sided:
There was a lot of “Defend Life.”
And “stop abortion now.”
And a lot of text-heavy signs. I think these signs say: “The birth of a child changes the world: let every child be born for a better world” and “The Gospel of Life lights our way at the Catholic Community of St. Frances Xavier”
There were signs with phone numbers.
There were signs declaring that abortion kills children.
And children who don’t want you to kill babies.
There were cranky-looking seminarians who vote.
And members of the pro-life generation who look like they might yell at you.
And a man with a sign saying that women do regret abortion. Silent No More, I think.
And he certainly was not the only one concerned about women who have already had abortions.
Even the grumpiest looking nun (technically they aren’t nuns, and I’m pretty sure she was actually just cold) carried signs that looked appropriate for a children’s book.
There were young women whose signs indicated that they had reasons to smile.
And others who just looked like they were freezing at a youth rally.
I saw several de-fund Planned Parenthood signs sprinkled through out the crowds.
I noted that almost all of the somewhat snarky signs were held by women well over the average age for the crowd. My mother says that the wonderful thing about hitting 50 is that you can say whatever you think.
Have I mentioned that there were a lot of Defend Life signs?
They are my least favorite, because one critique of the march (that I have only actually heard from myself) is the litter that is left from this one little thing with a certain group handing out signs. The signs often are not cared for, thus litter.
Which brings me back around to the irony that I saw no graphic images of abortion at the March for Life. In fact, the last time I saw such images in person was on the signs used to picket the Knights of Columbus grand gathering, or whatever it is they call it.
- March for Life 2013
- I am thankful
I love the “Your Body, Not Your Body” Sign. I’m really glad to be seeing fewer graphic images – in my pro-choice days that gauranteed that I wouldn’t stop and read the rest of your poster – and glad to see plenty of support groups trying to get their numbers and websites a little coverage!
These are great photos. I LOVE all the young people. it gives me hope that someday we will see change.