Notre Dame presses charges against pro life protestors

[RobbyS]

You need to learn to read with distinction. The distinction is not that subtle.

How many children did the arrested protesters save by their street theater? Or do you think street theater is mroe pwoerful than prayer?

That comment is not worthy of a response. Try taking your emotional response out and using some logic, instead of making an ad hominem slur.

No, that is not what I am saying; and if you can’t understand what I said, there is no point in my belaboring it.

OK, the whole thing went right over your head.

I don’t have an attitutde.

Let’s try this with small words. Both Rosa and Martin were protesting unfair and unjust laws. Rosa violated an unjust law - a law based on the color of your skin, which makes you worthy of privilige or unworthy of it - is an unjust law. By sitting in the whites only section, she violated an unjust law, and prosecuting her made clear how unjust the law was. Trespassing is not an unjust law. Those protesting abortion are not being denied the ability to portest it. Breaking a trespass law is not going to get the abortion law changed, but sitting in the whites only section did get the whites only section removed.

Marching down a street in Selma, Alabama with a permit was not the violation of a law; but when the cameras caught the troops and police using water cannons and police dogs to attack the peaceful protesters, that is what triggered changes in civil rights laws. Whites did not get water cannons and police dogs when they wore hoods and white robes, and burned crosses. But when blacks walked down the street, they got both for the simple reason of marching while black. That was not street theater; it was not the violation of a just law to protest an unjust one, but where it occured, there were violations of unjust laws.

If you don’t get the difference, then conversation about it will be fruitless.

Well, it was not quite that way. The demonstrators were not that peaceable. Quite a few cops were injured trying to control what was, after all, a mob action. A lot of that violence was not caught on camera, nor recorded by the press.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I will presume you have not read all of the posts herein; had you done so, you would understand that there is a very real need to prosecute trespassers on private property, particularly property that can be a beacon to any individual with an ax to grind. The results of protesters of every kind and stripe to do physical damage is so thorougly documented that it bears no discussion. One only need read the paper or listen to the news to find out what one or another radical group has done this time. ND, like all other institutions of higher learing which have experimental components are open to the physical violence of radicals such as PETA, to name one; other environmental groups are well docmented by their destruction of private property. Your desire for selective enforcement of laws of trespass indicate a very non-reality based understanding of why we have trespass laws. And given that each of the individuals was welcome to come under the umbrella of a legitimate protest against Obama, you offer no explanation as to why they could not or would not comply. ND is not a monolithic organization intent on shutting down all free speech. But in case you have not learned, free speech is not free. It requires that other laws too be obeyed. Free speech as you would have it borders on anarchy.

Alan Keyes is not ELF, and ND knew it and knows it.

Certainly, ND has a legal right to prosecute him or any other unwelcome person who comes on campus. That doesn’t change the fact that ND chose to arrest and prosecute peaceful people who came on campus to protest ND’s endorsement of abortion. Exercising one’s legal rights to the full on every occasion does not necessarily provide a good moral example. But it can sometimes disclose where one’s heart is. ND chose to embrace and support the killing of children, then prosecuted a handful of people, including an elderly priest who wanted to make a statement opposing that killing. Like throwing a widow out in the snow who failed, by a day, to pay her rent timely, sometimes we identify ourselves by doing those things which we have every legal right to do.

 

[reggieM]

Peaceful demonstrators have little impact unless they are able to draw the media spotlight to themselves. If they had been able to muster 100,000 people to the event, maybe (Look at the little attention paid to the annual January gathers in DC.).

I agree. The purpose of the demonstration is to bring attention to the cause. The March for Life attracts up to 100,000 people and it barely gets mentioned.

It’s like the web petition collected by the Cardinal Newman society – that had 300,000 e-signatures and nobody in the media paid attention.

Even the fact that 90 bishops gave verbal opposition to the Obama event had little impact. They gave “statements” – which, when not backed up by action prove to be meaningless.

The pro-life protestors who got arrested at ND are seasoned veterans in the media wars. They all know that even if 1,000 people got arrested, that would barely be enough to break through the media’s consciousness (it might merit a single mention on cable news).

But the goal was to break through to the “Catholic consciousness”. Most of the secular world has proven that it doesn’t even care about partial birth abortion or abortion survivors. This is well-known. But the hope was that there are still some Catholics who could wake up and see how badly compromised our own institutions, like Notre Dame, really are.

