National Campus Life Network

Here’s what’s in store on the campuses over the next couple of weeks!

Over 15 campuses will be hosting public screenings of the ‘It’s A Girl’ documentary.  The film talks about the impact of gendercide and sex-selective abortion, specifically in India and China.  Mark Warawa (MP – Langley) will also speak on Motion 408 following the B.C. screenings.   

Here are the screenings dates coming up in the next few week with links to their Facebook event page.  Check one out at a campus in your area and keep coming back to this page for screenings being added!  

Brock Life-line promoting their upcoming screening of It’s A Girl on Friday, March 8th.

Thursday, March 7th

• University of Manitoba, MPR Room (210 Killarney) 2nd floor University Centre, 7:00pm

 Friday, March 8th

• Brock University, Thistle 247, 7:00pm

 

Tuesday, March 12th 

• UBC, Woodward 6, 6:30pm

 

Wednesday, March 13th

• Trinity-Western University, Northwest Auditorium, 4:00pm
• Simon Fraser University, Burnaby C9001, 6:30pm

 

Thursday, March 14th

• University of Waterloo, RCH 308, 7:00pm
• University of Guelph, Mackinnon 029, 7:00pm
• McMaster University, Mills L115, 7:30pm

Monday, March 25

• University of Toronto, Sidney Smith 2135, 6:00PM
• McGill University, SSMU Ballroom, 9:00PM

Thursday, March 28

• Carleton University, Tory Bldg Room 447, 7:30PM

Wednesday, April 3

• York University, Student Centre 307, 4:30PM
• Tyndale University College, Chapel, 6:30PM

 

The DefendGirls campaign  has gotten off to a great start, with more campuses using these resources to raise awareness on sex-selective abortion, gendercide, and to build support for Motion 408.

 

Members of Queen’s Alive during their DefendGirls Awareness Week

Queen’s Alive distributed DefendGirls materials last week, screened, ‘It’s A Girl’, and will be hosting a Euthansia Debate on March 13th, featuring  Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and Dr. Udo Schuklenk, a philosophy professor.  They will address the question, “Should assisted suicide and/or voluntary euthansia be decriminalized in Canada?”

 

University of Waterloo Students for Life will be doing a number of events for their Life Weeks, including having the Silent No More Awareness Campaign give personal testimonies on the hope and healing found after having an abortion, and inviting  Stephen Woodworth (MP, Kitchener Centre) to speak on Motion 312 on March 13th.  Check out the details on the outcome of this event here.

 

NCLN’s Executive Director, Rebecca Richmond, will be speaking to Brock Life-Line in St. Catharines on the impact of sex-selective abortion and gendercide in our world and our country. She will also expand on Motion 408 and what campuses can do to raise awareness and build support for the motion.

 

We are excited for all these events, and more!  Further details to come on the  ’It’s a Girl’ documentary screenings and other events!  Stay tuned!

 

 

 

 

 

     

By Rebecca Richmond, NCLN Executive Director

Gavin Richmond, 1897-1917

My great uncle was several years younger than I am now when he died, only one week away from his 20th birthday.  Gavin Richmond’s name is inscribed on the Vimy Ridge Memorial and his life is counted among the 62,820 Canadians who were killed in the First World War.  He was part of a generation decimated by the war.

They fought for our freedom and are rightly commemorated for it. But we have not used that freedom responsibly; we have failed to protect the most vulnerable and innocent in our society from a violent death. Today we mourn a shameful anniversary that has made possible the extermination of the lives of a quarter of our generation, but these deaths have no Remembrance Day. They largely go unnoticed and unmourned and, even more horrific, the slaughter continues day after day.

Ours is a generation of survivors. We, the remaining 75%, made it out alive – though some more narrowly than others. I have worked with students whose parents chose life when facing pressure to abort and others whose parents aborted their siblings. Many of us are probably unaware of the twisted legacy abortion has carved in the branches of our family trees.

Dr. Morgentaler’s oft-repeated mantra – still used on every Morgentaler clinic website – is: Every mother a willing mother. Every child a wanted child. This must make us, I suppose, the “wanted” generation that Morgentaler spoke of. Our parents could have aborted us if they had wanted. They were given, in neo-Roman fashion, the power of life or death over their children – death that was, of course, sanitized, state-sanctioned, and even funded by the public’s own tax dollars.

