U of C Abortion protests

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Russic

Hanging Jews, hacked up African kids ... you know ... standard pro-life protest images. I don't really have a problem with the showing of fetuses, but I do have a problem when they show unrelated graphic imagery just to get attention.

Ah, that clarifies things considerably. If that is the case, then what pro-lifers are doing is reprehensible. It is a shameless tactic to drum up support for their movement via the most effective method: the appeal to one's emotional sensitivities. In this, pro-lifers are being disingenuous: If abortion is indeed as horrible a crime as they suggest, then they should argue against it on its own demerits. My problem in all of this is the exaggeration that they feel they need to resort to in order to be heard.

I personally find abortion to be tragic and horrible. But there are a lot of horrible things in this world that are not the same as genocide and mass murder.

[flamingreen]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Ah, that clarifies things considerably. If that is the case, then what pro-lifers are doing is reprehensible. It is a shameless tactic to drum up support for their movement via the most effective method: the appeal to one's emotional sensitivities. In this, pro-lifers are being disingenuous: If abortion is indeed as horrible a crime as they suggest, then they should argue against it on its own demerits. My problem in all of this is the exaggeration that they feel they need to resort to in order to be heard.

I personally find abortion to be tragic and horrible. But there are a lot of horrible things in this world that are not the same as genocide and mass murder.

It's not just the imagery they use that is questionable, it's their behaviour as well. Shouting at passer-bys, getting into the faces of people who are trying to ignore their display, complaining to Campus Security at the first signs of a counter protest.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by flamingreen

It's not just the imagery they use that is questionable, it's their behaviour as well. Shouting at passer-bys, getting into the faces of people who are trying to ignore their display, complaining to Campus Security at the first signs of a counter protest.

This is the worst part, I have been harassed by them on 3 separate occasions for nothing more than trying to walk by while ignoring them.

Heres where I stand: I don't care.

Its not an issue that affects me currently, and as such I dont feel that I have a relevant opinion either way. I have an opinion, but until such a time comes as I get a vote or some sort of say in the matter its really not important.

So, when I'm walking past the display listening to my iPod and on my way to get lunch or meet friends at the bar, not only do I not want to see their protest du jour, I dont care what they think.

That is not invitation to scream at me to pay attention to their cause as I'm passing by. Two of the three times I actually dignified them with some semblance of a discussion, realizing that an intelligent discussion wasn't forthcoming I abondoned it.

The third time I simply walked by and muttered:

"I don't care....let them kill babies, babies are disgusting creatures."

I'm not offended by their imagery, I just dont have the time or inclination to argue with these people anymore. See what shocking imagery gets you? Desensitized people within 2 to 3 years.

I cant wait to see what they'll come up with next.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Locke

This is the worst part, I have been harassed by them on 3 separate occasions for nothing more than trying to walk by while ignoring them.

Heres where I stand: I don't care.

Its not an issue that affects me currently, and as such I dont feel that I have a relevant opinion either way. I have an opinion, but until such a time comes as I get a vote or some sort of say in the matter its really not important.

So, when I'm walking past the display listening to my iPod and on my way to get lunch or meet friends at the bar, not only do I not want to see their protest du jour, I dont care what they think.

That is not invitation to scream at me to pay attention to their cause as I'm passing by. Two of the three times I actually dignified them with some semblance of a discussion, realizing that an intelligent discussion wasn't forthcoming I abondoned it.

The third time I simply walked by and muttered:

"I don't care....let them kill babies, babies are disgusting creatures."

I'm not offended by their imagery, I just dont have the time or inclination to argue with these people anymore. See what shocking imagery gets you? Desensitized people within 2 to 3 years.

I cant wait to see what they'll come up with next.

I think the issue of harrassing other students is where the university should have gone after them. There signs whether they are inward or outward could be easily ignored. The harrassmnent by the demonstrators
is what the university should be using to contain the demonstrators.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, you would go with the latter? Personally, I find both the viewing of surgical procedures and committing of graphic slaughter to be offensive. My point in this is that those who find the images objectionable are equally outraged by the implication that pro-lifers attach to them. Abortion is not the same as "killing babies", and this is regardless of whether or not you feel the practice is immoral.

Unless the abortion occurs in the third trimester then it is pretty much a baby. In canada they are legal until the moment of birth. Some crazy pro-choicers want partial birth abortions defended so each side has its crazies.

[joe_mullen]

i'm fully aware that i am quite late in entering the fray, but here it goes. first, for disclosure, i am anti-abortion in my belief, but have come to accept that legally this is not a topic that will ever be changed. that being said, my main annoyance with abortions is that in the majority (i presume) of cases it is an elective medical procedure, but yet it is publicly funded. in spite of my anti-abortion stance, i can see how abortion where the mother is at risk, is a victim of incest or rape, can be argued to be a medically required procedure. however, for other circumstances, abortion is a purely elective procedure for which public funds should not be diverted. thoughts?

also, (totally off topic) in response to claims that UVic is a better university than UofC, some links would be appreciated. according to objective international standards, the UofC is actually superior to UVic (there may be other rankings that refute this)

http://www.topuniversities.com/world.../fullrankings/

[LGA]

I'm a pro-choice person myself and enjoy a good debate with a rational pro-lifer. I, however, will punch anyone in the face if they run up to me and yell "Abortion is murder! If you support abortions than you would've supported the holocaust" Seriously, I will curb stomp someone if they ever do that to me again.

What really irritates me about these "pro-lifers" is that they often bring children along to their protests, do these kids even know what they are doing? If anyone is doing anything Nazi related it's these adults bringing young impressionable children along to these events to help protest.