If our own priests and bishops need to be awakened to the meaning of our own sacred doctrines, then that’s where we need to focus. Through this event, including the arrests and “illegal” protests, it’s very easy to see how bad the situation is in Catholic leadership today (or lack thereof).

That was the change in strategy with this focus on ND. Thankfully, at least 90 bishops stood up long enough to make some statements against ND. That’s a half-step forward. If a couple of leaders can emerge out of that group and stir up the rest of them, we’ll begin making some real progress.

 

[imperial]

At that time Jesus went through the fields on the Sabbath day; and his disciples, being in need of food, were taking the heads of grain.
2 But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said to him, See, your disciples do that which it is not right to do on the Sabbath against the law]
. 3 But he said to them, Have you no knowledge of what David did when he had need of food, and those who were with him?
4 How he went into the house of God and took for food the holy bread which it was not right for him or for those who were with him to take, but only for the priests?
5 Or is it not said in the law, how the Sabbath is broken by the priests in the Temple and they do no wrong?
6 But I say to you that a greater thing than the Temple is here. 7 But if these words had been in your minds, My desire is for mercy and not for offerings, you would not have been judging those who have done no wrong.

30 Whoever is not with me is against me; and he who does not take part with me in getting people together, is driving them away.

                               :whistle: BINGO :whistle:

                 Any support for abortion is against him

 

[Oceanon]

I remember durning the Civil Rights movement of the early '60s, before it was shown on TV, that many a law was broken – purposefully – in order to draw broader attention.
During those years, we expected to be arrested, sued, and abused.

We counted it all joy . . .

 

[Rach620]

Is a person arrested for trespassing when he breaks into a burning home to save a child?

Obviously not. While it is “against the law” to break into a house – when it comes to saving a life, such things are permitted.

The law that permits abortion is unjust. It cannot be defended by any Catholics.

When a Catholic institution honors (I’ve corrected you on this before – it’s not just a speech) a man who ardently supports this unjust law its a very serious wrong.

Now you’ve just spent a lot of time asserting that peaceful protestors have done something “wrong” and should be punished for it. But this does not take into consideration the gravity of the crime of abortion. Additionally, the so-called wrong that was done, occurred on a campus where they claim to believe in God, in Jesus Christ and in the pro-life teachings of the Catholic Church.

There are a few issues in your logic here.

No one is disagreeing with you that it is a very serious wrong, a grave scandal for Notre Dame to honor President Obama as it did. BUT the nature of this scandal is not of the same nature as abortion itself. The crime of abortion did not take place on Notre Dame’s campus. Honoring Obama is not equal to murder. Honoring Obama does not show unequivocal support for abortion; rather, it shows that those honoring him don’t believe that LIFE is an important enough “issue” when it comes to making political judgments. THIS is the root of the scandal at Notre Dame.

Because of this, trespassing on Notre Dame’s campus as a prayerful witness against honoring President Obama is not at all like sidewalk counseling outside abortion clinics–an action which violates no laws and which is directly intended to save lives about to be ended by abortion. No lives were about to be ended by abortion on Notre Dame’s campus when the trespassers entered; there was no urgent need for them to walk on to campus in order to save lives (as would be the case for entering a burning building to save a child).

The simple fact of the matter is that outlets were open to any and all pro-life protesters (including Alan Keyes, I’m sure, who would have been welcomed to campus had he not vocally advertised the fact that he was coming to South Bend to join forces with Randall Terry and intentionally get himself arrested!) to protest the Notre Dame scandal on Commencement weekend, and several clearly chose not to take those opportunities. otjm and I are not arguing that pro-life protests were entirely out of place at Notre Dame, but that protesters who in fact shunned ND Response’s activities and invitations and “went their own way”–the way of street theater and intentional arrests–shouldn’t be turned into martyrs for the pro-life cause, or be viewed as somehow more effective than the thousands of “licit” protesters who gathered on campus.

You’re worried that the government will clamp down on pro-life activities but if the new policy is that nobody should ever risk getting arrested, even in protesting an unjust law – then the government’s job is going to be a whole lot easier.