Abortion on demand, made possible through the Supreme Court’s ruling 25 years ago, changed our society with ‘wantedness’ determining whether we live or die for the first nine months of our lives. Yet we do not choose life or death for born humans according to whether or not they are ‘wanted’ or ‘unwanted’. The thought of classifying human beings in such a manner is profoundly disturbing – or ought to be.

When my own grandmother was pregnant with my father in the 1950s she did not decide to go forward with it based on whether or not he was wanted. (What decision would she have made, I have to wonder, if abortion on demand had been offered to her?) She carried a new life within her and looked out for his best interest by deciding to have my father adopted and raised by a couple who wanted a child. Despite Dr. Morgentaler’s classification of children as ‘wanted’ or ‘unwanted’, the fact is that children are children regardless of how we feel about their arrival. What is up to us is how we treat them.

Those of us who survived now have the opportunity and the obligation to secure the freedom of the next generation. We grew up in the shadow of R. v. Morgentaler with one quarter of our generation missing, but we are now capable young adults: we cannot abandon the next generation to such a fate. Twenty-five years of R. v. Morgentaler is twenty-five years too long. This culture of abortion on demand may be a stubborn shadow, but we can cast it out if we shine all the brighter with the light of truth, love and life.

The tragic death of Savita Halappanavar in Ireland has caught the world’s attention.  Pro-choicers allege that Savita was a victim of Ireland’s laws against abortion and that these laws must be changed allow for legalized abortion.

As campus pro-life leaders, we have addressed questions from our peers including “what if the woman’s life is in danger?”  But we probably haven’t had to respond to a specific situation like that of Savita’s.  But unless you live within a very secure pro-life bubble (or a bubble that is cut off from newspapers and the internet), you will mostly likely have to respond to this situation.  Does Savita’s tragic death illustrate why legal abortion is necessary?  Should Ireland ‘liberalize’ their abortion laws?

The following are excerpts from a few must-read articles.  Each analysis should be read in its entirety to better understand the facts and how we should respond to them:

MaterCare International, a group of obstetricians and gynaecologists dedicated to “improving the lives and health of mothers and babies both born and unborn,” has analyzed the situation.

“With the exception of the rare and tragic case of Savita Halappanavar, Ireland’s practice of maternal medicine has been impeccable in recent decades. Ireland, along with other countries where abortion is not permitted by law, boasts one of the lowest maternal mortality ratios in the world. It ranks sixth lowest in the world for its maternal death ratio (5.7 per 100,000 live births), thus making it one of one of the safest places in the world for women to deliver their children. To dramatically alter these successful medical practices medical in order to cater to boisterous and uneducated lobbying would be a mistake. 

….

For many obstetricians, a maternal death resulting from a direct obstetrical cause, such as in the case of a septic miscarriage, is an extremely rare event which legalizing abortion will not prevent. What will prevent these deaths is intensive obstetrical care, provided with the intention of saving both lives.”

Andrea Mrozek, Manager of Research and Communications for the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, writes in an op-ed for the National Post:

Pro-choicers have long held that maternal mortality rises without abortion. Yet the record shows that Canadian maternal mortality declined precipitously prior to the legalization of abortion in Canada. Canadian abortion laws began to open up in 1969 and abortion became available on demand without any restriction after the 1988 R. v. Morgentaler decision.

This shows abortion does not save women’s lives, but good medical care does. Ireland’s own statistics reflect this truth. The United Nation’s 2005 report on maternal mortality found Ireland has one of the lowest maternal mortality rates in the world, despite largely banning abortion procedures.

….

We do know that Savita was 17 weeks pregnant. Had she had an abortion, it would have been a more complicated one. Abortions get more dangerous as the number of weeks progress. Second trimester abortions may involve the use of forceps to remove dismembered body parts. This is not a faceless mass-precisely because by this point ears, eyes and eyelashes are developing, as are major body systems.

A truly interested person might ask questions around the nature of Savita’s sickness, and whether the miscarriage was the prime culprit in her death. We don’t know whether she received antibiotics, how much or when. Without the right dosage of antibiotics, an abortion might just as likely have resulted in sepsis and death.

Stephanie Gray, Executive Director of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, writes:

  So instead of jumping to the conclusions that Halappanavar needed an abortion and that Ireland needs to legalize the killing of the youngest of its kind, the reasonable approach would be to get to the bottom of what Halappanavar’s condition was and examine how it was, or was not, responded to.  We have yet to hear from the hospital and the medical professionals involved as to what precisely happened, but with this report of her dying from E. coli ESBL one wonders how killing Halappanavar’s baby Prasa would have killed the E. coli.

….

