Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school [View all]pnwmom
(110,226 posts)231. What is so bad about the "blown up images"? I showed the same basic pictures,
in book form, to my 4 year old when I was pregnant. It's hard to imagine that any high school student wouldn't have seen them in some class along the way.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
267 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school [View all]
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
OP
I looked at the video and my main concerns are the editorializing, false info and the enlarged photo
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#107
According to the article it was based on a school club doing what other clubs did
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
#29
How many school clubs put plastic replicas of body parts in the lunchroom at noontime?
jmowreader
Mar 2014
#39
If the school let them have a club than the rules should be the same:
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
#44
It would be easy to avoid a display in the room you describe if the tables were on the opposite
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#139
Reading that was a waste of time. Your article doesn't say anything about what is taught
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#254
These are 14 - 18 year old "children" who have almost certainly seen picture of fetuses before.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#151
If it is a replica of an embryo or fetus, there is nothing disgusting about it.
Chemisse
Mar 2014
#116
I watched the whole video. There were just the standard photos of fetuses at various
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#152
So should the "gun club" be allowed to bring in demonstrations of their stuff?
madinmaryland
Mar 2014
#57
So guns = babies? Or do we just like to silence dissenting views? (nt)
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
#60
It is about a school sanctioned club having the same rights other clubs have
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
#73
It is absolutely about this issue. It's an anti-choice club, which by definition has a political
cui bono
Mar 2014
#191
Even if it's not religious based, though in all probability it is but we don't know that for a fact,
cui bono
Mar 2014
#207
Finally, someone who's being honest. This isn't really about adults thinking images
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#156
There is no silencing of dissent. The issue is you have adults (18) who are finishing up
madinmaryland
Mar 2014
#99
The people in the anti-abortion club say other groups were allowed to set up displays
jmowreader
Mar 2014
#141
I assume you're not really comparing a fetus to a pile of human waste, are you? nt
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#26
When I was at school, our Biology teacher knitted a model of the alimentary canal...
LeftishBrit
Mar 2014
#68
How are condoms a different matter? This type display, with "blown up images" is meant to not only
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#52
Can you really not distinguish between those two things? Do I have to quote Voltaire at you? N.T.
Donald Ian Rankin
Mar 2014
#241
Cafeterias are large, noisy places with four walls. I don't think it needs to be in anyone's face.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#42
I volunteer for Planned parenthood. I know this bullshit. Sell it somewhere else.
HERVEPA
Mar 2014
#93
After a quick look, lies. "Week 4, the baby's heart has a steady beat"? BS.
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#96
Don't you think that there is a better way to "promote the use of birth control"?
blueamy66
Mar 2014
#215
Okay, if the students have seen them already, why show them again? In the cafeteria?
blueamy66
Mar 2014
#233
Well, people going to Catholic school know that they don't have the same rights.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#237
Let's pretend there is a White Power club. Should they be allowed to have displays in the cafeteria?
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#252
There should be exceptions for hate material, just as there are for adults in the workplace.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#256
Ah, so you subjectively decide it is hate speech and so it is ok to deny them the right to free
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#259
Maybe that's the problem. You're reading much more into it than the typical middle school student.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#41
And the answer to a polite society is to give people safe spaces where they aren't confronted
KittyWampus
Mar 2014
#74
I don't think fetuses are disgusting, as some people here have said. Is that what you think, too?
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#76
Good for you. Some of us do not want to be confronted with them while eating. GET IT?
KittyWampus
Mar 2014
#86
The OP says the girl was 17. Do you really think, based on your experience with adolescents,
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#137
Kids at that school are 14-18. Are you saying the person who made the display wasn't traumatized so
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#143
In my husband's 8th grade class of 30, there were 4 pregnancies. I think that by the time
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#145
Having worked a lot in reproductive health, including managing a Family Planning clinic, I agree
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#192
"blown-up images of fetuses and real- life sized fetus models". This is what I have an issue with
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#48
As an author I read recently put it on bringing up controversial topics in inappropriate settings :
Brigid
Mar 2014
#50
Because partents use their children like cannon fodder in a religous war. nt
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#150
Maybe another student should set up a table displaying condoms and other forms of B.C.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#63
Supporting free speech means supporting the right to express unpopular opinions.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#71
If they accidentally see a fetus, they can turn their faces away. As a former child who once
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#81
This club can find other graphics to advertise their existence. And you've already been told
KittyWampus
Mar 2014
#84
If you don't want to look at a fetus while you're eating, then take a seat away from the table.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#88
The girl was at the table the school allowed her, until the school reacted to complaints.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#224
Then you are ok with blown up graphic images of dead kids via the anti-war club.
