In Part I, I wrote about how abortion clinic escorts use misdirection and distraction, which are among the tools of stage illusionists as a way of controlling the audience’s attention. These same tools are also at the heart of “pro-choice” rhetoric.
Ad-hominem attacks against pro-lifers are obvious, and a trained debater won’t be sidetracked by them, but virtually every women-centered question or statement is also misdirection. The real issue is not whether we should care about women. Everyone knows we should. The real issue is about caring for pre-natal children.
My answer to many questions is, “We should treat pre-natal children the same as we should treat born children.” Or, “Whatever problem you pose with a pregnancy and a pre-natal child, we should find a solution that is, in principle, no different than if the child were born.”To a large extent, even the scientific debate over when human life begins is misdirection and distraction. My philosopher-carpenter friend, John S., wrote recently in a letter to a state official, “Questions like ‘when does life begin’ or ‘what is a person’ are exercises in playing dumb. We know when life begins—it begins at conception (fertilization). We know what a person is—it’s a human being.”
The answer then is not so much in talking about abortion, but in acting as if abortion is murder. The Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) is a powerful appropriate indirect response to the gravity of abortion. It’s really not debate, but a presentation of facts through imagery. GAP is a statement of the obvious to people who are distracted. Any contribution to debate we make has more to do with interpreting the images for people who are confused.
GAP creates problems for abortion-choice supporters. In the face of evidence of the gruesome violence, “pro-choice” rhetorical engagement is a losing proposition. GAP compels either acquiescence, active resistance, or a dilution of our effort. Since the activists don’t intend to quit, they must issue propaganda and organize protests. They spread propaganda through social media and campus publications.
We see resistance in most schools, but I’d like to focus for now on the campus of the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, and at North Carolina State University (NCSU) in Raleigh.
At Chapel Hill, abortion supporting students lined up in front of the GAP display with signs and helium balloons. A couple of masked male students tapped on snare drums for endless hours. A Planned Parenthood representative stood on a wall overlooking the scene and shouted meaningless patter about condoms and filing complaints with the Dean of Students. At NC State, the abortion “counter protest” took a further step by attempting to block the view of the GAP display and form a complete wall of bodies and signs.
The portrayal of the victims of abortion through GAP helps distracted and misdirected people attend to the real issue of abortion. And if GAP is so effective that abortion supporters must turn out in force to distract people from seeing the images, then shouldn’t we do GAP even more often?