And yet, The Toronto Star would have you believe, “There’s a very simple reason why Savita died. It’s because she wasn’t listened to.” On the contrary, much more needs to be known about how she died.  But what we do know is that jumping to the conclusion that abortion should be legalized in Ireland overlooks the underlying medical condition and makes the dangerous assumption that we need to kill one person to save another.

Ireland’s Youth Defence has reported on  what Irish Obstetricians and Gynaecologists have to say about women’s health and abortion in their country.  

Dr John Monaghan on Newstalk: The whole thing has become very inflamed. We cannot at this stage judge what the true medical facts were. I cannot see how legislation would have influenced this particular scenario. In the light of the [Medical Council] guidelines I quoted to you a few minutes ago, it would be legitimate under the current regulation that a doctor would intervene to deliver the baby in the situation where the mother has become septic. To me as a clinician that would fit in with those guidelines. So I am not sure how legislation could deal with this particular case as I understand it.

By Clarissa Luluquisin, NCLN Central Campus Coordinator

I’ve been on staff with NCLN only a few short months now but I’ve quickly learned that my job follows me home – or even on weekend road trips. Last weekend, while in Washington DC, I visited the Holocaust Memorial Museum. I expected to be horrified and moved by the history I would see. I was, yet the hardest part of the experience was knowing that while the horrors of the Holocaust is a part of history, the slaughter of preborn Canadian children is all too current.

What particularly stood out to me was the propaganda the exhibit displayed, used to dehumanize the Jewish people and make their destruction possible. The propaganda also was directed to encourage all Germans to participate in Hitler’s vision of a united nation and an ideal race.

Nearing the end of the exhibit, I was overwhelmed with grief for the victims, but also felt a strange twinge of emotion for the ordinary people of Germany. I pitied them. They were not given the truth. They were fed with perverted truths and outright lies. Their bitterness and sentiments of loss resulting from World War I were twisted and used against them. It does not erase guilt, but it does illuminate their behavior.

The parallels to our own society’s acceptance of abortion immediately struck me. So many default to “choice” because it appeals to a politically correct notion of morality. After all, how does “choice” not sound like a good thing? They are fed with “my body, my choice”, “men have no say in this women’s issue”, and “it’s a lump of tissue”.  And so Canada allows the destruction of innocent life.

For me, the exhibit reaffirmed that the Holocaust, and the minds behind it, systematically sought the deliberate destruction of certain identifiable groups – primarily 6 million Jews. This was accomplished under the guise of a better Germany. But the Holocaust ended; yet, today, abortion seeks to deliberately destroy the preborn child – 41 million worldwide yearly – under the guise of “choice”.

The magnet I picked up at the museum’s store is what initially inspired this post in the first place:

The next time you witness hatred

The next time you see injustice

The next time you hear about genocide

Think about what you saw

Because of what I have seen, I am even more convinced.

Yet, as pro-lifers, we must do more than simply remember what we saw. We must be moved to action each time we see hatred and injustice. Pro-lifers must never cease to share truth with those caught in the current of ‘choice’. We must awaken our culture to the slaughter our society’s actions and apathy perpetuate.

Pro-Life Rally in Victoria to “Speak for Life.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

On May 10th, Pro-Life British Columbians from across the province will march to the Legislature in the 5th Annual March for Life in Victoria.  With the abortion issue receiving such prominent attention in the media lately, organizers expect a large turnout this year.  This year’s theme, “SPEAK UP FOR LIFE,” challenges all British Columbians to raise their voice for the protection of the lives of the unborn.

Recent news stories about gender selection abortion and designer babies, and the current Parliamentary Motion calling for a committee to review the Criminal Code’s definition of a human being, have all drawn much needed attention to this issue. “The attention these issues have received, and polling data results, clearly show that Canadians are concerned by the complete lack of restrictions on abortion,” said March for Life media spokesperson, Anastasia Pearse.

“Our intention here today is to peacefully and prayerfully bring attention to the victims of abortion in our province,” she added. “We want to raise awareness and ask people to think before they choose abortion. They need to know the facts and be fully informed of all of the risks before they make these life changing decisions.”

The March for Life is organized to be a celebration of lives saved as well as a commemoration of lives lost. In BC, despite a severe lack of transparency in abortion record keeping, it is estimated that over 14,000 abortions are performed every year. “As tax-paying citizens, our money is being used to fund these abortions,” states Pearse. “We are marching today to speak out against this atrocity, to speak up for those 14,000 British Columbians who never had the chance to speak for themselves. We cannot remain silent when so many lives are at stake.”

