It's tough to go on for an entire paragraph with such nonstop moral confusion. In fact, just about everything in the paragraph you just read was either wrong or deeply morally misguided. First of all, third-trimester abortions really aren't controversial. That is why, overwhelmingly, people reject them as morally unacceptable cold-blooded murder. Nor are the doctors who perform them courageous. It takes no courage to dismember a developed human fetus that is trapped in the womb and can't fight back. Nor is it "moving" to celebrate child murder. Nor is it "compassionate." It is simply twisted.
"Reviews: According to the Hollywood Reporter, 'Whether one is pro-life, pro-choice or without opinion on the issue, After Tiller provides personal insight into a heart-wrenching, complex reality. The film does not pretend to be an answer to the abortion controversy but rather a presentation of the people who are demonized, correctly or incorrectly, for their actions.'”
Interesting, isn't it? The LGBTQIA Office has included a set of reviews of the pro-abortion film. This one, by the Hollywood Reporter, actually suggests that the film is morally neutral on the issue of late term abortion. It isn't. This false characterization requires a substantial obfuscation. This is accomplished by characterizing a very simple issue as a "complex reality." It really isn't. Regardless of one’s position on early term abortion, most people who are morally developed know that it is wrong to kill a developed human fetus.
"Additionally, Variety states, 'Martha Shane and Lana Wilson manage a rare feat in After Tiller, making a calm, humanist documentary about a hot-button topic …Well contextualized and sensitively shot with extraordinary access, the pic reflects the personal, moral and ethical struggles of the doctors as well as their patients, and deserves the widest possible audience.'"
Sensitively shot to depict the ethical struggle of the doctor? Does it have a shot of the little one struggling while he (or she) is being torn limb from limb by the "struggling" abortionist? I agree it deserves a wide audience. Too bad 55 million potential viewers have been aborted and won't be there for the showing.
"And, Movie City News says, 'A+! A terrific documentary that handles sensitively this controversial and heated topic.'"
Actually, I don't think the topic is heated at all. It is cold. It is heartless advocacy of cold-blooded murder. And your taxpayer dollars are going to support it. Amy Schlag, Program Coordinator of the LGBTQIA Resource Office and UNCW Instructor of Women's Studies, left her office public phone number at the bottom of the mass email she sent promoting this event. This number is published publicly on the UNCW web page. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate for pro-lifers to use it to express their concerns. If you call, please be more compassionate than she is. Thankfully, that won’t be difficult.
And, while you’re at it, email UNCW Chancellor Gary Miller at email@example.com. Ask him what LGBTQIA stands for. Is it “Leveraging Government Budgets To Quietly Increase Abortion?” If not, then why does the university refuse to fund the other side of the issue?
And, more importantly, ask Gary Miller if anyone employed by the LGBTQIA Resource Office is splitting time working for Planned Parenthood? I already know the answer. I bet you do, too.
...To be continued.