The protesters at ND may have been protesting unjust abortion law, but they didn’t get arrested under an unjust law. They got arrested for breaking a just law. Unless, of course, you’re arguing that private property trespass laws are unjust…

Other than the fact that you are insistent that these peaceful protestors should be prosecuted, I don’t know what you’re advocated at all. I don’t think you’ve given any ideas – except to pray and not do anything that Fr. Jenkins won’t like (since its supposedly his private university).

You’re not talking to me, here, but it seems that you’re not taking much time in reading otjm’s posts. It’s clear to me that he/she is sincere and incredibly pro-life, but just happens to disagree with you on this point. Perhaps passion for the cause is blinding you to this sincerity or to understanding the entire argument?

But as for myself, I’m grateful for those who risked getting arrested to show that our opposition to abortion is not just what we do when it’s convenient – but that people are willing to pay a personal price to try to stop it.

I don’t understand why the entire Notre Dame scandal and all that it involves boils down to the issue of abortion. I’m sure you don’t mean to only be railing on the abortion issue, as I’m sure you know that the pro-life position is much broader and all-encompassing than opposition to abortion. But even besides the fact that Obama is the most anti-life president to ever hold the office, the issues at Notre Dame run deeper. ***They bring to light deep cultural problems that divide Catholics in America, as well as internal Catholic identity problems that Notre Dame has been experiencing for quite some time. ***

Addressing these issues in particular requires MUCH more reflection, thought, prayer, and WORK than can be done by outside protesters (such as the Keyes/Terry group) and staged, intentional arrests. The goal of ND Response in this regard was to address these Notre Dame-specific issues with ideas and support from people who truly understand the university, have good will for Notre Dame, and still hope for its Catholic future. THIS was really the division point between ND Response and Terry’s group (or the non-Catholic group that flew the graphic abortion images trailing behind the airplane over campus for hours a day, every day, before Commencement): the fact that students still truly “love thee, Notre Dame,” and others would have the place shuttered or burned to the ground.

Methinks we are finding the same divisions here.

 

[otjm]

I agree. The purpose of the demonstration is to bring attention to the cause. The March for Life attracts up to 100,000 people and it barely gets mentioned.

I would agree that it does not get the media attention that other issues do. I soule disagree that it does not have impact. You seem to be measuring impact by the number of articles and the amount of air time. I measure it by the comments I hear from those around me.

It’s like the web petition collected by the Cardinal Newman society – that had 300,000 e-signatures and nobody in the media paid attention.

See my first note.

Even the fact that 90 bishops gave verbal opposition to the Obama event had little impact. They gave “statements” – which, when not backed up by action prove to be meaningless.

You show not only an ignorance of civil law, but also Canon law. There is very little the bishops can legally do within civil law, and almost nothing in Canon law. Their witness and their statements are the most powerful thing they can bring to bear, particularly as they are listened to by those “on the fence” and of hardened hearts. Will they make a lot of progress? Not visibly, and not for a long time. This whole issue of abortion, and the problems within the Church re: catechesis have taken 40 to 50 years to get to this point; they are not going to change overnight.

The pro-life protestors who got arrested at ND are seasoned veterans in the media wars. They all know that even if 1,000 people got arrested, that would barely be enough to break through the media’s consciousness (it might merit a single mention on cable news).

And they consist of a vey small minority of those in the pro-life meovement. They are consistent in their approach, I will grant them that. They are also playing right into the hands of one of the most powerful lobby groups and media darlings - NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and the Democrats in office, be that the House, the Senate, or the Adminsitration, and especially Homeland Security. Are you paying any attention to the letter they sent out to sherrifs and police departments concerning terrorists? One of their prime examples of home-grown terrorists were the “extreme anti-abortion” groups. And the people who intentionally get arrested for violating a law such as trespass are held up by the press as prime examples - they use key words to get across the point that all pro-lifers are a bit crazy, and these folks in particular are dangerous becasue they willingly violate laws. The protesters give carte blanche to the media to damage as much as possible the pro-life people, like you, who practice a lawful, non-violent sidewalk ministry. Most people are somewhat to very ambivilent about the abortion issue, which shows up in poll after poll. People like Keyes take an inch the majority of pro-life groups have made with their sweat and tears, and set it back a foot.

