Silent No More makes an impact

April 6, 2011

Last Monday, March 28th, about 50 people went out of their way to stop in front of the SUB and listen to the stories of three courageous women as they spoke of how abortion has affected each of their lives. The fact that these women were sharing from their own experiences made the presentation quite powerful. A number of students who heard the presentation reflected on what the message meant to them. Kimberlee Graham-Knight, the event’s emcee, had this to share:

I was riveted by the power of all three presenters’ speeches. I find it’s difficult to get first-hand accounts of abortion, because it is not a subject I feel comfortable asking about, nor one that women freely talk about. After the presentation, being a healthcare worker, I asked a colleague for her anonymous experience with women who have had abortions (I was emboldened by the presentation) and she said it was all but universal that these women have extreme difficulties post-procedure. She added that many of them feel few immediate effects, but develop psychological problems even a decade later. This made me think of cigarettes: perhaps I want to smoke, but I should be made aware of the long-term effects.

Another student shared this with us after hearing the stories:

The Silent No More Awareness Campaign was a shocking snapshot of life pre and post-abortion. I was surprised to hear that all three speakers chose the abortion unwillingly and out of fear, to mask the shame of admitting they were pregnant. It was particularly numbing to know that one woman’s mother and grandmother drove her to the hospital, exterminating their grandchild and great-grandchild in the process.

 

Although a large number of the students who came to listen to the speakers were pro-life, a large group of other students professing to be pro-choice were also present. One of YPY’s executive members shared this experience after interacting with some students:

I had the privilage of speaking with a number of students throughout the day, some of whom professed to be “pro-choice” and some of whom professed to be pro-life. … Two of the students who had stopped to observe the campaign outside of the library said that they were personally opposed to abortion. After asking them whether or not they were personally opposed to rape, and whether or not they felt they would be placing their subjective morality on someone who was not opposed to rape, they came to understand why abortion is not merely a matter of personal preference or belief. If any human life has value, then all must have equal value and must be protected. 

 We are extremely thankful for the people from Silent No More Awareness Campaign for coming and sharing with us their experiences. Many students were touched and many more went away thinking about the issue and how it not only affects the lives of pre-born children, but all who are involved in the choice of abortion. For more information about the Campaign or more personal testimonies about abortion, see their website here.

Leave a Comment » | News, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

Silent No More Awareness Campaign coming to UVic

March 21, 2011

March 28th, 2:15 PM, Student Union Building, UVic

 

In my experience, one of the most powerful ways that I have come to know and accept certain ideas or messages into my own life is through personal testimony. Learning through the personal testimony of others can be a powerful way to learn how to deal with a personal situation. As a club that seeks to uphold the dignity of all human beings, it is important for us to remember that not only does abortion kill pre-born human beings, but also that it may deeply hurt the people who make that choice.

 

YPY invites you to come hear a group of speakers from the Silent No More Awareness Campaign as they share their personal stories: how abortion affected their lives, and how they have healed. They speak from experience and their stories are very powerful. They will be speaking outside the Student Union Building at around 2:15 on Monday March 28th.

1 Comment | Abortion, News, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

Embryo Research: Experimenting with Humans?

March 9, 2011

Ever wonder what embryonic stem cell research is? It is essentially an area of research involving the use of human cells that have the ability to differentiate into many other different types of human cells. However, how researchers go about acquiring these cells is a topic of ethical debate. A reflection on this topic and how it relates to the abortion debate can be found here in an article by Abort73.com.

This Tuesday, March 15th, Youth Protecting Youth is hosting a presentation by Dr. Clement Persaud on the topic of embryonic stem cell research and the ethical questions associated with this process. The presentation will begin at 6:00 PM (in the Bob Wright Science Building, room B150), and will feature a presentation of approximately 45 minutes regarding embryo research, human embryo hybridization and other related biological processes. He will address the ethical issues involved with such procedures and propose practical points of action. This presentation is particularly relelvant to any student or person in the field of biology, medicine, embryology, or ethics. There is no cost to this presentation. We invite you to join in this event which will be sure to be very informative.

 

2 Comments | Abortion, News, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

Social Interaction in the Second Trimester

February 23, 2011

The following is a reflection by Youth Protecting Youth’s vice-president of activities:

An argument I’ve heard several times against recognizing the unborn as persons is that they are less cognitively developed than others, or that they don’t do the things that born people do, like interact and form relationships. The reason, of course, for these differences is that the unborn are at an early stage in the complex process of human development. They aren’t “supposed” to be able to do those things yet. To say they are not persons because of this is simply discrimination based on level of development.