This year’s March for Life is part of a national day of marches across the country. The BC March is co-sponsored by the Knights of Columbus BC & Yukon State and Campaign Life Coalition British Columbia. The March begins at 2:00pm in Centennial Square.

For more information, contact:

Anastasia Pearse,

March for Life Media Relations

westerncanada@ncln.ca

604-365-3484

-30-

By Rebecca Richmond

“Not a single boy from our club came to help,” noted the club president with a sigh. We had just spent two days outside in the cold, sharing the pro-life message with thousands of students on this campus. But it had been the women of the club who had endured the name calling, insults and outright hostility from their peers.

“There’s the problem,” I quipped. “You have boys. We need some men.”

Though pro-choicers will sometimes accuse our movement of being run by old men, the opposite is more likely true. Just last week, one protestor at UBC wielded a sign that read, “77% of anti-abortion leaders are male. 100% will never get pregnant.” I don’t know where the 77% statistic came from, for even a cursory look at the Movement would show the reverse. NCLN, for example, has an all-female staff and a mostly female board. Numerous organizations have similarly skewed demographics.

So I chuckle when I hear those accusations, but the reality is no laughing matter.

Through my pro-life work, now and previously as a student, I have been privileged to work alongside incredible young men. They are pro-life in principle and in action. These men often face more hostility, from men and women alike, whenever they are publically pro-life. They take the abuse in stride and continue to pray in front of abortion clinics, to engage in dialogue on street corners with Choice Chain, to stand in front of a pro-life table at the university centre, and to speak up in class. Unfortunately, they are rarer than they ought to be.

Sadly, although there are other men out there who are opposed to abortion, many won’t lift a finger to stop the carnage. They’ll give a thumbs up or a “God bless” when they pass 40 Days for Life, but you won’t catch them taking an active, let alone public, role.
Then, there are men out there who intuitively dislike abortion and who would support their significant other through a pregnancy, but they can’t “force their opinions on anyone else.”

Many more refuse to really look at the issue at all.

“What do you think about abortion?” I’ve asked countless young men on campuses and on street corners.

If I had a dollar for every time I heard, “I’m a guy. It’s a woman’s issue,” well, I’d be a wealthy woman.
These “men” place the issue squarely on women’s shoulders. Perhaps it’s because they’ve been brainwashed to think this is what respecting women’s rights is all about, and perhaps it’s because this “choice” allows them to continue living their lifestyle “consequence-free”. It’s probably a combination of both.

Abortion definitely affects men and women differently, but it is not solely a woman’s issue. It is a human rights violation and, since responsibility for this atrocity rests on both men and women, so too does the remedy.

So to all my stalwart, courageous, compassionate, selfless pro-life brothers: thank you. You inspire and encourage me. You give me hope for the future. Thank you for standing up for women, for babies, for the future generations. Thank you for respecting and honoring me and the pro-life women you stand with.

To all the other good men out there: I’ve heard you say that you’re afraid, nervous of saying the wrong thing, not sure how to handle the anger and emotion you might encounter. I know you have other things to do: commitments, ministries, jobs, activities. But are the fears and obstacles that hold you back more important than the cause I know you believe in? Please, won’t you stand up and stand alongside us?

Our society has more than enough boys. What are we need are many more good men.

March 14, 2012: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Ontario students want abortion debate but abortion advocates unwilling to defend their position

Toronto, ON: This March, two Ontario university clubs are hosting abortion debates on campus, but pro-choicers have been unwilling to debate.  Despite contacting over 120 professors, feminist organizations, and abortion advocacy groups, Guelph Life Choice and McMaster Lifeline have been unable to find anyone willing to debate.  Pro-life students from McMaster and Guelph are now issuing a public challenge to pro-choice proponents (specifically professors, doctors, clinic workers, and advocates from pro-choice organizations), inviting them to defend their position on abortion and join in an open and respectful debate.

“There’s been great student interest in having this debate,” states Hanna Barlow, President of the University of Guelph Life Choice.  “But everyone we’ve contacted to represent the pro-choice side has either rejected the invitation or simply ignored it.  It’s very disappointing.”