But the goal was to break through to the “Catholic consciousness”. Most of the secular world has proven that it doesn’t even care about partial birth abortion or abortion survivors. This is well-known. But the hope was that there are still some Catholics who could wake up and see how badly compromised our own institutions, like Notre Dame, really are.

and I am telling you that the Catholics who haven’t figured it out get turned off by people who violate the law, especially when the press does such a good job of making them look like radicals.

If our own priests and bishops need to be awakened to the meaning of our own sacred doctrines, then that’s where we need to focus. Through this event, including the arrests and “illegal” protests, it’s very easy to see how bad the situation is in Catholic leadership today (or lack thereof).]

They didn’t need Keyes to trespass to get going. This was the most outstanding show of Catholic moral though I have seen out of the bishops. You are obviously not a student of history, particularly history of the US clergy over the last 40 years. The bishops who have waffled on the issues of abortion, ABC and the like are dying off and/or retiring. And they are being replace by bishops like Chaput. The tide has changed. Wake up; this is not 1980 or 1970. It is not even 1995. The dawn has broken; it is time to stop cursing the dark.

That was the change in strategy with this focus on ND. Thankfully, at least 90 bishops stood up long enough to make some statements against ND. That’s a half-step forward. If a couple of leaders can emerge out of that group and stir up the rest of them, we’ll begin making some real progress.

You would do well to read, calmly, dispassionately, and several times what the bishops have been saying for a long, long time. There is a thread running through their comments that we need to be peaceful and law abiding in our protests. Let me repeat that: they have for a long time been saying that violating laws such as trespass laws do far more harm than good to the meovement. I would suggest that you start doing some research. I applaude you for your passion. But passion uncontrolled results in chaos.

And the leaders emerged several years ago. You just weren’t paying attention, and you have little or no patience or long range vision.

 

[reggieM]

They didn’t need Keyes to trespass to get going.

Keyes was, by far, the most prominent and nationally known figure to join the protests.

This was the most outstanding show of Catholic moral though I have seen out of the bishops.

Certainly, yes. But it was yet another statement - it had limited value. In fact, I just read yesterday that some Catholic universities are asking the bishops to “revisit” their 2004 statement about Catholics in public life (the statement ND violated so easily) – in order to soften it. If that happens, the bishops won’t even have an official directive forbidding pro-abortion Catholics from getting awards.

You are obviously not a student of history, particularly history of the US clergy over the last 40 years. The bishops who have waffled on the issues of abortion, ABC and the like are dying off and/or retiring. And they are being replace by bishops like Chaput. The tide has changed. Wake up; this is not 1980 or 1970. It is not even 1995. The dawn has broken; it is time to stop cursing the dark.

I heard that kind of thing 30 years ago. Since then, as Rach pointed out, we’ve lost every Catholic university in America, with the exception of ND. But let me just accept what you’re saying at face value – if the tide has turned and bishops are going to rebuild our educational facilities (along with all of the institutions of thier dioceses and archdioceses, parishes and seminary programs), then there’s not much reason to be arguing with me – a damaged hold-over from the 1970s. The victory is won and there will always be a few malcontents like myself, etc.

But I think you’re overstating the victory. We just saw a pro-abortion politician receive almost 60% of the Catholic vote. We saw ND receive a flood of donations after the Obama visit. We saw a majority of students at ND adopting a pro-abortion position.

I’ll be the first one to rejoice and embrace what you’re saying – that Abp. Chaput is the wave of the future. If that is the case, then I will gladly shut up and play my part in contributing to a restoration of Catholic life.

You would do well to read, calmly, dispassionately, and several times what the bishops have been saying for a long, long time.

I’ve seen what they do, which is more important than what they say. We all saw Abp. Weakland, for example – we saw him for a long, long time. My own bishop is in that mold.

And the leaders emerged several years ago.

Who are you referring to?

 

[Spiritoftruth]

…if you do the crime, I guess you must be [prepared at least] to do the time. Now in the world of important university dollars to waste, I would have issue with the president of the university…

 

[underhismercy]

How much lower can they sink?

It’s unbelievable.

Well…let’s see…Father Jenkins stood in open rebellion to the Bishop in his state, he led the university in defiance against thousands of people who signed a petition against his actions including church leaders and alumni. He paraded all this before the country and the world then placed this stumbling block to truth and obedience as an example to the young people in attendance at graduation…He further upset the legacy of that once noble school AND … they charge $ 50,000 (est) per year for this great Catholic formation.