Let me state from the beginning that the reason I believe abortion is wrong is because it is an action that directly and intentionally kills an innocent human being. I recently came across an article, though, which provides even more food for thought on just how human the unborn are.

Researchers in Italy used 4D ultrasound technology to observe twin fetuses at 14 weeks, and again at 18 weeks, of development, noting that a twin pregnancy “offers the unique opportunity to explore social behavior before birth”. The type and frequency of movements was recorded. The researchers observed that the twins reached out to touch one another, and that their motions toward one another were different than their motions toward the uterine wall. The frequency of interaction was higher at 18 weeks than it had been at 14 weeks. They stated:

“We conclude that performance of movements towards the co-twin is not accidental: already starting from the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses execute movements specifically aimed at the co-twin.”

A while ago the National Post ran a story that stirred up a lot of controversy: there is an increase in cases of mothers pregnant with twins deciding they want one child, not two, and requesting a procedure called “selective reduction”, in which one twin is aborted. Obviously my objection to this procedure is that it kills a baby, and as one person quoted in the article suggests, treats babies as a commodity. My immediate question, though, was what would it be like to find out later in life that you had a twin but your parents only wanted one of you, so they aborted the other? Given the new insight into social interactions between twins early in development, I think the effect of this procedure on the surviving twin becomes an even bigger question.

Leave a Comment » | Abortion, Contributions, Updates | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

UVSS Takes Action against YPY

February 9, 2011

In October of 2010 we hosted Jose Ruba of CCBR, who gave the presentation, “Echoes of the Holocaust.” The UVic Students’ Society Board of Directors has now voted in favour of a motion that will censure YPY for hosting the event because they allege that our actions contravened the club harassment policy. YPY is specifically being reprimanded for advertising the event in such a way that it “misled” students, and allegedly harassed them as it compared abortion to the Holocaust. There seemed to be little consensus at the UVSS board meeting as to whether harassment had actually occurred: many board members seemed to think that since people had been upset, something needed to be done to deal with YPY, whether or not we had actually broken any rules.

 

The Motion:

Whereas a Complaints Committee was struck in response to complaints received regarding an event called “Echos of the Holocaust” hosted by the club Youth Protecting Youth; and

Whereas the complaints committee investigated several different complaints; and

Whereas by hosting an event “Echos of the Holocaust” Youth Protecting Youth allowed for people to be misled about the nature of the event and the Complaints Committee deems this to be in violation of the harassment policy, clubs policy part 2; and

Whereas significant concerns were raised by students about off the conduct of campus groups such as, “The Canadian Center for Bioethical Reform”; and

Whereas the UVSS would like to find long lasting, proactive solutions to reoccurring issues; therefore,

BIRT the UVSS investigate the possibility of mediating with Youth Protecting Youth to help prevent further issues; and

BIFRT Youth Protecting Youth be censured for violating the harassment policy found in clubs policy part 2; and

BIFRT the Political Action Committee hold a restorative justice event; and

BIFRT legal counsel be consulted to investigate if there can be changes to policy that would address concerns around the conduct of off campus groups or speakers.

We hosted the presentation because we believe we continue to experience “echoes of the Holocaust” today. Just as the Holocaust and past genocides are characterized by their unjust denial of personhood to a group of human beings and their systematic destruction of this group, so too do we see denial of personhood and systematic destruction with abortion in our society – the group targeted is the unborn. In two previous blog posts we addressed this comparison and the false accusations made about the event.

Yes, we knew that some people would be offended by the presentation. But what are we supposed to do? Stay quiet to avoid offending some people, while we silently watch 100,000 Canadians die every year because of abortion?

Let us remember that feeling offended and emotionally upset because one disagrees with a viewpoint does not mean one is being harassed. After all, no one has a legal right to be free from offense. Students who see and dislike our posters are not being subjected to a “hostile, intimidating, threatening or humiliating environment.[i]” The Clubs Harassment Policy states that harassment is defined as “treatment” of a person. If merely expressing our beliefs in advertising constituted “treating” people in a harassing manner, then no one would be able to express his or her views without fear of censure.

We are truly sorry that some people felt emotional or upset when they saw our posters. But abortion is emotionally upsetting. We do not want any woman or child to be hurt by abortion, and therefore want to provide students with as much information as possible so they can choose life-affirming options for themselves and their unborn children. This presentation was one way to express these beliefs.

