Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

"...there are lots of folks in AVL who want to see you injured, or even worse."

The full text of the indirect, but definite threat of violence that was made against me through an anonymous comment posted to my blog last Sunday is:
You are a sad,pathetic excuse for a Christian. Jesus was against persecution, and your refusal to act towards the world in a loving way is earning you a seat in hell.
Also, you should know - there are lots of folks in AVL who want to see you injured, or even worse. Might wanna watch your back.
As for Casey Blake's article that I've posted below, her attitude is apparent. At the first pass of reading paragraph one, I didn't even recognize myself--I thought she was talking about someone else because I'm not photographing "anyone coming and going." Rather, I'm taking pictures of anything that's interesting, and of abortion site workers and escorts, and of people who yell at us. Couples coming for abortion happen to be an important part of the story--I'm not out to ID them or shame them, it's just people need to see this--what it's like outside a killing center. I'm usually not even thinking about taking pictures of people coming for abortion.

Now, what can she mean by "voyeur-style" photography?  No doubt she is suggesting there is some perverse sexual thing going on in my picture taking, which itself is sick and perverse.

Even an electrician?  If she had spent a little time with my blog, she would have noticed I take pictures of everything that interests me, even a hawk. Why didn't she remark on the conversation I had with the electrician?  On that particular day, I tried to get a picture of a blue jay that was attacking something under the eaves of the Planned Parenthood building. Unfortunately, he was hard to catch.

Thoughts on killing children?  Of course, she puts the "killing children" words in quotes, because to her abortion probably isn't killing children, but then she doesn't mention that they are not my thoughts, leaving it open that I'm thinking about killing children.  The article doesn't even mention abortion.  It's sloppy, careless writing that shows disrespect for the person she is writing about.  She didn't put "voyeur style" in quotes.

Speculation on an an unzipped backpack?  There was no speculation written, but only noticing. Why?  Because I've been running around with a stuffed, multi-pocketed, compartmental school/business backpack for the past four months, and sometimes I don't get all the pockets zipped.  It takes time and sometimes I'm in a hurry.  So, I'm not the only one.

Lastly, she doesn't take the trouble to link to my blog so that readers may learn more and possibly form their own opinion, but she does link to Planned Parenthood's Facebook page so readers may share the love about the "unusual bright spot for pro'choice progress in the South."

So, nothing but negatives, soft boos, and inaccuracy for the pro-life guy, and nothing but warm hugs for the largest killer of pre-natal children in the world.

When I contacted the AC-T about the threat, they weren't much interested.

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Pictures of the Dead at Antietam


