Introduction

It has long been a major controversy within the broader pro-life movement: the use of graphic abortion
victim imagery when engaging a culture that has become desensitized to the shedding of innocent
blood. Over the decades, much of the pro-life movement has adopted a “big tent” structure, shifting
away from a gospel-centered and church-driven model. In many cases, this has led organizations and
churches alike to partner with secular groups and political coalitions under the assumption that “the
enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

The abortion abolitionist movement, however, differs fundamentally from the modern pro-life movement
in both its message and its foundation. While the pro-life movement has often focused primarily on
legislation, political strategy, incremental restrictions, and appealing to public opinion, abolitionists
argue that abortion must be addressed first and foremost as sin before God and as the unjust murder
of innocent children.

Abolitionists reject incrementalism and instead call for the immediate and total abolition of abortion
without exception or compromise. More importantly, abolitionists believe the Church, not political
institutions or secular organizations, is meant to lead the fight against abortion through the
proclamation of the Gospel, public repentance, and obedience to God’s commands.

 

The Biblical Foundation

It is from this conviction that abolitionists defend the use of graphic abortion imagery.
Ephesians 5:11 commands believers to:

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.”

Paul wrote these words to the church in Ephesus as an exhortation to walk in love while standing firmly
against the evils of their age under the Roman Empire. In the early church, it was not uncommon for
infants to be abandoned and left to die. The response of Christians was not silence or avoidance, but
rescue. They intervened on behalf of those being led to death.

We see a similar reality in the modern age. Instead of hearing the cries of dying children in the streets,
their deaths take place behind closed doors, hidden from public view. Because of this, Christians have
been given an opportunity, and an obligation, to be a voice for those who cannot speak for
themselves.

Too often, however, the humanity and victimhood of the child are minimized while the conversation
centers exclusively on the circumstances of the mother.
As Matt Trewhella has said:

“If their death is public policy, their suffering must be publicly displayed.”

For abolitionists, the use of graphic imagery is therefore not rooted in shock for its own sake, nor is it
merely a political tactic. It is an act of obedience to God’s command to expose evil in an age marked by
moral blindness and a culture of death.

 

Historical Precedent for Graphic Imagery

Throughout history, graphic imagery has often been used to expose cultural evil.

A Local Example: Emmett Till

One example took place right here in Chicago with the murder of 14-year-old Emmett Till.
In 1955, during a trip to Mississippi, Till was accused of whistling at a white woman.

On August 28, he
was kidnapped, brutally beaten, strangled, shot, and thrown into the Tallahatchie River with a 75-pound
cotton gin fan tied around his neck.

After his body was recovered, Emmett Till’s mother made the decision to hold an open-casket funeral
so the world could witness the brutality inflicted upon her son.

The graphic display of his body forced
the public to confront an evil many had ignored or minimized. Rather than hiding the horror, she
exposed it so the truth could not be denied.

(Emmet's mother Mamie and her fiancé Gene Mobley at their son's funeral)

 

A Well-Known Example: The Holocaust

Another example came at the end of World War II, when the world was confronted with the atrocities
committed by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime.

As Allied forces liberated concentration camps, the public was made to witness the carnage left behind.
Images and firsthand accounts of mass graves, emaciated prisoners, and extermination camps
shattered much of the propaganda that had hidden the true nature of the regime.

The horror people witnessed forced society to confront the reality of what had been tolerated and
ignored. Evil was not defeated by hiding its victims from public view, but by exposing what had been
done to them.

(German people being forced to walk through the carnage of the holocaust)

 

The Modern Age

In our own day, abolitionists believe Christians have the same obligation to expose evil rather than
conceal it. Scripture does not call believers to protect society from uncomfortable truths, but to confront
darkness with truth.

Until our culture sees the evil it is perpetrating, until the Church recognizes the evil it has tolerated, and
until people recognize their need for Christ, we will not see the abolition of abortion.

This is why many abortion abolitionists believe these images must be shown. Evil that remains hidden
is rarely challenged. But when darkness is exposed, people are forced to reckon with what they would
otherwise prefer not to see.

 (Baby murdered by abortion)

In Conclusion

The use of graphic abortion imagery will likely remain controversial. Yet throughout history, societies
have often refused to confront evil until its victims were made visible.

Whether through the open casket of Emmett Till, the liberation of concentration camps in Europe, or
the exposure of other historic injustices, public confrontation with suffering has frequently awakened
the conscience of a culture that had grown blind to evil.

For abolitionists, exposing the reality of abortion is not ultimately about provocation or political
strategy. It is about truth, obedience, and refusing to allow the victims of injustice to remain hidden
behind closed doors.