The presentation did not pose a threat to anyone who attended; we are all adults capable of choosing for ourselves what we want to believe, and this presentation did not force anyone to do anything. We simply stated that genocide is horrible, the Holocaust was horrible, and we see that abortion is horrible because like the Holocaust and other widely recognized genocides, it involves the denial of personhood to and subsequent killing of innocent human beings. We wish none of these things ever happened, and we want to better uphold the dignity and value of every human being, born or unborn.

It is unfortunate that the UVSS Board of Directors has chosen to censure YPY and thinks it is necessary to mediate with us and host a restorative justice event. Although we welcome and encourage dialogue on the abortion issue, we have not harassed anyone, and so the actions taken by the board are based on a false “guilty” verdict. In addition, we worry that a policy made to govern who can and cannot speak on campus wouldn’t be applied equally to all clubs, and could be used to censor YPY.

The continued mistreatment of campus pro-life groups is still receiving much media attention, as can be seen in this recent MSN article. Nathalie Des Rosiers, general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, cautions student unions that attempt to silence pro-life groups, as doing so sets a precedent for future debates. “When they’re approaching this issue, they should not diminish their responsibility toward ensuring that university campuses are places where ideas can circulate freely.”

[i] UVSS Policy Manual: Clubs Policy. Part F: Harassment: Definition http://www.uvss.uvic.ca/upload/docs/Policy%20and%20Bylaws/2010-11%20Clubs%20Policy%20%28Amended%202010-06-21%29.pdf

7 Comments | Free Speech, News, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

A reflection of “SLED”

January 19, 2011

SLED

When you click on the heading “Why Abortion is Wrong” on the menu bar of Youth Protecting Youth’s website, these words appear on your computer screen:

During an abortion, the life of a fetus or embryo is ended – that much is universally agreed upon. This is euphemistically referred to as ending the pregnancy. Abortion is wrong because fetuses and embryos are innocent human beings, and killing human beings is wrong because all human beings, born and unborn, have inherent value and dignity.

This section of the blog (one of our most-read) was included because we decided that online visitors who don’t have time to read more (or aren’t inclined to do so) should have access to a quick, very simplified pro-life position statement.[1]

We have been including pro-life explanation pieces over time to make the blog into better pro-life information source. But because many other resources (some of which can be found on the side-bar under “Pro-Life Apologetics Resources,[2]“) do a fine job of speaking in defense of the pro-life position, we offer unique perspectives that may be specially relevant to UVic students and community members while trying to summarize concepts, instead of re-inventing the wheel – or the sled:

The acronym “SLED” was invented[3] to describe the characteristics that distinguish unborn from born humans: size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency. If one accepts that humans are valuable and worthy of protection, then considering that these are the only differences between the born and the unborn and that these characteristics continue to change throughout someone’s entire life should lead to the conclusion that abortion is wrong.

Size

“A person’s a person, no matter how small.[4]” The elephant in Dr. Seuss’ famous book recognized the worth of some very small beings, but Horton’s antagonists weren’t used to acknowledging very small beings, and they forgot something about Whos that applies equally well to us: The value of human beings is independent of size.

This sounds obvious when stated so bluntly. It also seems obvious when we compare born people to one another: a newborn is no less valuable than an adult despite being smaller, and Steve Nash is no less valuable than the other Phoenix Suns players despite being shorter. Actually, having been named MVP twice, might he be even more valuable than they are? Does Steve Nash’s value as a person depend on his basketball skills? The next section will help to answer that question.

Level of Development:

Third-year engineering students are further developed in knowledge and ability than first-year engineering students[5], but this doesn’t make the third-years more valuable as human beings. Toddlers are much less developed than teenagers, but we don’t treat toddlers as any less human.

All humans are of equal worth, regardless of their respective levels of development. The lack of brain activity or absence of a heartbeat at certain stages of development don’t disqualify unborn children from being persons worthy of protection. Nor does their lack of life experience. If we were to conclude that these things do make a difference, we would have to concede that human worth varies according to ability and development, and we only achieve our full worth (which would be less than the worth of people with more ability, according to this philosophy) when we arrive at adulthood. Steve Nash may be a better basketball player, but you and I are just as valuable as he.

Environment:

Pro-lifers make the assertion that someone’s location doesn’t determine his or her value. Like the size argument, this is also obvious when stated explicitly: I’m not made any more or less valuable as a person when I come into the SUB from a Frisbee game on the Quad. But I guess sitting in the SUB does put me at the mercy of the UVSS’ maintenance contractors; if they choose to ignore sprinkler system upkeep and there is a fire, I might perish. Should they have a responsibility to protect me or is my life no longer worthy of protection, since I’m now dependent on them?