With the debate scheduled for the end of the month, Guelph Life Choice contacted the Student Help and Advocacy Centre (SHAC) from the student union for help finding a pro-choice advocate.  They declined, stating, “We do not believe that the sexual and reproductive rights of women is [sic] something that should be debated because we see ‘pro-choice’ as the only option. For us, reproductive rights are non-debatable.” (See full email text at: http://uofguelphlifechoice.ncln.ca/2012/03/14/email/)

“Unwillingness to debate is something we’ve seen before on other campuses,” states Rebecca Richmond, Executive Director for the National Campus Life Network, a national pro-life student organization.   “Despite accusations from pro-choicers that we’re closed minded and backwards, they are the ones who keep rejecting our offers to engage in dialogue.”

“Anyone who holds a belief on an issue must have evidence to back up their belief,” states Julia Bolzon, President of McMaster Lifeline.  “If pro-choicers are confident in their position, then they should be willing to defend it in a debate.  We hope pro-choicers will rise to the challenge.”

For more information or for those interested in representing the pro-choice side of the debate, contact:

Julia Bolzon – President McMaster Lifeline, 647 221 0912, jbolzon@gmail.com

Hanna Barlow – President Guelph Life Choice, 519 830 9072, hannabarlow@gmail.com

Rebecca Richmond – Executive Director, National Campus Life Network, 416 388 0461 director@ncln.ca

-30-

By Rebecca Richmond

The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) started a student project a few years ago called ‘Synergy’, or the Student and Youth Network for Reproductive Justice, and a post on their website caught my eye last week because the author made a number of points that I actually agreed with.  Surprising?  No, not really.

Consider that our two organizations, despite being on opposite sides of “reproductive justice” issues, exist for similar purposes. Both Synergy and NCLN exist to help network and support efforts across the country at the post-secondary level.  Naturally, both organizations believe strongly that the university environment is a critical place to promote our cause and both Tara Paterson, the article’s author, and I both emphasize the importance of being active on issues of injustice.

Tara, Synergy’s Student Network Coordinator and the Chair of the University of Victoria Students’ Society (not our favourite student union), points to the growing momentum of pro-life activities on university campuses (“hotbeds for anti-choice activities”) and the fact that, historically, activism on universities was a significant part of the pro-choice movement.  “The shift,” she writes, “from campus as a hub for pro-choice activity to one where anti-choice clubs monopolize a lot of student media and politics is worth noting.  We have a unique opportunity here to reclaim the campus as a site of political organizing for reproductive justice.”  So although I believe we are still far from “monopolizing” campuses, Tara and I both identify universities as critical ground to take in the fight for justice and human rights

Unfortunately, Tara failed to understand the purpose of some of the projects used on campus, such as those used by the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.  She also errs in her description of Carleton Lifeline’s lawsuit against the administration.  And I will not bother to address her laughable statement that, “the anti-choice lobby is a well-funded machine backed by right-wing bigwigs and the Catholic Church.” (But if anyone knows a right-wing bigwig with deep pockets and a hankering to support a worthy pro-life organization, please send them our way.)

But Tara is absolutely right to insist upon a pro-active stance when it comes to fighting injustice.  She calls pro-choice students to action.  As pro-lifers, we need to bear this in mind as well.  If our position on abortion is just that – simply a belief that abortion is wrong – then we will never end this atrocity in our country and we will never succeed in building a society that respects and affirms the value and dignity of every human life.  But if our respect for human life and our love of our fellow human beings flows into pro-life action, then consider the impact that would have!

And like Tara, we too should “grow our networks, hold events, share resources and otherwise inspire our campuses.”  We must continue and increase our activities.  Synergy may accuse us of ‘taking it upon ourselves to offend them’, but the reality is that abortion IS, itself, offensive because it takes the life of an innocent human being.   And while both Tara and I may share a passion for ‘justice’, we must root that justice in an objective morality that ensures that all human beings, regardless of their size, location, dependence or development, are given human rights.  Without this, Synergy’s call to action does not right an injustice, but, sadly deepens and perpetuates one.

March 7th, 2012: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

ABORTION DEBATE ON BC CAMPUSES

Vancouver, B.C. University pro-life clubs across British Columbia are bringing the abortion debate to their campuses in an unprecedented manner. Over the next week, six B.C. university campuses will be hosting multiple events, seeking to engage their peers on the issue of abortion.

“Our universities are places where ideas should be shared and contentious issues discussed,” states Anastasia Pearse, Western Campus Coordinator for the National Campus Life Network, a national pro-life student organization. “A recent CIHI report reveals that over a quarter of abortions are performed on university–aged students. If this is a choice young women are making, it is important that they consider what precisely they are choosing and know what abortion alternatives exist.”

