Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees every citizen the right to freedom of speech.
But are certain topics off limits for debate?
Anti–abortion clubs at Canadian universities have been silenced, censored and shut down by student governments across the country. The justification being that their message threatens a woman's right to choose.
The pro-choice Canadian Civil Liberties Association has fought for abortion rights since the sixties. However, it also believes that no opinion should be censored and has fought tirelessly on behalf of anti-abortion clubs when threatened with deratification.
The University of Western Ontario and its student union proclaim their commitment to dialogue and discussion.
This commitment was tested on April 2nd, 2009 when two anti–abortion clubs brought Silent No More to campus.
This documentary takes the listener through the weeks leading up to the event, the challenges faced by the anti-abortion clubs and how it compares to other campuses.
"People are always preaching freedom of speech...except when it applies to a "socially unaccepted" concept such as Pro-Life. If we can allow Pro-Choicers to voice their opinion, why can't Pro-lifers?? It's pure prejudism."
Yes and the stupid thing about their position is that legal protections for freedom of speech exist not for speech that everyone agrees with or that is in-offensive, but for speech which is unpopular and offensive since such reasons have been used in the past to censor people's speech.
The thing with the subject of abortion here is that the pro-abortion people try as they might are having a hard time convincing people that anti-abortion activists are anti-women since many pro-life clubs are either headed by or majority staffed by women. The other problem for the pro-abortionists is that they are advocating in support for the legalization of a procedure which they and most people don't want to talk about. This then begs the question, that if abortion is such a good thing and worthy of legal protection why not proclaim its virtues to the hill tops?
The only reason why universities are getting away with censoring pro-life clubs is because the universities live in this legal grey zone which declares that despite the fact that most of these institutes are public and get most of their funding from the taxpayer, they have been declared private and in control of their own spaces and hence laws like the Charter don't apply as much to them. This gets me wondering if the Courts which have made such decisions in the past would rule the same way if for instance one such school decided not to admit blacks like George Wallace tried to do in Alabama 45 years ago? Somehow I doubt very much that said Courts would be declaring these institutions to be private. Perhaps defending civil liberties insn't such a priority when the victims are not exactly from the traditional groups of disenfranchised.
Ethan, I applaud the coverage of such a wide variety of information in only 15 minutes. It will be interesting to see what comes out of this issue. I certainly appreciate the comment from the one individual who mentioned that ensurance of freedom of speech is the responsibility of the university administration as well, not up to campus unions alone... we often forget that the administration has a role to play as well in campus life.
People are always preaching freedom of speech...except when it applies to a "socially unaccepted" concept such as Pro-Life. If we can allow Pro-Choicers to voice their opinion, why can't Pro-lifers?? It's pure prejudism.
I am glad that someone is speaking up about the groups that are being silenced such as this one. We are supposed to have freedom of speech but are losing ground fast. It doesn't matter what side of the debate you are on, you should always have the right to speak and demonstrate. In these times, the minority is ruling and laws are being changed for various minority group. How did this ever come to be? For the record, if this was my area of passion, I would march along, demonstrate with, and voice my opinion for Pro-Life. Life begins at conception. "You are fearfully and wonderfully made".
You did a great job Ethan. Thank you for sharing this with us. Best wishes.
Comments
Good Job Ethan!
by Desmond P. Burton-Williams
Wed, 06/03/2009 - 23:05
"People are always preaching freedom of speech...except when it applies to a "socially unaccepted" concept such as Pro-Life. If we can allow Pro-Choicers to voice their opinion, why can't Pro-lifers?? It's pure prejudism."
Yes and the stupid thing about their position is that legal protections for freedom of speech exist not for speech that everyone agrees with or that is in-offensive, but for speech which is unpopular and offensive since such reasons have been used in the past to censor people's speech.
The thing with the subject of abortion here is that the pro-abortion people try as they might are having a hard time convincing people that anti-abortion activists are anti-women since many pro-life clubs are either headed by or majority staffed by women. The other problem for the pro-abortionists is that they are advocating in support for the legalization of a procedure which they and most people don't want to talk about. This then begs the question, that if abortion is such a good thing and worthy of legal protection why not proclaim its virtues to the hill tops?
The only reason why universities are getting away with censoring pro-life clubs is because the universities live in this legal grey zone which declares that despite the fact that most of these institutes are public and get most of their funding from the taxpayer, they have been declared private and in control of their own spaces and hence laws like the Charter don't apply as much to them. This gets me wondering if the Courts which have made such decisions in the past would rule the same way if for instance one such school decided not to admit blacks like George Wallace tried to do in Alabama 45 years ago? Somehow I doubt very much that said Courts would be declaring these institutions to be private. Perhaps defending civil liberties insn't such a priority when the victims are not exactly from the traditional groups of disenfranchised.
Ep. 92
by Jennifer H.
Wed, 06/03/2009 - 21:44
Ethan, I applaud the coverage of such a wide variety of information in only 15 minutes. It will be interesting to see what comes out of this issue. I certainly appreciate the comment from the one individual who mentioned that ensurance of freedom of speech is the responsibility of the university administration as well, not up to campus unions alone... we often forget that the administration has a role to play as well in campus life.
People are always preaching
by Blank
Wed, 06/03/2009 - 15:23
People are always preaching freedom of speech...except when it applies to a "socially unaccepted" concept such as Pro-Life. If we can allow Pro-Choicers to voice their opinion, why can't Pro-lifers?? It's pure prejudism.
Ep. 92 - The Silenced Scream
by Marg Watson
Wed, 06/03/2009 - 03:03
I am glad that someone is speaking up about the groups that are being silenced such as this one. We are supposed to have freedom of speech but are losing ground fast. It doesn't matter what side of the debate you are on, you should always have the right to speak and demonstrate. In these times, the minority is ruling and laws are being changed for various minority group. How did this ever come to be? For the record, if this was my area of passion, I would march along, demonstrate with, and voice my opinion for Pro-Life. Life begins at conception. "You are fearfully and wonderfully made".
You did a great job Ethan. Thank you for sharing this with us. Best wishes.
Post new comment