The New York Times
October 20, 1862
Bradley's Photographs
The living that throng Broadway care little perhaps for the dead at Antietam, but we fancy they would jostle less carelessly down the great thoroughfare, saunter less at their ease, were a few dripping bodies, fresh from the field, laid along the pavement. There would be a gathering up of skirts and a careful picking of the way; conversation would be less lively, and the general air of pedestrians more subdued. As it is, the dead of the battle-field come up to us very rarely, even in dreams. We see the list in the morning paper at breakfast, but dismiss its recollection with the coffee. There is a confused mass of names, but they are all strangers; we forget the horrible significance that dwells amid the jumble of type. The roll we read is being called over in Eternity, and pale, trembling lips are answering to it. Shadowy fingers point from the page to a field where even imagination is loth to follow. Each of these little names that the printer struck off so lightly last night, whistling over his work, and that we speak with a clip of the tongue, represents a bleeding, mangled corpse. It is a thunderbolt that will crash into some brain—a dull, dead, remorseless weight that will fall on some heart, straining it to breaking. There is nothing very terrible to us, however, in the list, though our sensations might be different if the newspaper carrier left the names on the battle-field and the bodies at our doors instead.
We recognize the battle-field as a reality, but it stands as a remote one. It is like a funeral next door. The crape on the bell-pull tells there is a death in the house, and in the close carriage that rolls away with muffled wheels, you know there rides a woman to whom the world is very dark now. But you only see the mourners in the last of the long line of carriages—they ride very jollily and at their ease, smoking cigars in a furtive and discoursive manner, perhaps, and were it not for the black gloves they wear, which the deceased was wise and liberal enough to furnish, it might be a wedding for all the world would know. It attracts your attention, but does not enlist your sympathy. But it is very different when the hearse stops at your own door, and the corpse is carried out over your own threshold—you know whether it is a funeral or a wedding then, without looking at the color of the gloves worn. Those who lose friends in battle know what battle-fields are, and our Marylanders, with their door-yards strewn with the dead and dying, and their houses turned into hospitals for the wounded, know what battle-fields are.
Mr. Brady has done something to bring home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of war. If he has not brought bodies and laid them in our door-yards and along the streets, he has done something very like it. At the door of his gallery hangs a little placard, “The Dead of Antietam.” Crowds of people are constantly going up stairs; follow them, and you will find them bending over the photographic views of that terrible battle, taken immediately after the action. Of all objects of horror one would think the battle-field should stand pre-eminent, that it should bear away the palm of repulsiveness. But, on the contrary, there is a terrible fascination about it that draws one near these pictures, and makes them loath to leave them. You will see hushed, reverend groups standing around these weird copies of carnage, bending down to look into the pale faces of the dead, chained by the strange spell that dwells in dead men’s eyes. It seems somewhat singular that the same sun that looked down on the faces of the slain, blistering them, blotting out from the bodies all semblance of humanity, and hastening corruption, should have thus caught their feature upon the canvas and given them pe[r]petuity for ever. But so it is.
These poor subjects could not give the sun sittings, and they are taken as they fell, their poor hands clutching the grass around them in spasms of pain, or reaching out for a help which none gave. Union soldiers and Confederates, side by side; here they lie, the red light of battle faded from their eyes, but their lips set as when they met in their last fierce charge which loosed their souls and sent them grappling with each other and battling to the very gates of Heaven. The ground whereon they lie is torn by shot and shell, the grass is trampled down by the tread of hot, hurrying feet, and little rivulets that can scarcely be water, are trickling along the earth like tears over a mother’s face. It is a bleak, barren plain and above it bends an ashen sullen sky; there is no friendly shade or shelter from the noonday sun or the midnight dews; coldly and unpityingly the stars will look down on them, and darkness will come with night to shut them in. But there is a poetry in the scene that no green fields or smiling landscapes can possess. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and stamp their convictions with their blood; men who have flung themselves into the great gulf of the unknown to teach the world that there are truths dearer than life, wrongs and shames more to be dreaded than death. And if there be on earth one spot where the grass will grow greener than on another, when the next summer comes, where the leaves of autumn will drop more lightly when they fall like a benediction upon a work completed and a promise fulfilled, it is these soldiers’ graves.
There is one side of the picture that the sun did not catch, one phase that has escaped photographic skill. It is the background of widows and orphans, torn from the bosom of their natural protectors by the red, remorseless hand of Battle, and thrown upon the fatherhood of God. Homes have been made desolate, and the light of life in thousands of hearts had been quenched forever. All of this desolution imagination must paint—broken hearts can not be photographed.
These pictures have a terrible distinctness. By the aid of the magnifying glass, the very features of the slain may be distinguished. We would scarce choose to be in the gallery when one of the women bending over them should recognize a husband, son, or a brother in the still, lifeless lines of bodies that lie ready for the gaping trenches. For these trenches have a terror for a woman’s heart, that goes far to outweigh all the others that hover over the battle-field. How can a mother bear to know that the boy she has cradled, and whose head her bosom pillowed until the rolling drum called him forth—whose poor, pale face, could she reach it, should find the same pillow again—whose corpse should be strewn with the rarest flowers that spring gives or summer leaves—when, but for the privilege of touching that corpse, of kissing once more the lips though white and cold, of smoothing back the hair from the brow and cleansing it from blood stains, she would give all the remaining years that Heaven has allotted her—how can this mother bear to know that in a shallow trench, hastily dug, rude hands have thrown him. She would have handled the poor corpse so tenderly, have prized the boon of caring for it so dearly—yet, even the imperative office of hiding the dead from sight has been done by those who thought it trouble, and were only glad when their work ended.
Have heart, poor mother; grieve not without hope, mourn not without consolation. This is not the last of your boy.
With pealing of trumpets and beating of drums
 
These trenches shall open—the Son of Man comes.
And then is reserved for him that crown which only heroes and martyrs are permitted to wear—a crown mightier than bays, greener and more lasting than laurel.
 

