Back in 2011, when I was still going to school at U of M, I was walking through the Diag one day and there were a bunch of posters and billboards set up bashing on abortion. There was also a big portion of the project devoted to comparing abortion with genocide (using the Holocaust as an example). The project was set up and displayed by the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform.
Apparently, their main argument for linking abortion and genocide was the fact that there are a lot of "dead victims". One person also pointed out that in both cases a victim is "dehumanized" first. I guess the demonstration wasn't something put on by U of M students, it's one of those traveling shows or exhibits that likes to go from campus to campus (or wherever they think people are having abortions). They also rely a lot on the "shock factor" of using graphic photos to get people to dislike abortion, while comparing it to genocide.
A lot of people that walked by thought the images were too graphic, but the Pro-Life and Genocide Awareness people argue that they were just depicting "what's really going on". Funny, because I don't recall seeing any labels where dates or locations were mentioned. Apparently it's too hard to cite your sources. While yes, it may be considered as part of Freedom Of Speech - I think it's more like force feeding someone than actually expressing your opinion.
Another reason it bothers me that they didn't list where they got their photos from, is because I don't know if those photos are real or not. If you're trying to be bold and drastic, congrats on doing that. But on the other hand, I could easily just get a doll's hand and squirt some red food coloring over it, calling it abortion too. They are also relying on the argument that fetus=human, so killing fetuses=killing humans (according to them).
I'm betting that a lot of other people were offended by the presentation as well. Like, people who had family actually IN the holocaust, or in Darfur, or even people who have had abortions or known someone that has. I bet they didn't find any welcoming arguments here. Some people even accused the Pro-Life people of using "scare tactics" to get their point across. I can kind of see that. They weren't really giving a debate or any proof, they were just presenting aborted fetus photos next to photos of racial crime or lynching.
The boldness and the finger pointing in general that comes with the Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice debate kind of reminds me of the presidential campaign. Each side spends so much time arguing reasons why the other person is wrong or stupid, rather than arguing why their side is the right sight or the right argument. That's like saying, "hey, don't pick that guy because he's a bully, pick me instead". But WHY should I pick you? WHY? Because you're showing me dramatic photos? Because you're giving me hope that you'll change the country one day (eh hem, presidents)?
I'm not going to go into the whole he said, she said, debate right now because I haven't done as much research on the topic as I'd like to before voicing an argument that's actually worth reading. I just wanted to mention this event because I know it upset a lot of people but also drew attention to the debate as well. I don't regard this argument as a legit argument. Just because death is involved in both instances, doesn't mean that abortion has anything to do with genocide. And if you're really that concerned with genocide being so awful then maybe you should act like you give a shit about what's going on in other countries right this minute. Because chances are you aren't even giving them a second glance.
And just as a final thought, take a look at the above picture as it compares war in Cambodia to abortion that supposedly takes place in the U.S. I GUESS people only have abortions because they don't "want" babies. There could be no other reasons why someone might choose that option? Righttttttt. Not. Anyway, just wanted to add that little tidbit on there.
For more reading on the event, I suggest the article "Abortion is not Genocide" by Daniel Chardell. It was published in the Michigan Daily approximately on October 12th, 2011. He had some great arguments, and he uses very intelligent vocabulary.