Toronto Photo Essay: Anti-abortion Activism

The old guy witht he Killing Center billboard is the result of the load his mom should've swallowed.

I never understood pro-lifers, to be honest. Me, myself, I would never get an abortion, but I'm happy that it's my choice, and mine alone. There are so many children today being raised in despicable conditions because their parents never had the capacity to care for another human being.

Well the last picture which I find the most disgusting is also not accurate. It has a healthy head of hair and fetal hair does not begin to grow until between 19 & 23 weeks and hair follicles only begin to develop between 32 & 36 weeks. That means a fetus with that much hair would be almost 8 months old, far more developed then abortions done in clinics.

Which clinic? This column started off a bit abruptly, without mentioning any establishing details (or was that the point?). Guessing from the photos, it's on Gerrard St near Parliament.

Gloria, that's the one.

This is morbid and disturbing. People don't get abortions for fun. Abortions are painful. Yes, obviously we know that the fetus is being killed, but this is not a case of social injustice. Abortion is the end result of a difficult decision process in a difficult time of one's life. No one needs to see such senseless graphic images, especially just driving down the street. Have some respect for the women who've endured this difficult process. Grotesque horror show slasher photos are not helping anyone.

This is obnoxious - both the signs and the post. What is the purpose of writing about a minuscule protest of such an old issue? Other than to be obnoxious, that is. There were several protests in the city yesterday, this one being the most trivial. Aren't you simply publicizing these activists' cause? Or was there an editorial reason? Explain?

Editor's note: The purpose of this post (and this column in general) is to present the people, places, and things seen in and around Toronto, by Torontonians. We're not promoting viewpoints or taking a political stance here - we're simply presenting a Toronto photographer's series of photos, and leaving the discussion and opinions up to the readers.

The anti-abortionists like to hijack common
sensibilities of the general public to make
their point.

Rather like hitting a person over the head
to get their attention. Self-defeating at best.

So there's no relevancy other than this took place on a street in Toronto?

My point is, some editorial discretion is needed. I could submit a picture of some guy picking his nose on Bathurst, which fits the stated criteria of this column, but I would hope the editors do his/her job and not publish that.

If BlogTO wants to cover a protest in the city, that's fine. I also respect that they kept the more gruesome photos for later in the article, so they aren't the first thing that you see. However, I find it slightly disturbing that the article beneath this one is for a Steakhouse with a photograph of meat.

Abortions and Steakhouses shouldn't really be beside each other. You could have put the FRINGE article between them for some breathing space between these two examples of different bodily procedures - Abortion and Eating.

It's poor taste.

Secondly, to tie it in to recent news, you could have mentioned Dr. Morgentaler's entry into the Order of Canada, and the surrounding current opinions recently, in this article. This protest outside this clinic has been occuring since my grade school days. This isn't really anything new or shocking, whether I agree with it or not.

I'd tend to agree. Reporting this as a 'current happening' is one thing, but please, some discretion with respect to photos. I don't really care to give these lunatics another forum, and I don't think these photos should even be displayed publicly on the street.

When the 'abortion = genocide' circus came to UofT, they were required to have their little 'exhibition' set up in a closed circle outside of public view. Passers by could be invited in and go look if they so chose, but it wasn't gruesomely assaulting the sensibilities of just anyone making their way to class.

so what you're all saying is... freedom of speech but only where you agree, right? i am a grey area dweller, i suppose. i agree with the person who said i would never get one, but am glad that it's a choice. life is not always the best option, but... on the flipside, they are equally as entitled to their display as someone who might display pictures of the atrocities of war.

that being said, i don't agree with this display. i know of these people and definitely think this is more traumatic thank helpful.

oh, and in response to this:
"Well the last picture which I find the most disgusting is also not accurate. It has a healthy head of hair and fetal hair does not begin to grow until between 19 & 23 weeks and hair follicles only begin to develop between 32 & 36 weeks. That means a fetus with that much hair would be almost 8 months old, far more developed then abortions done in clinics.
Posted by: Eric at July 11, 2008 3:58 PM"

Actually, part of the reason so many people protest is because in Canada there is no law governing abortion. A woman can have one right up to term if the baby has not yet been born.

freedom ain't always pretty...

It's pretty awesome that the title of this contains "anti-abortion" instead of "pro-life." I'm so sick of the "pro-everything" titles the pro- and anti-abortionists put upon themselves. Pro-life should mean something entirely different from anti-abortion.

I do find it odd that presumably progressive and open-minded inhabitants of the comments section are so intolerant of a different viewpoint than theirs. This is a topic on which reasonable people can disagree, as far as I'm concerned, so calling one side "lunatics" seems pretty ridiculous.

"Abortions and Steakhouses shouldn't really be beside each other. You could have put the FRINGE article between them for some breathing space between these two examples of different bodily procedures - Abortion and Eating."