For all the great knowledge and wisdom in those hallowed halls of learning I think they’ negleted the truth they were entrusted to teach. That’s as low as you go…and have mercy -- they will answer for it one day.

Mk 10: 42-44

 

[BobCatholic]

You need to get your facts a little more clear. You are confusing the several thousand legitimate protesters with the few who refused to be part of the legitimate protest, and purposely came on campus with the intent to not go through normal proceedures to protest. The law was not unjustly enforced. You are letting your emotions get in the way of facts. ND isn’t out to hurt abortion protestors, as is amply shown by the legitimate protests which took place during graduation time.

OK, then I have one simple question for you.

How many pro-Obama demonstrators were arrested?

The correct answer: ZERO.

The fact that ND doesn’t bother making a simple call to the police and saying “we drop the charges” or “we ask for clemency” shows they have an animus toward the pro-lifers while the pro-Obama folks got off scott free.

 

[BobCatholic]

Do you know that for a fact? …

So you do not know of the activities of other demonstrators?

See for yourself.

news.google.com/news?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=notre+dame+pro-obama+demonstrators+arrested

Survey says!

*Your search - **notre dame pro-obama demonstrators arrested *- did not match any documents

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

I don’t think you have any evidence that the pro-Obama protesters acted in the same manner as the anti folks. So your presumption about them getting a free pass is just specious.

 

[diggerdomer]

OK, then I have one simple question for you.

How many pro-Obama demonstrators were arrested?

The correct answer: ZERO.

The fact that ND doesn’t bother making a simple call to the police and saying “we drop the charges” or “we ask for clemency” shows they have an animus toward the pro-lifers while the pro-Obama folks got off scott free.

Duh–because the pro-Obama demonstrators obeyed the civil law. That’s why they weren’t arrested.

Those protesting Obama’s visit LEGALLY had the venue on campus to express their opinions. Their was a rosary and Mass at the Grotto at Notre Dame that was attended by many people – students, priests, outsiders, faculty – who DID NOT violate civil authority.

 

[BobCatholic]

Duh–because the pro-Obama demonstrators obeyed the civil law. That’s why they weren’t arrested.

No, Notre Dame allowed the pro-Obama demonstrators free reign while imposing restrictions on the pro-lifers.

Pro-lifers had to go to this one location, (to the back of the proverbial bus) and follow very strict rules while they let the pro-Obama demonstrators do what they want.

It is called a double standard. It was impossible for pro-Obama demonstrators to be “trespassing” for ND gave them free reign. That’s why none were arrested.

Proof has been shown that the law was enforced in an unjust manner.

I guess some people are more equal than others. In this case, it was the pro-Obama types that had human rights while the pro-lifers didn’t have as many human rights.

I don’t think you have any evidence that the pro-Obama protesters acted in the same manner as the anti folks. So your presumption about them getting a free pass is just specious.

OK, then let’s see.

pro-lifers were permitted NO signs. Were the pro-Obama types carrying signs? Witnesses said “yes” - yet none of them was arrested.

Same thing about T-shirts. pro-lifers were not permitted those who blasted Obama. But pro-Obama types, sure! They can do that.

And there’s the permitting process. Pro-lifers got a restricted permit while the pro-Obama types had more open permitting.

The proof is in the pudding. The law was enforced unjustly - Viewpoint discrimination.
Number of pro-Obama types arrested: Zero. Number of pro-lifers arrested: many

 

[diggerdomer]

No, Notre Dame allowed the pro-Obama demonstrators free reign while imposing restrictions on the pro-lifers.

Pro-lifers had to go to this one location, (to the back of the proverbial bus) and follow very strict rules while they let the pro-Obama demonstrators do what they want.

It is called a double standard. It was impossible for pro-Obama demonstrators to be “trespassing” for ND gave them free reign. That’s why none were arrested.

Proof has been shown that the law was enforced in an unjust manner.

I guess some people are more equal than others. In this case, it was the pro-Obama types that had human rights while the pro-lifers didn’t have as many human rights.

OK, then let’s see.

pro-lifers were permitted NO signs. Were the pro-Obama types carrying signs? Witnesses said “yes” - yet none of them was arrested.

Same thing about T-shirts. pro-lifers were not permitted those who blasted Obama. But pro-Obama types, sure! They can do that.

