Free Speech on Campus

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, I have been the Vice President of Lifeline.

Everyone is welcome to google my name to see how much I was involved.

I tended to do most of the research for the group, and though I am not currently serving on their exec, I assist in an advisory capacity when requested by the current president.

You can even check up on the current president. The first name is no coincidence.

Tearing down posters is not violence.

Not according to Ryan Marshall, the AMS president at the time, who testified that at the trial. You may not have believed your actions to be violent, but again, put the shoe on the other foot. Suppose I wanted to try to break your white pro-choice banners? Would you not construe such an act as violent?

You folks should have put your huge, graphic images in a room somewhere where students could go and look at them if they wanted to.

So shutter us away in a corner where no one will see them? That's very fair.

Also, where would we put them? We couldn't go in the AMS building, now could we, where all the other clubs go to hold meetings of this sort.

Our side would have picketed to be sure, but we wouldn't have prevented anyone from seeing them.

Why rip down the posters, unless you want to prevent people from seeing them? Why try to evict all students who dare to come close to the signs? Why try to cover up the display with your white banners, so much so, that the campus security has to enforce a barrier to make sure people see our display.

Why do you campaign to keep GAP off our campus?

Your sole goal has been to prevent people from seeing these pictures, because the pictures are effective in changing people's beliefs on abortion.

Now, I have no problems with your counterprotests, but when you bring a bullhorn to shout us down, how are you respecting our rights to be on campus, and to put our display where other people will see them.

And by the way, we put up warning signs, so that people who do not want to see the display do not have to walk by them, as a courtesy.

So we are not forcing the pictures on anyone.

[Ben Kenobi]

Joncha, I know you are the far most immature person I have ever met here

Gian:

**** off.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Gian:

F*ck off.

My thoughts exactly.

[Giancarlo]

**** off? Is that all you can say? I'm trying to defend your right to freedom of speech. I don't like you, BK.. and I don't like attitude.. but if you want me to "**** off", fine.

[Ben Kenobi]

**** off? Is that all you can say? I'm trying to defend your right to freedom of speech. I don't like you, BK.. and I don't like attitude.. but if you want me to "**** off", fine.

I don't need that kind of **** to defend my points, and I'm trying to keep that **** out of here.

[Provost Harrison]

It's not a fair way to put things Ben Kenobi, it's pure sensationalism. These foetuses have a very low state of neurological development. Much less than cattle or pigs. So go and show pictures of abattoirs as well if you feel that strongly...

[lightblue]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So all protests must have prior notice before they are conducted?

As far as i know you have to have police permission before holding any kind of demonstration, at least here in the U.K. (lots of hassle with animal rights people over the last few years).

Obviously I don't know the Canadian law, but I am guessing it'll be similar.

[mrmitchell]

Comparisions between the victims of the holocaust and the victims of abortion makes us hatemongers?

Ben, this is why the abortion debate never advances. You've got blind extremists (I should add the "on both sides" qualifier) invoking Godwin's Law left and right, and the vast majority of people who would see it as immoral instead just think of those crazy ultra-fundies that were out with a banner of aborted fetus pictures.

Instead, both sides need to take a step back, look at all the facts again, and approach the issue much less explosively. Otherwise things will never get done.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Sadly, the folks on our campus want to prevent others from seeing the same.

Why would anyone want to see it? Why not show pictures of a heart transplant and declare it bad because it's gross? If you're argument is anything other than gross=bad, then there is no point to show the pictures. Why not approach it in a way that doesn't make your group look like hatemongering bigots?

[OzzyKP]

The issue here isn't whether Ben's posters were effective or proper or appealing to look at, the issue is whether he had a right to put them up.

Certainly he did.

That's what free speech is about, and the reason these protections exist. A law protecting free speech isn't needed to protect speech that everyone agrees with. Its needed to protect controversial speech.

Also, I never knew Ben and John went to school together. Facinating.

I would urge y'all to watch that video. It had some similar stories. Like a College Republican at Cal Poly in California whose flyer advertising an upcoming speaker was torn down. The flyer had the title of the book their speaker had written, named something like "Leaving the Plantation" (it was written by a black author). The people who tore it down said it was offensive and called the police on him. He was brought up on charges at the school and made to write letters of apology for putting up that flyer and told to take sensitivity training. He refused and fought the issue. (there was more, you need to watch it)

[Asher]

The issue here isn't whether Ben's posters were effective or proper or appealing to look at, the issue is whether he had a right to put them up.

Certainly he did.

So you also think people would have a right to put up huge billboards with hardcore pornography on them?

Graphic images in either case.

[OzzyKP]

I don't think thats a fair comparison.

See how you like this one, when visiting Sacramento recently there was a large billboard advertising some gay dating line, or phone sex line or something, and it showed two beefy men embracing. Now I'm all in favor of gay rights, but that big billboard wasn't a welcome image for me.

Of course they have an absolute right to put it up. I've got a right to avert my eyes.

Should animal rights activists show images of factory farms? Should anyone show images of the Houlocaust? Do we dare present people with the awful truth?

[Asher]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I don't think thats a fair comparison.

It is absolutely fair. Let's say it was for a women's rights groups protesting how pornography exploits women.

[GePap]

This is always such a silly issue.

Certainly there are plenty of clueless raidal lefties at universities who think acitng like an ass makes them an intellectual, and university admins. more interested in getting rid of a problem than enduring the ire of these morons making a nuicense of themselves, but in the end the righties get to move on and thrive.

[Ben Kenobi]

It's not a fair way to put things Ben Kenobi, it's pure sensationalism. These foetuses have a very low state of neurological development. Much less than cattle or pigs. So go and show pictures of abattoirs as well if you feel that strongly...

And that's the whole point. If we truly believe that these children are less developed than pigs or animals, then it should be no different then from showing a slaughterhouse.

Sensational? Only because people begin to see the opposite, that these are children, that look like children and not animals.

So don't give me that. If university students are mature enough to have an abortion, then they are also mature enough to see pictures depicting one.