A post shared by Live Action on Facebook has been inexplicably censored, with the photo blurred and text added, reading, “This photo may be sensitive to some people.” No reason was given, but the image in question is not graphic, nor does it show the body of a preborn baby who was a victim of abortion. It merely depicts the development of a preborn child growing in the womb.
The censorship of pro-life views on social media is nothing new, and is something that Live Action has battled for years. Twitter has suppressed Live Action ads since 2015, while allowing pro-abortion groups to advertise. Other Live Action graphics have been removed from Facebook and called “hate speech,” even though they are not spreading messages of hate.
It’s now indisputable that preborn children are human beings. From the moment of conception, preborn babies have their own unique DNA, distinct from their mothers. Organs begin to form within just two to three weeks, and the baby’s heart is beating as early as 16 days. Brain waves can be detected just a few weeks later, and the baby reacts to touch by six weeks of pregnancy. By 10 weeks, babies suck their thumbs, play, and have their own unique fingerprints.
READ: Abortion facilities have history of lying to women about fetal development
It seems unusual that this information should be controversial and censored. And yet, with no explanation, Facebook has chosen to hide the reality of what preborn children look like in the womb from being easily seen. It is unknown whether Facebook took this action because the images are being used to express a pro-life sentiment: that abortion, without question, ends a human life. The majority of Americans hold pro-life beliefs, but the media skews in favor of abortion — and that bias has also found a home on social media.
Earlier this year, Facebook admitted that it “limit[s] the distribution” of messages they deem to be unpopular, with Facebook’s vice president of video, Fidji Simo, saying:
“… [W]e think there’s a pretty big difference between what is allowed on Facebook and what gets distribution…. We tell our algorithms that this is probably not something we want to see distributed widely…. We actually pop up a module that says, ‘Hey you’re about to share something our fact checker thinks is inaccurate, you may not want to do that.’ That decreases distribution very dramatically, north of 80 percent, that’s very effective at reducing the spread of it.’”
Pro-abortion messages are frequently allowed unchecked, but pro-life views are often censored — and this type of censorship shows no signs of stopping anytime soon.
