Being arested to make a statement for the pro life movment

[catholictiger]

alright now first let me state this may not be the case in this situation but I think it might be.

so real quick there is this thing that happened at a college in canada you may have heard about it.

lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/oct/10100716.html

now I don’t know much about the story, but it seems like the pro life group was denied acess to displaying signs in the quad.

so in response to that they display them anyway, and they get arrested for it.

now I’m 100% pro life and believe in everything the pro life message means, but sometimes I don’t always agree with what they always do.

Anyway my thoughts on this is that they shouldn’t have gone against what the university told them to do, becuase they did so they got arrested for trespassing.

yeah it makes a statement but I think it could hurt them more then it could help them in the long run,

I don’t know how that university works but they could lose student privileges, their group could be pretty much ineffective becuase they lose their right to do anything on campus.

instead of purposelessly getting arrested (i think they did this) they should have challenged the universities denial, bring it to court so they can maybe change policies in the future adding this little display adds nothing in your favor when it comes to the court of law.

but enough of my ranting

Should the pro-life movement ever go into a situation where they know they are going to get arrested, even if the law is violating rights?

or should we not do that and focus on changing the law in the courts

I personally think when we do it the second way we look more professional instead of just looking like we just want a lot of attention for our movement.

Changing the minds of women is very important but we must do it in a legal way, and if laws that prevent us from doing this fight them in legal ways don’t break laws just to bring attention to ourselves.

Thoughts anyone?

 

[Alexander_Smith]

I am of the same opinion. When I watched the story of those students, I was disappointed that such a great statement was being stifled because of their choice to go against university policy. There are many ways to protest abortion without getting arrested for it, and I think those students would have done better to protest elsewhere. It’s not like university students are the best recipients of such a message anyway.

 

[the_phoenix]

It’s not like university students are the best recipients of such a message anyway.

Oh, really?



Members of the Ohio Right to Life contingent all decked out with signs.
Love all the youthful energy!

Photo taken by me this past January 2010
at the March for Life rally
in Washington, DC.

 

[SonCatcher]

Martin Luther King, Jr. and others did the same 40+ years ago.

 

[catholictiger]

Martin Luther King, Jr. and others did the same 40+ years ago.

i think thats a different issue, we are dealing with freedom of speech here not overturning RVW now thats the ultimate goal but this mainly deals with freedom of speech.

If think you should always go with the option that will do the least harm, bringing a lawsuit against a university becuase they deny you your freedom of speech is better and probably more effective then trying to make yourself innocent of a trespassing charge.

I am of the same opinion. When I watched the story of those students, I was disappointed that such a great statement was being stifled because of their choice to go against university policy. There are many ways to protest abortion without getting arrested for it, and I think those students would have done better to protest elsewhere. It’s not like university students are the best recipients of such a message anyway.

first students need to hear this message this is where the majority of abortions occur among college students and your friend telling you not to have an abortion is alot better then some old guy lol.

Oh, really?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LjwC-AwaHZE/S2ZFStmWYBI/AAAAAAAAAT0/9CyS3VIHHNk/s400/Ohio+RTL_2.jpg

Members of the Ohio Right to Life contingent all decked out with signs.
Love all the youthful energy!

Photo taken by me this past January 2010
at the March for Life rally
in Washington, DC.

I went on that too I loved march for life i may have been near that area I was with Louisiana Students for life even though I joined up with the Baton Rouge Diocese most of the march

to all i must mention one more thing I do side with the university in how they handled this issue, if a group is denied access but use that access anyway they are trespassing.

But I don’t agree with the denial of that access, cause it sounds like its on the grounds of offensive behavior, now in the USA you can’t deny people that freedom but i may be differ in Canada

so becuase of the way I see this the pro life group should have never done what they did, and fought the denial in the courts not ignoring the denial and doing it anyway

 

[PatrickSebast]

If they would have offered to use less graphic signs and been denied then I might feel more inclined to support them. It is entirely possible to protest abortion without shocking images, and they were still allowed to display the images in a more private area so it is hard to say how oppressed their view really was. The law has always been able to censor certain images, and I certainly don’t think it is a good thing to blatantly disregard the law to further your cause.

 

[catholictiger]

If they would have offered to use less graphic signs and been denied then I might feel more inclined to support them. It is entirely possible to protest abortion without shocking images, and they were still allowed to display the images in a more private area so it is hard to say how oppressed their view really was. The law has always been able to censor certain images, and I certainly don’t think it is a good thing to blatantly disregard the law to further your cause.

i don’t approve of graphic images being publicly displayed (this is for another time so no arguing

but I do support the right for them to display them if they so please

my main objection to what happened is that this group approached this issue the wrong way, they should have filed a lawsuit against the denial, atleast that’s what I would have done.

btw your last statement about how you think its a bad thing to blatantly disregard the law to further your cause is a great statement and I agree with it.

if you disagree with a law either put people in charge who will change that law or if it is unconstitutional or what ever your country follows bring it to the courts if you can do that.

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

It sounds like their argument that the space was “bookable” indicates they had not actually booked it. If they had, then there would be no question about whether or not they should have been there as a student organization.

 

[Spirithound]

It sounds like their argument that the space was “bookable” indicates they had not actually booked it. If they had, then there would be no question about whether or not they should have been there as a student organization.

They actually tried to book the space, but were told that it was not bookable space, even though the university’s own policy book says that it is bookable.

 

[catholictiger]

It sounds like their argument that the space was “bookable” indicates they had not actually booked it. If they had, then there would be no question about whether or not they should have been there as a student organization.

they tried to book the space but where turned down.

so in response they did it anyway

which I think is where they went wrong they should have challenged it legally instead of ignoring the request of the university.

at-least that’s my view

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

They actually tried to book the space, but were told that it was not bookable space, even though the university’s own policy book says that it is bookable.

So they were arrested for making a statement for the pro life movement… in a place they were explicitly denied access to.

What did they expect?

 

[PatrickSebast]

So they were arrested for making a statement for the pro life movement… in a place they were explicitly denied access to.

What did they expect?

They almost certainly knew they were going to get arrested. It seemed like they were choosing to do so to bring more attention to their cause.

 

[catholictiger]

They almost certainly knew they were going to get arrested. It seemed like they were choosing to do so to bring more attention to their cause.

yep and I think alot of pro life people will get behind them and say this is so so wrong why would you do this to these people.

But I say they knew it was coming and wanted to make a statement, even though (I think) they could have fought it in the courts. (not sure how Canada works)

if you can fight something legally always do it that way don’t break the law just to bring attention to yourself.

Also i was thinking about this what if your group was responsible for changing the rules on campus making it easier for student groups to get that space int he quad, i think you be alot more popular then some group that says they where arrested for no reason.

 

[SonCatcher]

i think thats a different issue, we are dealing with freedom of speech here not overturning RVW now thats the ultimate goal but this mainly deals with freedom of speech.

I think making it a freedom of speech issue is a red herring. The true issue, as always, is protecting life. BTW - the article is about Canada. Roe isn’t an issue there (though it is no less political).

 

[catholictiger]

I think making it a freedom of speech issue is a red herring. The true issue, as always, is protecting life. BTW - the article is about Canada. Roe isn’t an issue there (though it is no less political).

yes but if your free speech is limited it can prevent you from protecting life.

for example if you can’t be on a public sidewalk next to a abortion clinic you wouldn’t be able to sidewalk conical.

and im not talking about the politics of abortion or anything im just wondering would it be right to purposely be arrested if you could change a law where you didn’t have to get arrested