1
   

Canadian liberal college students against freedom

 
 
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:19 am
I am sure there was a thread that I wanted to post this into, but couldn't find it.
______________________________________________________

Carleton students bar anti-abortion groups
Denied funding, space on campus

Katie Rook, National Post; with files from CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, December 07, 2006

Carleton University's student council has voted to deny funding to campus anti-abortion groups.

A carefully worded policy amendment, passed on Tuesday night during a council meeting, also bars student groups with anti-choice mandates from council-managed spaces. "What we were speaking out against is those anti-choice behaviours that the majority of students feel are very discriminatory towards women," said Shawn Menard, president of Carleton University Students' Association (CUSA).

"Where we draw the line in terms of anti-choice is that anti-choice is a stance that aims to limit or remove a woman's right to choose her best option in the case of pregnancy.

"Anti-choice often wishes to use the law to force women to bring unwanted pregnancy to term and they usually advocate for the recriminalization of abortion or a return to the board-granted abortion process," he said, adding the students' association did not want to fund that kind of activity.

Mr. Menard denied the amendment targeted specific campus groups, but council was widely criticized last week when Carleton Lifeline, a fledgling student group identifying itself as pro-life, claimed such a policy amendment was discriminatory.

The newly approved policy reads: "CUSA further affirms that actions such as campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to limit or remove a woman's options in the event of pregnancy will not be supported."

The amendment passed by a vote of 26-5.

Don Hutchinson, general legal counsel for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, was one of about 150 people who attended Tuesday night's debate and said council failed to distinguish between anti-choice and pro-life.

"Basically, [Carleton Lifeline is] being told they can be pro-life, but they can never speak out and suggest that Canada should have an abortion law which the Supreme Court of Canada has said is a decision to be made by Parliament," Mr. Hutchinson said. "It is fair to say abide by [council] rules, but those rules have to be fair and equal in their treatment of everyone, and it's not fair and equal to single out groups that hold a position that is open to free discussion in our society and to say that free discussion is not permitted on a university campus."

The faith-based advocacy group is threatening to take CUSA to court over the policy, contemplating seeking a court injunction to block the student association policy from being implemented.

The Evangelical Fellowship has also offered legal representation to Carleton Lifeline should it launch a human rights complaint against CUSA. Carleton Lifeline had previously claimed their rights to freedom of speech under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms were being infringed.

Martha Jackman, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Ottawa, questioned how the Charter might be relevant to the controversy.

"Essentially, a claim that a Charter right has been breached can only be brought against an entity that is part of the government, for the purposes of the Charter: The government, the state, the government or its delegates," Prof. Jackman said. "Clearly the Carleton student association is not government. They are a private student organization, but the question can still be raised is Carleton University the government or a government delegate?"

*continued*

Another case of freedom of speech for me, but not so much for you? I wonder what the uproar would have been like if it was funding for a liberal driven organization was being denied?

Any thoughts from our resident Canuckians?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,234 • Replies: 54
No top replies

 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:21 am
Not a Canuckian, but I can easily see their point -

They don't want to fund an organization which seeks to criminalize and harass the student body of the school. How tough is that to understand?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:21 am
"The newly approved policy reads: "CUSA further affirms that actions such as campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to limit or remove a woman's options in the event of pregnancy will not be supported."

Well, would not an option be to NOT have an abortion?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:22 am
woiyo wrote:
"The newly approved policy reads: "CUSA further affirms that actions such as campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to limit or remove a woman's options in the event of pregnancy will not be supported."

Well, would not an option be to NOT have an abortion?


Yes, that is an option. That's what 'pro-choice' means. That you have a choice.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:49 am
i'm not one to wave the flag, but damn, i'm proud to be a canadian at this moment
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:50 am
I think it is much more likely that these students are New Democrats, rather than Liberals--though, you never can tell. I would say the odds are good that they ain't Conservatives.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:51 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
woiyo wrote:
"The newly approved policy reads: "CUSA further affirms that actions such as campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to limit or remove a woman's options in the event of pregnancy will not be supported."

Well, would not an option be to NOT have an abortion?


Yes, that is an option. That's what 'pro-choice' means. That you have a choice.