LOL. That's funny.

These dicks set up at Bayview and Eglinton as well outside my store. (No, I am not an abortionist, and as far as I know there are no abortion clinics anywhere near Bayview and Eg.)

I don't give a crap about whatever little protest you want to have, please don't try and drive away my customers.

bbpsi ? the Morgentaler Clinic is at Bayview and Eglinton.

Wow, what a lousy start to the summer break that kid is having. And to think that I got mad at my parents for forcing me to take summer school.

Absolutely demented.

If it looks gross it must be wrong!

I pass those protesters at Gerrard and Parliament every day too. I have three words for them. 'Order of Canada'

never mind abortion, how dare they indoctrinate a child obviously too young to form his own opinions

It'd be fun to stand outside Scarborough General with photos of a kindney transplant(gross!), and signs saying "Transplants are evil!".

Taking photo of another photo is never a good idea. lol

These peaople are child abusers. The kid shouldn't be there, exposed to this kind of bullshit.

Eric's comment is correct: The pictures used in the protest are not from abortions. Abortions done safelly and legally in Ontario are performed 4-14 weeks (1st trimester) after pregnancy was engaged. The babies seen in the photographs are clearly older. Images of real fetal development: http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment1.php

The reason people don't like seeing these signs, and don't like them being posted here, is that they don't like being reminded of reality. Because they'd much rather continue doing what they want and is convenient for them, even if it means the ugly murder of an innocent little human being.

As someone else said, reality ain't pretty.

Am I supposed to be grossed out by these pictures? All I see is a fetus that was spared a childhood of neglectful parenting.

No one (except a moron) would say we shouldn't be reminded of the German holocaust by no one ever showing the photos of piles of murdered Jews. These anti-abortion protesters are accurately showing the reality of the modern-day holocaust. If abortion is such a good thing, then why is it a difficult decision for women to make? Oh, and there is no limit to how old an unborn child is for someone to take his or her life, that's why the last picture shows such an older child. Anyone who wants to ignore the abortion holocaust is just as despicable as anyone who wants to ignore the German holocaust.

Hey Scott,

As a Jew I find it offensive that you'd compare abortion to the holocaust. Comparing everything to the holocaust is a weak attempt at justifying your hatred for women's rights. Jews that that got killed in the holocaust were already living, breathing individuals with no umbilical cord attached to their mothers. They didn't have much choice whether or not they were going to be killed. You are using the deaths of my people as a way of pushing your own agenda. That is disgusting.

Who do you think you are, telling women they are killing their own kids? Are you waiting in line to adopt all these children? Abortion is a difficult decision because it involves complex biological and psychological issues. It isn't that simple. But you are not a woman, so you wouldn't know how it feels to even get a period. Go tell a rape victim she's evil. You sound like you belong in Saudi Arabia.

According to Jewish law, A baby isn't a full human being until half of the body is out of the mother and it takes it's first breath of air. We also believe that during pregnancy, should an emergency arise, the life of the mother is more important than the life of the unborn child. These are the same laws your Jesus would have believed.

Go ask a Rabbi if you don't believe me. (not a jews for jesus one please)

somechick: so unborn babies have a choice whether or not they are going to be killed?

"Women's rights" is a shorthand for the right to kill someone. An unborn baby isn't not a person because he/she has no ability to protest their death.

"You sound like you belong in Saudi Arabia."
^^^ You should have left this out somechick because it makes you sound disgusting despite your well thought out arguement.

It's always entertaining reading posts that actually deal with real issues. The fact of the matter is that people have a right to protest and blogTo has a right to report on said protest. Let's all keep in mind that this is a fucking blog and not a newspaper - so there are fewer options as to where to place the story.

Really - I think people just like having things to bitch about.

I remember seeing these signs set up in front of union station. They actually had a few younger kids (i would say 9-15 year olds?) holding up the large signs and handing out little papers with the same images on them.

I don't mind the fact that it was there, but some people may not appreciate them due to their graphic nature (I heard a few people mumbling how protests like this would probably change their minds on abortion... AWAY from the anti abortion front) But to each their own.

What annoyed me is that they were using little kids to hold and hand out these images.

Women's Rights is nota short hand word for "the right to kill some one".

Women's rights are about the freedom to have control over our own bodies. It's about having the right to have a job, own a home, drive a car and geting an education. It's about being autonomous and deciding whether or not to have children, whether or not to get married and having the right to vote in elections and become active members of society. It's about deciding what is right for us and not letting men decide what's best for women. Just because abortion is legal, doesn't mean women are gonna rush out and get them. It's about having a choice to do so or not based on a woman's own values or beliefs. if a women chooses not to have an abortion, I support that decision as much as that of a woman that chooses to have one.

There are lot of progeressive,supportive men out there. Unfortunately, you "person" aren't one of them.

abortion is wrong plain and simple