They certainly were nothing new. Life magazine did a photo series on fetal development around 1970; we studied it in Biology in high school in the mid-70s; and Time (and I think National Geographic) have done photo essays on the subject in the past two years. I agree with you that it's irrelevant -- they're meant to shock, not inform -- but they really aren't shocking. If anything, I'd say they support my position. The 11 week images are just masses of undifferentiated tissue. They could be frogs or anything; they're certainly not human.

fetish, you've brought up another issue, which drifts even farther off-topic: What rights do non-sentient beings have? I don't believe the Bible is the word of God, so I don't believe that man was given dominion over the beasts. I believe that we're care-takers for the planet and that we have responsibilities toward the less-intelligent creatures, but not rights over them.

That doesn't mean we can't eat meat. Humans are omnivorous, and I, in particular, am carnivorous. It does mean we shouldn't mistreat our meat animals...or our pets.