Cycloptichorn


Then why might they prohibit the voices of the option to have a child not be heard?
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:52 am
their communists set, godless pinko socialist freaks :wink:
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 11:54 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Not a Canuckian, but I can easily see their point -

They don't want to fund an organization which seeks to criminalize and harass the student body of the school. How tough is that to understand?

Cycloptichorn


Where does it say the a pro-abortion group seeks to criminalize and harrass the student body? No "group" is mentioned int he article. Why would they not allow a group that supports the benefits of parenthood be allowed on campus?
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 12:58 pm
I'm reading "anti-choice" in the above posting.
This is not the same as "pro-choice".

The distinction is obvious, and I support their ban.
It would be an entirely different issue if the group was pro-choice.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:01 pm
woiyo wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Not a Canuckian, but I can easily see their point -

They don't want to fund an organization which seeks to criminalize and harass the student body of the school. How tough is that to understand?

Cycloptichorn


Where does it say the a pro-abortion group seeks to criminalize and harrass the student body? No "group" is mentioned int he article. Why would they not allow a group that supports the benefits of parenthood be allowed on campus?


Did you read the article?

Quote:


"Anti-choice often wishes to use the law to force women to bring unwanted pregnancy to term and they usually advocate for the recriminalization of abortion or a return to the board-granted abortion process," he said, adding the students' association did not want to fund that kind of activity.


This is exaclty what anti-abortion groups try to do. You weren't aware of this?

Quote:
Then why might they prohibit the voices of the option to have a child not be heard?


Noone is prohibitng anyone from saying 'you can choose to carry the baby to term.' I'm not sure where you are coming from with this.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:02 pm
They are using anti-choice instead of pro-life. Their choice of words hardly has any bearing on the fact that they are limiting freedom of speech. Does Canada have anything like the ACLU?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:03 pm
They aren't limiting freedom of speech, they're just saying "not with my fees, you don't." Tell, McG, do you advocate taking peoples' money and spending it in ways of which they do not approve?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:04 pm
McGentrix wrote:
They are using anti-choice instead of pro-life. Their choice of words hardly has any bearing on the fact that they are limiting freedom of speech. Does Canada have anything like the ACLU?


How are they limiting freedom of speech?

The student body representatives obviously have the ability to choose which groups to fund and which not to. I know it worked that way at my University. Denying a group funding is not limiting their free speech; it is just refusing to pay them for it.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:05 pm
"CUSA further affirms that actions such as campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to limit or remove a woman's options in the event of pregnancy will not be supported."
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:08 pm
They should do the same with any campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to support abortion as well.

Leave the Canadian women completely ignorant of their options, after all, what is college for if not to keep the youth ignorant?
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:11 pm
candidone1 wrote:
I'm reading "anti-choice" in the above posting.
This is not the same as "pro-choice".

The distinction is obvious, and I support their ban.
It would be an entirely different issue if the group was pro-choice.


Explain HOW that is "anti choice"?

Is not giving birth a choice, just as not giving birth a choice?

Why should both sides not be heard?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:11 pm
McGentrix wrote:
They should do the same with any campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to support abortion as well.

Leave the Canadian women completely ignorant of their options, after all, what is college for if not to keep the youth ignorant?


Supporting pro-choice groups keeps noone ignorant of their options.

It isn't as if women aren't aware of the fact that they can choose to have the damn baby. You really think they need to have an organization to clue them in on that one?

Sheesh, you're being dense today

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:11 pm
I have no doubt that such a position is consonant with conservative principles.

So, McG, you are opposed to a democratically elected student body deciding how student fees are to be spent. Better they should ask you what to do with their money, huh?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:12 pm
woiyo wrote:
candidone1 wrote:
I'm reading "anti-choice" in the above posting.
This is not the same as "pro-choice".

The distinction is obvious, and I support their ban.
It would be an entirely different issue if the group was pro-choice.


Explain HOW that is "anti choice"?

Is not giving birth a choice, just as not giving birth a choice?

Why should both sides not be heard?


Because one side of the equation doesn't want to be heard, they want to make it illegal for the other side to exist.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Canadian liberal college students against freedom
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.89 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 05:26:58