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#83
No, I'm talking generic high school cafeteria. They're all large spaces with four walls.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#91
Enlarged graphic photos of Abu Ghraib and blown up kids are ok for cafeteria viewing.
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#100
I came back to this thread to post the exact same thing. Would an anti-war club
KittyWampus
Mar 2014
#95
"I think a high school anti-war club should be able to display whatever it wants to."
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#103
I would have absolutely no problem with blown up images or plastic replicas of compost.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#82
People.. this board included.. are only interested in free speech when its theirs
1awake
Mar 2014
#106
If the info they gave was accurate, not lies like "Week 4, the baby's heart has a steady beat"
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#110
Of course it is. What do you think free speech means? Only the cool kids get a table? n/t
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#219
No. In a public school free speech is not about allowing propaganda that is a bunch of lies
cui bono
Mar 2014
#189
I didn't see anything in the article about inaccurate information. Did you? n/t
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#221
Ok, so have the principal tell her she is off by a week and change the wording
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
#117
I do not have access to where the images came from, nor could I clearly see
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#121
Week 5 "The brain, spinal cord, and heart begin to develop." There's no way it could beat at 4 weeks
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#129
I didn't look that closely at them all, but giving inaccurate false "info" is wrong.
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#193
I have trouble seeing what the fuss is about, unless it's that people feel that this threatens
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#113
Did you look at the display? What is so disturbing about promoting lies to teens about reproduction
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#115
Why do you think I'm trying to limit YOUR freedom of speech? Does disagreeing with you
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#119
"So if you object to the content of her speech -- her anti-abortion views -- then you are objecting
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#122
You are objecting to her table being there because you're objecting to what she's saying.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#124
Except the written stuff by the embryonic/fetal display gives incorrect and misleading information.
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#123
The pix of fetus-dollies I've seen are not that true-to-life for the first 4 months....
Hekate
Mar 2014
#127
Couldn't they do both? I'm all for more birth control instruction/availability in the schools.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#138
PP makes the RW froth at the mouth because tho less than 5% of what they do ...
Hekate
Mar 2014
#208
Then the anti-war group should be allowed to show bloody bodies, dead children and maybe
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#140
lol - science? Right because we know the pro-life groups are pro-science, besides what do you
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#146
Again, what do you think the pics show that they are displaying? (nt)
The Straight Story
Mar 2014
#148
in the interest of science - i should be allowed to display amputations from cluster munitions...
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#155
If it's okay to show pictures of war torn bodies, then you would have to approve pictures
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#174
Yes, of course, I would approve pictures of bloody fetuses, that's exactly where your logic goes
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#197
No, the equivalent to THAT would be if the girl were trying to show pictures of
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#168
The pictures of the fetuses are non-violent. I think the best way to be equitable
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#171
You can just show the photos of those killed & injure by pro-lifers, nothing violent about that and
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#179
Did you watch the video? If anything, they looked too Disney. Not like dead fetuses.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#185
No. I was agreeing with you about having posters of the victims of anti-abortion zealots.
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#227
Seriously. What the fuck is up with people defending this anti-choice political propaganda
cui bono
Mar 2014
#177
I can't quite tell from the article if she was banned from having any table at all,
petronius
Mar 2014
#181
How the school defines 'gory' and/or 'shock-content' doesn't really affect my
petronius
Mar 2014
#199
Threatens establishment clause of bill of rights. Cafeteria is not an optional place -
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#194
I suspect that would apply to school-sponsored religious activities, but all
petronius
Mar 2014
#200
but by that logic, they could hang prayers all over cafeteria and have a group grace each lunch....
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#201
not during normal school hours while involving the entire student population
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#203
I do think you're mistaken, and it's not about "leading the cafeteria in grace" or doing things
petronius
Mar 2014
#206
yikes, i did not think cafeteria time counted strictly as non-instructional time since students
pragmatic_dem
Mar 2014
#266
Rather than "educate" at lunch, let the Health or whatever teacher give accurate info in class
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#247
Unless you're one of those progressives who think free speech is only for some people,
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#248
There are rules in schools that go beyond the outside world. Are you saying limiting displays in
uppityperson
Mar 2014
#249
There was a 9 year old Florida boy who sued after they accidentally broke his arm
pnwmom
Mar 2014
#260
I read the subject line and wondered, 'Why are they serving fetuses for lunch?'
valerief
Mar 2014
#229