The GAP is a pro-life project that changes minds and saves lives by exposing the atrocity of abortion. Expectedly, then, it faces criticism from abortion supporters. Unexpectedly, however, it faces criticism from some pro-lifers who claim it is not strategic and could even harm the pro-life message. In the spring of 2004, Stephanie Gray, executive director of CCBR, wrote a letter to several pro-life religious leaders addressing their concerns about the GAP. Below is an edited version of the letter which excludes the names of the individuals and organization it was directed to. Because it provides a defense for the GAP, the relevant portions are being shared to help educate others as to the merits of using graphic visuals in abortion education and, more specifically, of comparing abortion to historical atrocities.
The Genocide Awareness Project typically involves 4×8-foot or 6×13-foot signs set up in a public area of a university campus. Images depicting victims of various atrocities such as the Holocaust are arranged next to images of the victims of abortion. The graphic nature of the pictures as well as the striking comparison often stops passersby and compels them to stare in silence, listen to discussion, or engage in debate. This display is important for several reasons:
Few people are willing to discuss abortion; they may say that it is “too controversial” or they may have guilt from past involvement. But if something is “out of sight” it will be “out of mind.” Our culture wants to keep abortion hidden; therefore, pro-lifers need to force the debate “in sight” so it is “in mind.” As my colleague Gregg Cunningham says, “Injustice that is invisible inevitably becomes tolerable.”
Making the justice visible is controversial, but it is important. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. responded to criticisms of his bold approach to fight racial segregation in his Letter from Birmingham Jail. His words on exposing injustice readily apply to the modern-day fight against abortion:
Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.
When discussion about abortion does occur, it is often surrounded by slogans that have little depth. “Choice” is the popular word used by abortion supporters; if an intellectually honest discussion is to be held, however, pro-lifers need to shift the debate away from the abstract notion of “choice” to the concrete reality of what is being chosen.[1] The pictures make it clear that the “choice” of abortion is to kill a baby.
Some people may call abortion “evil” but they qualify that by saying it is the “lesser of two evils” or a “necessary evil.”[2] But they do not say that about the Holocaust or the slaughter of Tutsis in Rwanda. These people understand that some acts are so horrific that they cannot be justified in any circumstance. The same is true with abortion.
In my experience, the abortion debate does not centre on whether the unborn are human or not. In a private e-mail debate I had with a pro-abortion leader, she informed me she knows the unborn are “human,” but she said they are not “human beings.” That concept is more commonly phrased as, “The unborn are human beings, but they are not persons.” And that is precisely why the comparison in GAP is so vital. Here is what Gregg Cunningham says in the essay Why Abortion is Genocide:
Dominant societies have traditionally been selfish in the way they grant personhood. Ours is no exception. When a vulnerable group gets in our way or has something we want, we tend to define personhood in terms which exclude them. Indians got in the way of Westward settlement so society said they were subhuman to justify taking their land. Society wanted the uncompensated work products of blacks so society said they were subhuman to justify taking their freedom. Unborn children have gotten in the way of "women’s liberation" so society says they are subhuman to justify taking their lives.
In April of this year, I visited Washington, DC; while there, I toured the Holocaust Memorial Museum. At the beginning of the tour there was a quote on the wall from General Dwight Eisenhower. He said,
The things I saw beggar description... The visual evidence and verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were... overpowering... I made the visit deliberately in order to be in a position to give first hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to ‘propaganda.’
This quote spoke volumes to me about the power of visuals in communicating the unimaginable horror of abortion to our culture. Also in the museum there was a display designated to informing people about the Nazis’ euthanasia program. It said, “The Nazis regarded physically and mentally disabled persons as ‘lives unworthy of life.’” This position is strikingly similar to our modern culture’s justification of abortion and euthanasia based on a “quality of life” perspective. Those who do not understand the comparable nature of abortion and the Holocaust do not fully understand abortion. That is not to say the two atrocities are identical. In fact, the whole idea behind a comparison is that there are similarities as well as differences.
Pope Pius XII once stated that "the sin of the [20th] century is the loss of the sense of sin."[3] Indeed that is a tragedy of our times; that loss of the sense of sin readily applies to abortion. Our society calls bad “good” and killing “choice.” Showing the ugliness of abortion restores the sense of sin to this issue. I have come face-to-face with the brokenness abortion has caused in my years of encountering the wounded; but we maintain the hurt when we deny the sin. Those who have unresolved guilt may experience hurt upon being confronted with the truth of abortion; but that pain is because of the act of abortion, not the pictures of it. Those people need healing, but healing only comes when there is forgiveness. And forgiveness only comes when there is repentance. And repentance only comes when there is an acknowledgement of sin.
Coming face-to-face with the sin of abortion can be upsetting to a culture that has accepted the wrongdoing. But tension isn’t created by GAP. Tension is exposed by GAP. In his Letter from Birmingham Jail, Dr. King said,
...we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with.
Over half of all abortions on Canadian residents are performed on women between the ages of 20 and 29.[4] Almost 20% are performed on 15–19-year-olds.[5] The majority of abortions are therefore occurring amongst high-school- and university-age women. Although everyone in society needs to be reached, this group especially does. When a woman is unexpectedly pregnant, she faces the real and immediate concerns that her pregnancy brings. Such concerns often include: being kicked out of home, being abandoned by her boyfriend or husband, having to put her career on hold, stopping or lessening her education plans. She balances those concerns with the possibility of abortion, which the culture has told her is her “choice” and a “right.” Many women, then, opt for getting help out of their pregnancy (abortion) instead of help through their pregnancy (crisis pregnancy centres: CPCs).[6] In fact, according to Focus on the Family’s newsletter HeartLink, “less than 10 percent of the clients darkening the doors of pregnancy care centers nationwide were abortion-minded...”[7] If abortion appears better than maintaining the pregnancy, one doesn’t expect that shocking statistic to change much. GAP redefines the choice of abortion so that the act itself is more horrific than the challenges of an unplanned pregnancy.
