About 75 to 80 KU students peacefully marched down Jayhawk Boulevard yesterday to protest the anti-abortion displays organized by the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform.
* * *
[The] Black Student Union president said ‘ ... I hope this is a message to other organizations who bring us their garbage that we will not tolerate it.’ [Where was Mr. Decker with his "tolerance" declarations when his classmates most needed to hear them?]
Extra security measures were taken by the KU Public Safety Office for yesterday’s protest. [Sgt. Troy] Mailen said that six additional officers were deployed to the existing fleet of 11 [sic] officers.
* * *
Sally Puleo, KU Pro-Choice vice president ... [said] ‘Women who have had abortions are not Hitler.’
Ms. Puleo is finally correct. Highly distressed women who are being threatened with abandonment by the fathers of their unborn children and lied to concerning the humanity of those children, are certainly not Hitler. But the same can not be said of the cold-blooded doctors who are paid fortunes to kill babies of whose humanity they have a sophisticated understanding.
A similar story ran in Friday’s Topeka Capital-Journal newspaper. It described the march in larger terms:
About 125 students marched along Jayhawk Boulevard carrying signs and chanting slogans. Students along the path stopped what they were doing to watch. Some clapped or pumped closed fists in the air.
* * *
Gregg Cunningham, the center’s director, said even though the protesters shouted, ‘CBR go away,’ he was glad to see them. As they passed, he leaned calmly against a barricade put in place by KU security after a student rammed the display with his car Sunday.
* * *
‘If we would have put up these signs and the students ignored us, then we would have failed.’
Page 5 of The Kansan’s weekend issue contained a story titled "Abortion debate allows explanation of opinions." It began with a comparison:
The abortion debate held last night in the ballroom of the Kansas Union contrasted [with] the highly charged campus demonstrations earlier this week.
While the atmosphere was calm, the subject matter presented and discussed was graphic.
* * *
Andrea Austin, Lawrence senior and abortion rights advocate, said she attended the debate to hear the center’s arguments after seeing its display on campus.
* * *
‘I thought the presentation had good organization, but I still don’t agree,’ she said.
* * *
Sandra Barnes, Taylorsville, Miss., graduate student, came as an anti-abortion advocate to see what abortion rights advocates had to say. She said the evidence provided by Cunningham had silenced the opposition.
* * *
She described the content of the video demonstration as horrible but thought she had to watch it to fully understand the issue.
* * *
Sally Puleo, St. Charles, Ill., junior and KU Pro-Choice Coalition vice president, discouraged her fellow members of the KU Pro-Choice Coalition from attending the debate.
‘These people have a script,’ said Puleo, who attended about five minutes of the debate. ‘There is no way students can compete with professionals who do this every day.’
She also said her group had devoted many hours this week to protesting the center’s display and needed to spend time concentrating on academics and other areas.
There followed in the local newspapers (for weeks after our departure) so many editorials, columns and letters-to the-editor that we couldn’t possibly include them all in this report (or the scores of e-mails still coming into our Website) but here are some of the more memorable exchanges (readers wishing to review the news and commentary more fully may access The University Daily Kansan at http://www.kansan.com and The Lawrence Journal-World at http://www.ljworld.com).
Many female students told us the obvious; they have much in common philosophically with those who supported earlier forms of genocide. For instance, Meredith Toenjes, a Kansan columnist, wrote: "For many of those women who do choose to have an abortion, I might not feel that they made the best decision, and if it had been up to me, I might have chosen differently. "However, it’s not up to me, nor should it be." But surely Ms. Toenjes wouldn’t also say "Someone else’s ownership of slaves (and the attendant brutalization of blacks) isn’t up to me, nor should it be."
Lisa Kreiner, another Kansan columnist echoed the same sentiment: "The advantage of the current state of the abortion legislation is that regardless [sic]which position you support -- abortion rights or anti-abortion -- you are free to act in a way that is consistent with your belief system." But we can assume Ms. Kreiner wouldn’t have said of legalized lynching that "its advantage is the freedom to hang blacks or not, consistent with your belief system."
Sarah Deer, coordinator of the KU Pro-Choice Coalition also wrote the student paper to say: "There are members of our group who have personal opposition to abortion, but feel strongly that the government should not interfere with a decision regarding reproductive choice." Should "the government" today not be empowered to "interfere with a decision regarding discrimination against blacks?"