Degree of Dependency:

Of course, the UVSS’ maintenance people have a responsibility to uphold my right to life when I’m in the SUB by maintaining its sprinkler system. A toddler is more dependent on his or her parents than a teenager, but that doesn’t make a difference to the human value of either one – the toddler should be protected simply because of his or her humanity. A newborn is entirely dependent on his or her parents for survival, and they are responsible for the life of their newborn, and the situation is the same for the unborn. For more information on how the degree of dependence of the unborn doesn’t nullify their right to life, see this video[6].

From these four points, we see that human value is not a function of development, dependency, size or location. Rather, it is an immeasurable constant that is equal for humans of all colours, creeds, religions and races.

[1] For the more thorough learner, the hyperlinks on that same page lead to more information.

[2] Side note: Because of its Greek root, the word “apologetics” can be mistakenly seen to connote remorse. Apologetics means “speaking in defense,” not “apologizing.”

[3] Stephen Schwarz in “The Moral Question of Abortion” (Loyola University Press, 1990, p. 17.)

[4] From Dr. Seuss’ Horton Hears a Who!

[5] If ever in doubt about this, just ask any third-year engineering student.

[6][6] Toward the end of this video is a brief section that is graphic in nature; it shows the results of abortion.

1 Comment | Updates | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

Abort73.com – a website for exploring the issue of abortion

January 8, 2011

    

Abort73.com

 Honoured by a Webby Award for excellence on the internet (the Grammy’s of website design), Abort73.com exists to provide the reader with an engaging abortion education. Including abortion facts and statistics from around the world, and easy-to-read articles on topics ranging from the philosophical question of personhood, to frequently asked questions and common objections, to the controversial debate on stem cell research, Abort73 has something for everyone. The site’s page on prenatal development features a clear photographic timeline of a human’s development from conception to birth, a real-time video of an embryo moving its arms around in the womb only eight weeks after conception, and excerpts from various embryology textbooks. Abort73.com is updated frequently and openly welcomes your feedback. Check it out; but be warned-you might learn something you’ll never forget.

1 Comment | Abortion, Contributions, Updates | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

Reflection on support for mothers

November 23, 2010

An article recently appeared on Fox News, reporting on an organization called Students for Life of America investigating the University of North Carolina’s student health plan. Another organization known as Feminists for Life also offered its reflection on the UNC health plan and the actions of Students for Life of America. In their reflection, Feminists for Life president, Serrin Foster, points out that “the issue is not just the school’s insurance coverage”, but that “it is also common for students to have no maternity coverage in their health insurance” In other words, not only is it a sad reality that abortion is covered by many student health care plans and health packages offered by employers in both the United States and Canada, but there is also commonly very little support for student mothers in general, such as no maternity coverage for students in the health insurance plans. In British Columbia, all abortions are tax-funded. According to the University of Victoria’s Housing website, there are 181 housing units designated as “Family Housing Units” with reasonable rent costs, although in order to be eligible, parents must be taking a full load of courses. In addition, it is recommended that mothers apply a year in advance due to the high demand for these units. The reality for many women is that the prospect of no health insurance coverage and minimal financial support services to help off-set the cost of raising a child can be a significant factor in pushing a woman to decide to abort her child. Women who are pregnant should feel that they have the support to be able to give birth to and raise a child while still being able to pursue her education. As a society, we need to better support women in this regard. Women need to know that there are services and support available to help them to choose life for their child, rather than feeling that abortion is the only option.

 In the meantime, we are very excited to announce that Youth Protecting Youth will be offering an annual bursary for single mothers on campus. This bursary exists to support mothers and help enable them to pursue a university education while still supporting a child.  This bursary can be applied for by completing a General Bursary Application. We hope that this bursary will be a building block in the effort to change the culture and the way society views children in the context of education. It can never be acceptable to kill a born child for the reason that the child would interfere with the education of the parents. We will continue to work towards the day when this will also be true for the pre-born child. For more information about services in the Victoria area, see the “Need Help” section of the YPY blog.

