Are the pictures fake?

Believe it or not, one of the arguments commonly used by pro-aborts when confronted with graphic images of abortion is... "They're not real!"

I am posting here what I consider to be a comprehensive rebuttal to this blatant denial of (heart-wrenching) truth. I will copy my commentary, unedited, straight from a discussion in the online forum of Facebook (free membership required).

Are the graphic pictures faked?

This question seems to be a recurring point of contention in our abortion debate. Choicers insist on rejecting the pictures of abortion, claiming they are not real and are only a fabricated, deceptive ploy of Lifers to persuade by emotion.

For instance, in the thread titled “Genocide Awareness Project – May 23 and 24” Ciera P (post #25) argues, “Emotion is a powerful tool at promoting severe PTSD [Post Traumatic Stress Disorder] at women who ahve suffered miscarriages. Graphic, insensitive pictures like that have no place in a public place...Using falsified pictures of bloody miscarriages are inappropriate.”

In post #94 of the same thread, S.B. states, “TOM... Listen to me, please. I'm NOT debating what a HEALTHY, IN UTERO, 10 week fetus looks like. If we could reference a healthy 10 week fetus, yes... those pictures are accurate... but UPON REMOVING THE FETUS FROM THE BODY, it will NOT look like that... because the parts would be COMPLETELY destroyed while being removed.”

And again, S.B. insists that, “if I thought the pictures were real I wouldn't discredit them. I'd think they were distasteful, but from my own experience...I knwo that's not what it looks like.” (post #110)

Or, take Amanda Hitchins who has worked at an abortion clinic. In the thread “I am personally against abortion but…” she had this to say, “The surgical abortions end up in a biohazard bag, and literally, i swear on my life, look no different from a heavy period. Without a microscope, there are no identifying features that would make you say "ooh thats a fetus!" as opposed to "thats someones used sanitary pad!” (post #439)

I would really like to put this issue to rest, by starting a new thread.

Here are the reasons why I believe the graphic pictures depicting abortion should be accepted as authentic by Choicer and Lifer alike.

(a) They have been examined by a pathologist and notarized as authentic.

(For those who, like Amanda, go so far as to claim that “if you look closely, all of the signatures are EXACTLY the same, like not a single pen stroke is different, and they're all on the exact same space on the line” [post #441, “I am personally against abortion but…”], I’d invite you to compare these two signatures: Signature 1 and Signature 2. Note, in particular, the difference in spacing between “Abigail” and “Allen,” as well as the shape of the letter ‘A’ in Allen…and…of course, the conspicuously missing, “M.D.”)

(b) The Center for Bioethical Reform is in the process of taking to court a number of pro-aborts who accuse them of photo fraud.

(c) The images bear close resemblance to healthy unborn babies of the same gestational period. Cf. Picture #1, Picture #2, Picture #3, Picture #4

(Just an FYI, the “Week 12” references are actually of 10 week-old babies, since those websites begin counting the baby’s age from the woman’s last menstrual period. Similarly, subtract two weeks from the ‘hands-and-feet’ captions to get the precise age of the fetus.)

(d) If the pictures are fake, why won't NARAL and Planned Parenthood simply expose this "vast pro-life conspiracy" by bringing out the *real* pictures of aborted fetuses?

(e) If the pictures of abortion are fake, is this video footage of an abortion *in progress* also bogus? (First link; Chapter 1 of Choice Blues.)

(f) In addition to the authentication provided by the pathologist whose signature is notarized and referenced in (a), a former abortionist and attorney, Anthony P. Levatino, M.D., J.D., has also given his expert testimony that the pictures found at www.abortionno.com accurately depict aborted babies of stated age.

His letter reads, "I, the undersigned, having performed induced abortions earlier in my career, have examined the photos depicting the aborted human embryos and fetuses used by The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform in their public education projects (www.abortionNO.org). It is my professional opinion that the photos depict aborted human embryos and fetuses and that the depicted aborted human embryos and fetuses are accurately captioned as to age, in weeks since fertilization."

Dr. Levatino’s resume and contact information can be found here.


I have provided six very good reasons to accept the pictures. No doubt, for some, no amount of evidence is sufficient. Amanda and S.B. will surely ask us to rely on their own testimony that a first trimester aborted baby (natural or induced) looks nothing like the pictures.

While I’m positive some early miscarriages and abortions would prove indiscernible, I refuse to believe that arms, legs, hands and toes are “completely destroyed,” shredded, minced, or ground beyond recognition in all (or even most) abortions.

I submit that to hold such a belief is to embrace the same absurd attitude of denial anti-Semites do today with regard to the Holocaust.

The evidence that abortion is an act of violence which destroys a baby through dismemberment and hemorrhaging is, quite frankly, overwhelming.

Choicers should accept the pictures as authentic so that we can move forward and continue to debate abortion while maintaining some semblance of intellectual honesty.