Four women who are also members of the Pro-Choice Coalition (Holly Howell, Rebecca Kuether, Courtney Husted and Amanda Smith) added their robotic voices to this callous chorus in still another letter to the Kansan: "No government should be able to dictate what a woman should or should not do with her body." Would these ladies have argued that "no government should be able to dictate what a slave owner should or should not do with his property?" Of course, abortion advocates reject these comparisons because they reject the notion that an unborn baby is a person. But that is precisely what racists asserted (and assert) about African Americans, using many similarly crude, pseudo-scientific arguments.
Although the university administration and a large majority of KU students (even the pro-aborts) seemed genuinely committed to the First Amendment, an appalling minority seemed inclined toward fascism when offended. There was a high "f-factor" among the "how dare you" crowd. Jarrod Fobes, a Lincoln junior noticed this in his letter to the Kansan (quoted in part at the beginning of this report): "For KU supposedly being such a diverse and tolerant campus, there sure are a lot of angry people wandering around." Rachel Robson, a Baldwin City senior shared Mr. Fobes dismay . "As a pro-choice feminist, I am sickened. I am sickened to see people who presume to speak for me try to deny others freedom of speech."
But many students thanked us and they weren’t all pro-life. Troy Thompson, a Kincaid junior wrote the student paper to say:
This display invited discussion on a controversial topic which we, as a society ignore. The graphic depictions shocked and offended many people. We at the University need to be offended. We only want what is comfortable, not necessary. This type of display reminded us that the University is not a place to forget about the disturbing issues.
Shawn Beatty, an Attawa sophomore wrote the Kansan saying:
I would like to say ‘thank you’ to all of those that have been involved with the anti-abortion posters on campus this week. Not only have they opened the eyes of all that have viewed, but they have also made some valid comparisons.
Scott Raymond, a Kansas City, Mo., sophomore wrote the paper to say:
I’d like to applaud the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform for provoking a whirlwind of discussion on campus already. Sunday evening was the first time that I’ve ever seen a group of seven guys sitting in Mrs. E’s [a campus cafeteria] actively discussing social policy, ethics and morality. Whether or not you agree with the position of the demonstrators, the parallels that the group has drawn demand discussion.
Lisa Edwards, a Gainesville, Fla., graduate student published a letter saying:
As an open-minded, multicultural woman, I too was disgusted by the pictures displayed by the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform.
* * *
[But] ... it promoted a dynamic interchange of opinions and an intense amount of dialogue between many different people.
Space limitations also make it impossible to write about the hundreds of amazing face-to-face exchanges we had with students. David Lee of our staff, for instance, convinced a sexually active "Christian" student to become abstinent with his girlfriend. Many pro-abortion students complained that the GAP exhibit was all people were talking about (pity). One female student told us she was angry that GAP discussions were keeping her lectures from starting on time and added that she couldn’t concentrate on her work because she couldn’t get the pictures out of her mind. Another said the pictures were ruining his meals.
A Western Civilization professor brought the class out to observe the exhibit, as did professors of Speech Communications and Media. Two English classes were assigned to write papers on the exhibit and scores of students interviewed members of our staff to complete the assignment. A pro-abortion female student publicly thanked us at the campus debate for treating even rude students politely during the week. Several campus ministry leaders and a police officer said the same. Many students admitted in varying degrees that their views were being influenced by the photos. Another police officer confided to us that we had "changed his mind" (most of the police force was compelled to watch and listen to our presentations day after day). A student member of the Navigators ministry told us that he was "totally against the project at the beginning," but after watching he was converted and volunteered to help.
A sorority coed said her chapter leaders had told members to ignore the signs and not talk to one another about them. Traci Spencer (one of our volunteers & wife of CBR General Counsel Jim Spencer) told her that denial was unhealthy, and as the student agreed, she began to cry. This is why at each exhibit we display signs offering 800 numbers for post-abortion and crisis pregnancy help.
A young Chinese couple stopped to view the exhibit and were so transfixed by one of the many new pre-natal development videos we show on outdoor video monitors that they admitted their minds had been changed!
We are teaching students between classes at major universities what they would never learn in the classroom. We are reaching more people with a more convincing pro-life message in a shorter period of time than has ever been possible with any other project ever attempted. These are the people who will run this nation, and if we are going to change the culture we must influence the education of its leaders. These kids will never be the same – even the pro-aborts.
We receive nearly weekly requests to bring this project to more campuses than we can possibly accommodate on our present budget. Funding is the limiting factor. If you think this is the most effective pro-life project of its kind, please help us finance it. If you can’t, please contact us to become a regular part of our prayer support effort.
|