Not only are there many reasons for this display, many good fruits have resulted from it. Here is but a sample of these fruits:
Last fall, our affiliate, The Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR), did a GAP display at Citrus College in Glendora, California. My colleague Lois reported,
...we had two confirmed babies saved as a result of our display. Both students approached Chris Stevens, our sponsor... One student told him that she had visited Planned Parenthood recently and was scheduled to have an abortion. [She told him] ‘After seeing these photos, that is an appointment I can cancel. I am having a child.’ The second pregnant student told Chris that family and friends have been pressuring her to ‘consider abortion as an option. I now know that it is not. I love myself and my child.’
When GAP was at the University of Tennessee, several babies were saved. Here is what CBR reported:
...At a Crisis Pregnancy Center in Knoxville, eight students came in for appointments as a direct result of GAP at the University of Tennessee. The director there said that all eight were originally planning to abort their babies. However, 5 had changed their minds strictly from having seen the GAP photos and had decided to carry their babies to term. The other 3 made the decision not to abort after counseling at the center. All 8 babies were saved directly or indirectly from GAP.
CBR also received a promising e-mail about a girl whose mind was changed about abortion. In 1999 she wrote,
I am a student at the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida. I viewed your GAP display a few days ago. I am 19 years old and became pregnant at 15. I gave birth to my beautiful little boy at 16. When I saw your display, my eyes filled immediately with tears. I have always been pro-life, but there was always a question in my mind about what I would do if I became pregnant again before I was through with school and married. I thought to myself that I may have an abortion, as long as it was preformed in the very early stages. My mind has definitely been changed. I believe that if more girls saw these pictures of how developed these unborn babies are, they may think twice before opting to kill it. I never knew that within a few weeks of conception, the baby already has its little arms and legs and fingers and toes.
Another example of the impact of GAP involved a Jewish student at Florida State University who spoke with CBR volunteer and Messianic Jew Sammy. With tears in her eyes, she angrily said, “Do you think this is necessary?!” Sammy replied, “I’m so sorry to have to tell you, yes.” Sammy began to dialogue with this bright, articulate young woman. Eventually, he gently asked her, “Why are you reacting in this manner?” She responded, “I’ve never thought about abortion for me. I’ve always been ‘pro-choice,’ but when I saw these pictures, my mind was changed in an instant! After looking at the display, I could never be pro-choice again.”
In 1998, CBR received a letter from a crisis pregnancy center in State College, Pennsylvania. The CPC reported that the week following GAP they received three calls for post-abortion counselling; the entire year before they only received two calls.
In 2001, CBR reported, "One of our local sponsors at the University of North Carolina GAP e-mailed us this message: 'Our parish priest stopped me on the way into Mass and told me a woman who had seen GAP on the UNC campus spent several hours with him—she had had an abortion, now realized what she had done and was even looking to convert to Catholicism.’"
CCBR helped the pro-life club at The University College of the Cariboo (UCC) to display GAP in March 2004. A woman told pro-life club leader, Natalie, “It wasn’t so much the abortion pictures that changed my mind, it was the comparisons that you made.” Natalie explained the following:
When we (S4L) held the GAP display last semester she took our pamphlets but did not want to talk to any of the volunteers, she just wanted to look at the pictures. She took her time examining each sign, one at a time. She went home that night and thought about the display, and the comparisons that the signs made between well-know[n] atrocities and abortion. She read through the pamphlets and over the last four months she has gone from being pro-choice to pro-life! She is not yet ready to become active in the pro-life movement, but I believe for this woman, it is only a matter of time.
Natalie also reported,
I had a young woman approach me later that day to say that our display changed her mind on abortion. She told me that when she saw the display last semester she was filled with anger. She did not take any pamphlets or talk to any of the volunteers; she just looked at the pictures as she stormed by. That evening when she arrived home she was still fuming about the display and suddenly stopped and asked herself why the GAP display was making her so angry. She shared with me that she is a converted Christian and she began to pray. She also began to read up on abortion and is now pro-life. This young woman told me that if she had become pregnant six months ago she would have had an abortion without a second thought. The GAP display has changed her mind! She said that after what she has seen and learned over the last four months in regards to abortion, she would never, could never, have an abortion.
A student at the University of British Columbia (UBC) joined the pro-life club and got involved because he was so bothered by the pro-abortion students and their attempts to block the GAP display from being seen. A student at the University of Tennessee e-mailed CBR to say, “Actually it was a CBR display that influenced my opinion... or actually solidified my determination to act against abortion.”
Students not only increase their activism, but also the thought and dialogue they give to the issue. I have debated with individuals for hours. I have seen students leave only to return later that day or the next. I have observed a student unable to state any further argument because all of hers had been refuted. I have spoken with a student who began our dialogue extremely angry but who left calm and thoughtful. In March, I did a GAP display at the University of Manitoba where I spoke with a male student who wasn’t strongly pro-abortion but thought it should be a choice for a woman to decide. I used his comment in the context of slavery, to show how what seemed reasonable to him, when associated with abortion, suddenly sounded horrible when associated with slavery. He replied, “Hmm, that’s a good point; I never thought of that; well, you made me think.”
Continue to next page