Thankfully, aside from the U of C Abortion protestors, a lot of pro-lifers are reasonable people that will rationally argue their points without having to resort to ridiculous comparisons.

I agree with whoever said that the U of C pro-lifers are to regular pro-lifers as PETA is to vegetarians.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

i'm fully aware that i am quite late in entering the fray, but here it goes. first, for disclosure, i am anti-abortion in my belief, but have come to accept that legally this is not a topic that will ever be changed. that being said, my main annoyance with abortions is that in the majority (i presume) of cases it is an elective medical procedure, but yet it is publicly funded. in spite of my anti-abortion stance, i can see how abortion where the mother is at risk, is a victim of incest or rape, can be argued to be a medically required procedure. however, for other circumstances, abortion is a purely elective procedure for which public funds should not be diverted. thoughts?

Why public funding? Because the health of the mother is at stake. If you don't provide access to medical abortions, many women will resort to back alley coat hanger abortions / ingestion of motor oil / boyfriend's fist to uterus....etc. which leads to serious morbidity/mortality.

Not to mention that public funding supporting the basic pillar of democracy - choice - is what makes us a 1st world nation.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Why public funding? Because the health of the mother is at stake. If you don't provide access to medical abortions, many women will resort to back alley coat hanger abortions / ingestion of motor oil / boyfriend's fist to uterus....etc. which leads to serious morbidity/mortality.

Not to mention that public funding supporting the basic pillar of democracy - choice - is what makes us a 1st world nation.

fair enough, it would be interesting to see the cost benefit of publicly funding abortions (i assume this type of study may already exist). as for the health of the mother being at stake, that is debatable. abortions are not a risk free procedure (not arguing that coat hanger abortions are) either. however, i would argue that in the majority of cases, the health of the mother is not the main motivating factor in this "choice". i do not mean to get in a pro life vs choice arguement. i would simply argue that this choice is in essence an elective procedure in the majority of cases. it is my understanding (correct me if i'm wrong), the canada health act covers medically required services and not elective ones, thus, the majority of abortions should not be covered through public funds.

i'm not arguing that choice is a pillar of democracy, but by making abortion a choice, does it not then by definition make abortion an elective procedure

[HOZ]

What are people's opinions on this?

Over the past few weeks, Calgary police have been turning up at the homes of anti-abortion university students, charging them with trespassing on the very campus where they are enrolled in classes. On Monday, members of Campus Pro-Life visited the University of Calgary once more, to announce that the charges would not stop them from continuing their abortion awareness campaign.
Read the rest in the POST

A bit heavy handed don't you think?

I apologize if this has already been discussed. I did not go through the whole thread.

Getting a ticket is heavy handed? Oh jeez.

[Russic]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Getting a ticket is heavy handed? Oh jeez.

Exactly, this isn't the gestapo. They were told to play within the rules or they'd be ticketed. They chose not to and now have to pay the piper. This is a lot like the off-leash dog thread ... only with more holocaust references.

[JoseCuervo]

There was a Pro-Life thing at the University of Lethbridge Yesterday, we tried to dress up as fetus's and disrupt things but the security was tight and we didnt make it in the door.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Getting a ticket is heavy handed? Oh jeez.

Having police come to your door to hand it to you in person is.

The charges -- offering a maximum penalty of a $2,000 fine -- make good on a threat made by administrators in November.

That is a lot more than a ticket.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

fair enough, it would be interesting to see the cost benefit of publicly funding abortions

One study has been done by an econmist out of the university of chicago. Stephan Levit. He has a book freakanomcis. He found that abotions end up reducing crime. It is a US based study but the gist and logic of it was that the people most likely to have an abortion were poor and single mothers and poor and single mothers children are of a higher likelyhood of being criminals.

I don't support abortion in anyway but this study did show an interesting side benifit and is worth looking into by both sides of the debate

[Rathji]

So lets recap here:

1. Student group applies for permission to hold this even as they do every year

2. University explains the rules about holding the event, as they do every year.

3. The student group disobeys the rules in a major fashion.

4. The university presses charges, and it is decided that the penalty is the maximum amount.

5. Instead of hoping that the tickets magically get paid sitting on some desk, they deliver them to the people being charged with the offenses.

6. The people being charged, have every right to defend themselves by appearing in court and forcing the University to prove that they did break the rules.

Yep, everything seems fine here.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Rathji

So lets recap here:

1. Student group applies for permission to hold this even as they do every year

2. University explains the rules about holding the event, as they do every year.

3. The student group disobeys the rules in a major fashion.

4. The university presses charges, and it is decided that the penalty is the maximum amount.

5. Instead of hoping that the tickets magically get paid sitting on some desk, they deliver them to the people being charged with the offenses.

6. The people being charged, have every right to defend themselves by appearing in court and forcing the University to prove that they did break the rules.

Yep, everything seems fine here.

Would you be so flippant if this happened to a group you agreed with?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Would you be so flippant if this happened to a group you agreed with?

Would you consider it heavy-handed if the cops were handing out tickets to members of CFfGLTR (Communist Feminists for Gay/Lesbian/Transgendered Rights?

Originally Posted by HOZ

Having police come to your door to hand it to you in person is.

The charges -- offering a maximum penalty of a $2,000 fine -- make good on a threat made by administrators in November.

That is a lot more than a ticket.

Umm... isn't that a good way to get a ticket to someone? Actually going to the place they live to giving it to them?

Or should the police stake-out the university or places they hangout hoping to come across them. All this for a ticket.

Also, you can be served a summons at your house for anything- speeding, spitting, not wearing your seatbelt, etc, etc.

[Boblobla]

I couldn't be happier that these people got tickets. I remember these displays from when I was at the University and I hated how people would yell at me when I was walking past.