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

"Legalized Destruction of Life"

Human life begins at fertilization and abortion kills small babies? Is this the ridiculous claim of a rabid anti-choicer?

No, it is the admission of a once practicing Asheville, North Carolina abortionist! What follows is an excerpt from an article (written by me) that appeared in the now defunct magazine, the Life Advocate. To see the whole article, go to:
www.lifeadvocate.org/9_98/pov.htm .
In the early days of this modern war against pre-born children, and when there yet was real debate, some raw truth sometimes leaked out in the mainline press. Never in the charged atmosphere of today would an abortionist publicly say what Asheville abortionist Arthur Sherman Morris, Jr. admitted back in 1976.

The admission appeared in a full page article on the front of the Asheville Citizen-Times' Community Life (Life?) section on Sunday, April 4, 1976, little more than three years after Roe v. Wade... The title of the article, written by Citizen-Times staff member Ginger Furness, was, "The Status of Abortion in Buncombe County."

When asked by the reporter "When does life begin?" abortionist Morris of Femcare, answered, "Life begins with fertilization and abortion is legalized destruction of life."

These other remarkable quotes appeared toward the end of the article: "Patients are told that abortion in the second trimester is accomplished by injecting a saline solution into the amniotic sac. Right-to-Lifers call it 'salt poisoning.' The fetus is killed and usually within 24 to 48 hours it is expelled from the body."

"Inducing a miscarriage is a bad trip," said Dr. Morris. "We tell the patients they will hurt; they'll experience cramps and bleeding. We tell her exactly like it is; we don't mince words, including when they abort, they'll be aborting a small baby."

"Dr. Morris and his associates administer the saline injections at Memorial Mission Hospital, then send the patient home to await the miscarriage. When she expels the fetus, she is instructed to bring it to the hospital. Any woman who did not know the fetus at this point would be a fully recognizable human infant would doubtless experience a devastating and permanent shock."

Unbelievable.


I have in my possession an actual copy of that 1976 newspaper.

Abortionist Morris is retired, and the last I heard is with poor health and little memory in a nursing home. The person who took his place (and bought the abortion business) is Lorraine “Lorrie” Cummings, M.D. Cummings, like her predecessor, sometimes makes strange confessions in public. What follows is a letter to the editor I wrote to the Asheville Citizen-Times, appearing in print June 1, 2007. The title of the letter, “View of violence depends on which side of fence one is on” supports exactly what my letter criticizes.

By close textual proximity, the commentary, “Abortion regains spotlight as polarizing cultural issue,” (AC-T, May 20), seems to suggest that the thrice-weekly peaceful pro-life presence outside the abortion site on Orange Street in Asheville is violent. It is common for the press and pro-legal-abortion commentators to project violence upon those who publicly and non-violently stand against the hideous, tragic violence of aborting children.

For a hint of this violence listen to Asheville abortion-M.D. Lorrie Cummings as quoted in the commentary: “There are times when there are 13-weekers and 14-weekers and the head is not accounted for. If you do an ultrasound and see that it’s still in there, then you have to go back as a separate procedure,” Cummings said. “People are worried that that is what they are going to call a ‘partial-birth,’ that part of the fetus was removed without the other part.

How macabre.

Cummings says that she only aborts up to 12-weekers, but she sounds like an expert on 13-14 weekers.

Those who wish to decrease the chance of violence in our community would do well to stop collaborating with the perpetrators.


That last line of my letter has a public meaning, but its private meaning may require an explanation. Someday, I hope to recount here a powerful story from the Holocaust about Collaboration v. Resistance.