Leave a Comment » | Abortion, Contributions, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

Links on comparing abortion to genocide, and free speech on TV

October 21, 2010

As the date of the “Echoes of the Holocaust” presentation gets closer, and the controversy continues, I invite you to read an excellent piece about the comparison between abortion and the Holocaust (as well as other human rights abuses) written by Zuza Kurzawa, the president of the pro-life club at Queen’s university in Ontario. Zuza was the only non-Carleton student to be arrested October 4, and has written this in response to criticism she has received in regards to her involvement with pro-life outreach that compares abortion to genocide, particulary demands from students on her own campus that she make a formal apology for such comparisons. Definitely worth reading:

http://queensalive.blogspot.com/2010/10/zuza-kurzawa-response-to-critics.html

Also of interest, discussion of the arrests at Carleton and of free speech on university campuses in general on the Michael Coren show tonight.

Leave a Comment » | Abortion, Free Speech, News, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyvicepresident

Carleton University Continues to Bully Students

October 7, 2010

Five students, four from Carleton University, and one from Queen’s University, were arrested this week and charged with trespassing after attempting to display a peaceful pro-life protest in a public area on the Carleton university campus. Once again, the truth of the pro-life message is being silenced, this time by the university administration. The press release below comes from the National Campus Life Network, and includes a link to video footage of the arrests. In the past, Youth Protecting Youth has also had issues with freedom of speech and the University of Victoria Students Society, though these issues were not with the university administration and the issues were dealt with this past summer through legal action. Although it is extremely upsetting that students can be arrested for a peaceful protest on a university campus, the greater tragedy is that preborn children are still being killed through the act of abortion everyday, and that this process is still legal in Canada through all 9 months of a pregnancy.

CARLETON UNIVERSITY CONTINUES TO BULLY STUDENTS
Carleton Communicates Misleading Statements to Public

October 6, 2010. Ottawa. One day after Carleton University had Ottawa police arrest 5 students for attempting to peacefully express their views on abortion, a flurry of reports raise questions about whether the students are demanding something not allowed of other students. Footage can be seen at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeJkBQn1-r8

University representatives have been reported as stating that no students are allowed to set up displays in the Quad, the area that the pro-life students selected for their signs.

Ruth Lobo, President of Carleton Lifeline, and one of the students arrested, responded: “The university is misleading the public by making it seem as though we are demanding special treatment instead of equal treatment, but that’s not true.”

She explained that their booking request was made several months ago and at no point between then and now did the university communicate to the students, or their lawyer, that the Tory Quad is not bookable space for students.

“Why is the University now claiming the Quad is not bookable space?” asked James Shaw, club Vice President. “We have done extensive research on the policies of the university and see no evidence of their claims that the space isn’t bookable.  In fact, we see the opposite. If, as they’re now claiming, the Quad is not bookable, we should have been told in the summer when we were filling out the application form. That would have been a very simple answer to give, and a much easier one.”

According to the Booking-Space-On-Campus Policy, Tory Quad is listed as bookable space for recognized student groups, which includes Carleton Lifeline. Further, the policy does not place restrictions on display size or content.

According to David Sterritt, who is the Head of Housing and Conference Services at Carleton, the reason for denying the use of the Quad was based on content.  On August 9, 2010, Sterritt wrote the club,

“While we wish to provide your group with an opportunity to express itself freely on this matter, we are also aware that The Genocide Awareness Project uses promotional materials which are disturbing and offensive to some. To this end, we are prepared to offer your group the use of Porter Hall.”

Porter Hall is a closed room on campus that few students pass by and many are even unaware of its location.

“It’s clear by their direct communication to us,” said Lobo, “that this is content-based discrimination.  This censorship should concern everyone, regardless of one’s views on abortion.”

Shaw added, “First the university has us arrested for peacefully exercising our academic freedom and free speech rights.  And now they’re coming up with excuses for their bad behaviour that they never communicated to us.  Shame on Carleton.”

Carleton Lifeline continues to stress that the right to free speech does not exist so much as to maintain mainstream views but more so to protect unpopular opinions like theirs, especially on a university campus.

Lobo said she finds it appalling the university would “mislead the public by making the arrest look like we violated university policy instead of what it really was: that Carleton censors opinions on campus thereby violating their own policy of academic freedom.”

Below is Carleton University’s Human Rights Policies and Procedures- relevant section is Part 1 General Article 4:

http://www2.carleton.ca/equity/ccms/wp-content/ccms-files/human-rights-report-updated-2010.pdf

Below is Carleton University’s Booking-Space-On-Campus Policy- Relevant sections are Section 1 and Appedix A.:

http://www2.carleton.ca/secretariat/ccms/wp-content/ccms-files/Booking-Space-on-Campus-Policy.pdf

1 Comment | Free Speech, News, Updates | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by ypyinfoofficer

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.