I document the abortion holocaust. Was that the SUV of a PP worker? I didn't know. Besides, Caitlin's picture was in the Asheville Citizen-Times yesterday. She was posing with a smile. It's fascinating how different she looks with make up, brushed hair, stylish glasses, and a camera flash.
You DO know that Planned Parenthood provides MANY services besides abortion. So, you are simply violating peoples rights to privacy, and possibly documenting the PAP SMEAR holocaust.
PP provides many services besides abortion? Dismissing the evil of abortion this way is the equivalent of reminding us that a child molesting priest provides many services besides sexually abusing children. As for the pap smear holocaust, of course we have no way of knowing exactly who is at PP to abort their babies. Besides, abortion advocates look at both the pap smear and killing a baby as being of no moral consequence, so it's all an invasion of privacy to them. From the legal standpoint, photographing people in a public place is not an invasion of privacy because there is "not an expectation of privacy." If PP wants privacy, they can build a wall instead of calling the police and wasting officers' time, as they do now, as they did today.
Be assured that if there was any possibility local "pro-life" people standing on the sidewalk in front of PP were murdering innocent people, or supported such murder in any way, I'd be including their photos here, too.
What's fascinating is how real photographers know how to capture great images and pick the best ones to share. Knowing that Caitlin is a beautiful person inside and out, I can see that photography is not your true passion here. Harassing people while they are going to the doctor is your passion. I would believe the statistics about the services they provide based on my personal experience as a patient there and knowing many women who go there and have never had an abortion. Many of us do go there for routine care. Now that you're there, I have to worry about putting on makeup and fixing my hair because I'm going to end up having my picture taken and posted on the internet while I'm going in for a pap-smear. The caption would read, "Maybe going to get an abortion?" Your blog is like a tabloid. What if I posted your picture on a blog with your car and license plate and made up some rumor about you? What if I took your picture outside of Wal-Mart and posted it on the internet with a caption that reads, "Maybe going to buy a gun and kill someone?" Neither one of us would be breaking the law because we were both in public doing things that are legal.
I don’t care if I fit any particular definition of photographer. But look at my pictures at chaoticterrainpress.com, especially the photos titled “Board” and “Ivy.” Sure, I could have cleaned up the rooms in the abandoned house to make them look “best,” but then they would have lost their poignant charm. The photos tell a story. Regarding Caitlin Owen, manager of Asheville PP, I passed no judgment on her beauty as such, but did comment on the differences make up, a smile, and lighting make. (Not that it makes any difference, but I prefer when women don’t wear make up.) Anyhow, as the proverb says, beauty in a woman without discretion is like a gold ring in a pig’s snout, so physical beauty doesn’t really define character.
If Wal-Mart shot innocent people in their sporting goods department, and especially if they had a government issued license to do so, then by all means, post the photographs of who-ever. Wal-Mart grocery customers would risk being associated with and supporting a murdering enterprise. It sounds like the writer who objects to the photos is attempting to use PP’s non-abortion clients as a protective shield.
You know, if a person could admit that each abortion destroys a pre-natal child, and that PP does this 350,000 plus times a year and should be defunded and closed down, then we might be able to discuss these other issues meaningfully, being in their full context.
PP’s own stats admit that 10% of their clients come for abortion. Revenue from abortion comprises the largest share of their non-governmental, non “charitable” income.
Let's make the Wal-Mart hypothetical even more like PP. Suppose that not just innocent people per se are being shot in the sporting goods department, but it's parents bringing their children to be shot, dismembered, eviscerated, and decapitated using both guns (with silencers) and knives. What does that say about the shoppers in electronics, housewares, automotive, hardware, and gardening, etc.?
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
10 comments:
What is your goal when posting photos of the PP workers and their license plates? What would you like these photos to encourage and/or accomplish?
I document the abortion holocaust. Was that the SUV of a PP worker? I didn't know. Besides, Caitlin's picture was in the Asheville Citizen-Times yesterday. She was posing with a smile. It's fascinating how different she looks with make up, brushed hair, stylish glasses, and a camera flash.
Grow a uterus you moron then form an opinion. Post pictures of your people and their vehicles if it's no big deal
You DO know that Planned Parenthood provides MANY services besides abortion. So, you are simply violating peoples rights to privacy, and possibly documenting the PAP SMEAR holocaust.
PP provides many services besides abortion? Dismissing the evil of abortion this way is the equivalent of reminding us that a child molesting priest provides many services besides sexually abusing children. As for the pap smear holocaust, of course we have no way of knowing exactly who is at PP to abort their babies. Besides, abortion advocates look at both the pap smear and killing a baby as being of no moral consequence, so it's all an invasion of privacy to them. From the legal standpoint, photographing people in a public place is not an invasion of privacy because there is "not an expectation of privacy." If PP wants privacy, they can build a wall instead of calling the police and wasting officers' time, as they do now, as they did today.
Be assured that if there was any possibility local "pro-life" people standing on the sidewalk in front of PP were murdering innocent people, or supported such murder in any way, I'd be including their photos here, too.
I'll respond to the fallacious and silly "uterus" argument soon.
What's fascinating is how real photographers know how to capture great images and pick the best ones to share. Knowing that Caitlin is a beautiful person inside and out, I can see that photography is not your true passion here. Harassing people while they are going to the doctor is your passion. I would believe the statistics about the services they provide based on my personal experience as a patient there and knowing many women who go there and have never had an abortion. Many of us do go there for routine care. Now that you're there, I have to worry about putting on makeup and fixing my hair because I'm going to end up having my picture taken and posted on the internet while I'm going in for a pap-smear. The caption would read, "Maybe going to get an abortion?" Your blog is like a tabloid. What if I posted your picture on a blog with your car and license plate and made up some rumor about you? What if I took your picture outside of Wal-Mart and posted it on the internet with a caption that reads, "Maybe going to buy a gun and kill someone?" Neither one of us would be breaking the law because we were both in public doing things that are legal.
I don’t care if I fit any particular definition of photographer. But look at my pictures at chaoticterrainpress.com, especially the photos titled “Board” and “Ivy.” Sure, I could have cleaned up the rooms in the abandoned house to make them look “best,” but then they would have lost their poignant charm. The photos tell a story. Regarding Caitlin Owen, manager of Asheville PP, I passed no judgment on her beauty as such, but did comment on the differences make up, a smile, and lighting make. (Not that it makes any difference, but I prefer when women don’t wear make up.) Anyhow, as the proverb says, beauty in a woman without discretion is like a gold ring in a pig’s snout, so physical beauty doesn’t really define character.
If Wal-Mart shot innocent people in their sporting goods department, and especially if they had a government issued license to do so, then by all means, post the photographs of who-ever. Wal-Mart grocery customers would risk being associated with and supporting a murdering enterprise. It sounds like the writer who objects to the photos is attempting to use PP’s non-abortion clients as a protective shield.
You know, if a person could admit that each abortion destroys a pre-natal child, and that PP does this 350,000 plus times a year and should be defunded and closed down, then we might be able to discuss these other issues meaningfully, being in their full context.
PP’s own stats admit that 10% of their clients come for abortion. Revenue from abortion comprises the largest share of their non-governmental, non “charitable” income.
Let's make the Wal-Mart hypothetical even more like PP. Suppose that not just innocent people per se are being shot in the sporting goods department, but it's parents bringing their children to be shot, dismembered, eviscerated, and decapitated using both guns (with silencers) and knives. What does that say about the shoppers in electronics, housewares, automotive, hardware, and gardening, etc.?
Post a Comment