And there’s the permitting process. Pro-lifers got a restricted permit while the pro-Obama types had more open permitting.

The proof is in the pudding. The law was enforced unjustly - Viewpoint discrimination.
Number of pro-Obama types arrested: Zero. Number of pro-lifers arrested: many

Really??

Were you there??

I was.

 

[imperial]

No, Notre Dame allowed the pro-Obama demonstrators free reign while imposing restrictions on the pro-lifers.

Pro-lifers had to go to this one location, (to the back of the proverbial bus) and follow very strict rules while they let the pro-Obama demonstrators do what they want.

It is called a double standard. It was impossible for pro-Obama demonstrators to be “trespassing” for ND gave them free reign. That’s why none were arrested.

Proof has been shown that the law was enforced in an unjust manner.

I guess some people are more equal than others. In this case, it was the pro-Obama types that had human rights while the pro-lifers didn’t have as many human rights.

OK, then let’s see.

pro-lifers were permitted NO signs. Were the pro-Obama types carrying signs? Witnesses said “yes” - yet none of them was arrested.

Same thing about T-shirts. pro-lifers were not permitted those who blasted Obama. But pro-Obama types, sure! They can do that.

And there’s the permitting process. Pro-lifers got a restricted permit while the pro-Obama types had more open permitting.

The proof is in the pudding. The law was enforced unjustly - Viewpoint discrimination.
Number of pro-Obama types arrested: Zero. Number of pro-lifers arrested: many

And the reason why they restricted pro lifers is simply because they knew what they where about to do, ‘BETRAY’ the unborn, ignore the church’s commandments, the bride of Christ
They will reap their rewards.

 

[BobCatholic]

And the reason why they restricted pro lifers is simply because they knew what they where about to do, ‘BETRAY’ the unborn, ignore the church’s commandments, the bride of Christ
They will reap their rewards.

Correct.

I’m sure if took the accounts of what happened at ND and replaced “pro-Obama demonstrators” with “whites” and “pro-lifers” with “blacks” And if Obama were replaced by David Duke or a grand dragon of the Klan?

the picture would be a lot clearer, wouldn’t it?

It is obvious that ND is bigoted against the unborn and pro-lifers.

But remember, in today’s leftist dominated secular society, pro-lifers are eeeeeeeevil and must be suppressed at all costs. This is how the left operates. Using the government’s power to enforce viewpoint discrimination.

 

[diggerdomer]

Correct.

I’m sure if took the accounts of what happened at ND and replaced “pro-Obama demonstrators” with “whites” and “pro-lifers” with “blacks” And if Obama were replaced by David Duke or a grand dragon of the Klan?

the picture would be a lot clearer, wouldn’t it?

It is obvious that ND is bigoted against the unborn and pro-lifers.

But remember, in today’s leftist dominated secular society, pro-lifers are eeeeeeeevil and must be suppressed at all costs. This is how the left operates. Using the government’s power to enforce viewpoint discrimination.

Great reasoning. Thanks.

But you never answered my question…were you there? Or are you relying on hearsay for your opinions?

I was there. No one stopped us from entering campus and participating in the demonstrations against ND inviting Obama (rosary, Mass, etc at the Grotto). We just walked right on to campus and could go wherever we wanted (except, of course, the graduation activities, tickets were needed for those…and by the way, Bishop D’Arcy was at the Baccalaureate Mass although he boycotted the Commencement).

 

[BobCatholic]

But you never answered my question…were you there? Or are you relying on hearsay for your opinions?

I’m relying on news reports and eyewitness testimony. Of course, you say you were there, which is nice, so you’re asking me to accept your eyewitness testimony, which contradicts the facts.

Fact: Number of pro-Obama demonstrators arrested: Zero. Number of pro-life protestors arrested: More than zero. Feel free to try telling me again how this is not viewpoint discrimination being practiced by ND.

I was there. No one stopped us from entering campus and participating in the demonstrations against ND inviting Obama (rosary, Mass, etc at the Grotto). We just walked right on to campus and could go wherever we wanted (except, of course, the graduation activities).

And except through the front gate or if one had the wrong signs because one’s opinion is not what ND likes - then don’t dare come on campus or else get arrested.

Sorry, your statement is incomplete.

Prejudice against the unborn and pro-lifers = ND official policy.