Despite Prime Minister Harper’s repeated refusal to reopen the abortion debate in Parliament, pro-life student groups across the country have continued to be active on this issue, even amidst censorship and discrimination like that experienced most recently by Youth Protecting Youth at the University of Victoria.

Events include academic debates, resource distribution, information tables, and abortion imagery projects, all aimed at educating and engaging students in dialogue on the abortion issue. These clubs are also calling on their local politicians, asking them to bring the abortion debate to parliament.

Along with Canadian campus groups, others across the country are also working to raise awareness on the need to dialogue about abortion. Jakki Jeffs, director of Ontario’s We Want the Debate Campaign, has stated that, “the suppression of any debate in a democratic society is unacceptable.” The Alliance for Life of Ontario campaign is demanding that, “the current censorship of the debate around abortion be ended, and that an open and informed discussion be held in public.”

Abortion takes the lives of approximately 300 Canadian preborn human beings every day. Canadian pro-life students refuse to remain silent or be censored while such an injustice is occurring in our society.

Abortion Debates:
Capilano University: March 8th, 1:30 pm, Cedar Building Room 122
University of British Columbia: March 12th, 5:00pm, UBC-Woodward 1
University of the Fraser Valley: March 13th, 6:00pm, UFV Abbotsford Room B101
Simon Fraser University: March 14th, 6:00pm, SFU Burnaby, room TBA

For further information contact:
Anastasia Pearse Western Campus Coordinator, National Campus Life Network westerncanada@ncln.ca 604-365-3484

February 7, 2012: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

University of Victoria Pro-Life Club Censored Once Again

Victoria B.C.-The University of Victoria Student’s Society (UVSS) Board of Directors passed two motions to publicly censure the pro-life club on campus, Youth Protecting Youth (YPY) last night, February 6^th. The first motion was put forward in response to complaints stemming from an event the club held last November called “Choice” Chain and charged the students with violating the UVSS Harassment Policy. The second motion was passed in response to a poster the club put up on campus in October. As a result, YPY will be denied their ability to book public space on campus for their events and is forbidden to hold “Choice” Chain or other similar events. The club is also banned from putting up posters until a new policy is written by the UVSS to govern poster content. The board also ordered YPY to write a letter of apology to groups who were offended by the poster.

“Choice” Chain is a project developed by the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) and consists of volunteers holding three by four foot signs with graphic images of first trimester aborted fetuses. The volunteers engage passers-by in dialogue about abortion. More information about the project can be found here: http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/projects/choicechain

“This is a disappointing development,” said Cameron Côté, YPY Vice-President and coordinator of the “Choice” Chain event. “People may have felt offended by the images but that in no way constitutes harassment. If you merely have to claim your feelings were hurt or you disliked someone’s message or way of expressing themselves to find that person guilty of harassment, freedom of speech ceases to exist. While we recognize that some people do not like our message, that doesn’t mean we should be censored.  ”

Campus Outreach Director for CCBR, Alanna Gomez, stated, “The charges of harassment have no grounds. There were no complaints made about the conduct of the students, because they acted respectfully and peacefully. The only complaints were based on the negative feelings people had because they didn’t like the pictures the students were holding. Just because someone doesn’t like a picture doesn’t mean they have been harassed, which is what the UVSS is trying to claim.”

The poster that resulted in the second motion was developed by National Campus Life Network (NCLN), and compares the current denial of legal personhood to the pre-born in Canada with similar treatment of other groups in the past. The poster can be viewed here: http://www.ncln.ca/resources/print-resources/person-poster/

“I thought the UVSS had moved past this type of discrimination and censorship since the settlement of YPY’s lawsuit in July 2010,” said Anastasia Pearse, former YPY president. Pearse currently works as the Western Campus Coordinator for NCLN. “Censorship of the abortion debate at a university is shameful and unacceptable.”

“YPY will not tolerate this ideological discrimination,” said Côté. “We must all demand that our   society be free of discrimination and censorship of minority or unpopular viewpoints. If there is a right not to be offended than we cannot have freedom of speech in this country or on campus.The legal killing of so many innocent human beings is a disturbing topic, but it is far too serious to suppress or ignore.”

###

For further information:

Cameron Côté (YPY Vice President) – 778-678-4275, youthprotectingyouth@gmail.com

Alanna Gomez (CCBR Campus Outreach Director) – 403-690-5217, acampbell@unmaskingchoice.ca

Anastasia Pearse (NCLN Western Coordinator) – 604-365-3484, westerncanada@ncln.ca