The encouraging thing is that this year there are pro-choice people all circling the display.

These people apparently have a litigous mindset, as well, as reported by the Varsity.

I also immediately thought of PETA in some of its more infamous campaigns - PETA has certainly offended in the past by exploiting the Holocaust as a metaphor.

quote:

---

The Black Students' Association, while not taking a position on abortion in general, objected to the imagery that GAP uses.

"We do not appreciate the oversimplification of the despicable acts of genocide perpetrated in the recent past that results from this comparison," said their executive in a statement. "Although there may be some similarities, the history and circumstances surrounding these issues are very different and should be acknowledged as such." Other campus groups, notably Hillel, have not commented publicly on the project.

---

Haven't heard about the reaction from any other student groups.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
I'd say I'm pretty strong on civil liberties as well, but I also don't think that freedom of speech is an absolute - I'm more of the belief that it's important to have civil discourse within the context of community standards. Problem with groups like these is that they feed off of provoking extreme reactions.

---

When I passed by around noon or so, it seemed groups from both sides were there, though the pro-choice were pretty dominant, it seemed, there and all up St. George Street. Someone was holding a sign that appeared to have pictures of fetuses, or something, on it.

quote:

---

That's kind of the point. If you are truly 'strong' on civil liberties, you should support idiots like these. This is what free speech is about. Giving voice to the least pleasant. It's not wrong to wish suppression of voice if that is what you believe. Make your choice.

---

Thanks, Makwa -- just what I need, a little babble-lecture after a long day. Oh well.

Let me clarify. I support, respect and will fight for freedom of speech, but I don't regard it as an absolute. Which is why I said I'm "pretty strong," not "completely unyielding." As with so many other things in life, understanding that there are moral shades of grey is important.

I at no time posted that I thought GAP should be banned. I think what they're saying is extremely repugnant on a variety of levels, and I do, indeed, see this as another example of the conflict between freedom of speech and offending/hurting others. Which is why I thought that a reasonable compromise was to make the display "voluntary," i.e. not easily visible to casual passers-by. Just as I might choose to avoid reading hurtful or hateful things on the internet, I don't personally want to see them in full view on a busy campus.

And saying I should "support idiots like these" is poorly worded, don't you think? Maybe support the right of idiots like these to make a public statement would be a better way to put it?

Saying that freedom of speech is an absolute right, even if someone is hurt by it, is never something I'd do. Child pornography is an easy example. Someone who had had an abortion and was conflicted by it, someone who lost relatives in the Holocaust, or someone who survived one of our modern genocides like Bosnia or Rwanda could easily be hurt by seeing this disply.

Gauging the level of hurt and the balance between free speech and harm to others is one of the tough issues that we all have to deal with. As a feminist, as someone who believes in the freedom of reproductive choice, as someone who knows people who have suffered through horrors they are putting up next to pictures of fetuses, and as someone who finds genocide abhorrent, I have to say that the GAP project comes very close to the line indeed.