The Ethics of Advertising
|
|
Ok, people, it's time to speak out about those anti-abortionist protesters. You know know the ones, those people who sit out on street corners with their placards boasting slogans about how abortion is murder or how women who have abortions have ruined their lives. Or they parade about in peak-hour traffic in their cars or trucks plastered with bumper stickers or huge signs that state how society is in decay when we will happily allow a life to be slaughtered before it is even given a chance.
We're not going to speak of whether or not it's a good cause nor will we be discussing the ethics of the practice, itself. What irks Rex is that they usually chose to express their distain by a shock tactic - depicting an unborn, aborted foetus. This clearly demonstrates that these protesters hate, not only the society that allows this practice (which Rex is somewhat sympathetic to), not only the people who oppose them, but also young children - those who are struggling to understand the world during their fledgling years.
Yes, people, children. While the anti-abortionist protester is busily going about their business of horror tactics in an effort to demonstrate their proclaimed love of life, they are causing more harm than good for the future. These images (which, incidentally, are extremely misleading and could, to all intents and purposes be dismissed as misrepresentation as they portray, not only the Univerally condemned third-trimester abortion, but an extremely Photoshopped version at that) do not really achieve their desired purpose and, in fact, achieve a far more nefarious agenda.
Do these people not realize that these are graphics images of disfigurement? Of course they do. Do they not realize that there are potentially children viewing these horrific portrayals? Of course they don't. And they don't care, either. If they save one unborn child from being terminated then they must consider that they have done well. On the other hand, if that is at the expense of a young child who passes by haplessly in a car and sees the image and gets the wrong message - perhaps that child mutilation is what these people are really arguing for - and that child grows up to be a child molester, child beater or Freddy Krueger, then are they really helping society?
A young child doesn't understand the debate, nor should he or she be expected to. The child, on the way to the dentist where, by chance, there happens to be a family planning clinic that is being protested and sees these graphic pictures doesn't, by cognition, think to him or her self "ooh, yes, abortion is wrong because it will look like that baby." They see a mutilated baby and who knows where that will lead their young minds?
At best they will need some psychotherapy and at worst they become the worst serial killer since Jack the Ripper. Think, people, think! Rex does not deny your right to protest. Rex does not deny your freedom of speech and, until now, Rex did not take a stance on the anti-abortion lobby ... until now. No matter how just you feel your cause to be, that does not give you the right to terrorize young children. At the end of the day, that's all these displays do. Adults can handle it and most rational adults have already considered the issue and taken a stance. It's unlikely that these shock tactics will sway them. But think about the children - those who have been born - to them this is nothing short of terror.
And anyone who deliberately causes terror is, by definition, a terrorist. What we see from the anti-abortion lobby, as they stand on street corners or driving their anti-abortion hate-mobiles can be deemed as nothing short of terrorism - emotional terrorism. And the message has been lost. We don't get the message that abortion is a barbaric practice (it may well be) we get the message that these people hate everyone, from the wizened old GYN who has been practicing for years to the delicate infant who will have his or her mind irreparably damaged by their horrific, photoshopped depiction.
Clearly, anyone who stands on a street corner, or drives a vehicle with this imagery doesn't care about society or children or even the unborn, for that matter. They care about one thing and one thing only: themselves. They want to be known and they want to make a statement and who gives a damn if they cause terror to little children. |
|
|
Ethel the Chicken
December 11, 2008 9:53 PM
|
| Question: Exactly when does a 'fetus' become 'human'? |
|
Rex the Strange
December 11, 2008 10:55 PM
|
| Ethel, in your case that's still to be determined (although Rex and I suspect that you're neither - probably a bot). This is not to be used as a forum for the pro-choice/anti-abortion debate. It simply is not about that. If anyone feels it is then Rex suggests you reread the post because you have clearly missed the point. But Rex has allowed this comment because it demonstrates how narrow minded and mechanized some people can be. |
|
Ethel the Chicken
December 15, 2008 3:13 AM
|
| Why does a simple question upset you so? |
|
Rex the Strange
January 10, 2009 11:44 PM
|
Because you're, clearly, a narrow-minded automaton (either figuratively, or literally) who hasn't even the mental capacity to understand what Rex is saying. I repeat "this is not a forum for the pro-choice/anti-abortion" debate. It is Rex's comment that people, such as yourself, are so self absorbed in their own personal crusade that they are incapable of either recognizing the damage they may be causing by their tactics or digesting other viewpoints, whether directly related to their argument or, in this case, indirectly.
The "simple question" upsets neither Rex nor myself. But I put it to you, Chicken - why can you not address this piece: that anti-abortion protestors who display offensive and misleading imagery in the clear view of minors are insensitive and narrow-minded, hypocrites - in context?
Sadly, the reason is the same as why you cannot understand, through your miniscule synaptic functions, that your question is, quite simply, completely irrelevant to what Rex is saying (but, of course, you will never know that because (a) you have clearly never read the post - or started to read and began to rant at the term "abortion" - and (b) are [sigh] really fucking stupid). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
