About

Carleton Lifeline Constitution:
Carleton Lifeline Constitution

At the beginning of the summer of 2010, Carleton University students filled out the appropriate paper work to use a large outdoor area on campus to display graphic images of abortion beside other atrocities such as the Holocaust and Rwanda. This display, GAP (Genocide Awareness Project), has been found to be educational and effective for helping women and saving babies (http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/gap.html).

After many months of waiting for the University Administration to respond, Carleton Lifeline, the pro-life club on campus, received notice from the Head of Housing and Conference Services that GAP was considered to be “disturbing and offensive to some” and therefore could not be shown in public (Please see “Correspondence” for official letter from Univ.). The University then offered Lifeline a closed room on campus where they could set up their display and invite members of the public to see it.

Upon being told this, Carleton Lifeline’s lawyer, Albertos Polizogopolous, informed Carleton University that this was an infringement on the rights of the students, a violation of the University’s own policies, and content based discrimination. Lifeline did not hear back from the University for an extended period of time, and when they did, the answer was the same: Carleton Lifeline may not display the Genocide Awareness Project anywhere on campus but Porter Hall (the closed room).

As such, Carleton Lifeline decided to procede with their event and informed the University that they would be staging a National Protest against Canadian Universities that

restrict freedom of speech and as part of their protest, they would erect the Genocide Awa

reness Project in the public space they originally sought.

On Monday October 4th 2010, Carleton Lifeline arrived on campus to find 9 Ottawa Police Officers waiting for them as well as Campus Security. After reading the University Policies to all authorities present, 4 Carleton students and one student from Queens were arrested and charged with trespassing.

In effect, the University violated the right of the students to express themselves freely without fear of persecution or detention. Further, the University has discriminated against its own students on the basis of content.The actions of the University mirror closely the actions of authorities who lived during the time of the Civil Rights Movement. Imagine if Martin Luther King Jr had been told he could protest racism as long as he does so in his segregated Church where he may invite white people to come and see it?

Under the guise of comprimise, Carleton Univeristy violated their own polices of:

1) Freedom of Assembly/Protest

2) Freedom of Speech

3) Freedom of discussion

4) Freedom to criticize the University in a public way

5) Academic Freedom

Sections from Carleton Universities Policies relevant to the arrest can be found here:

Snapshots of Revelant Polices regarding Censorship and Academic Freedom

DISCRIMINATION POLICY

Student-Rights-Responsibilities-Policy

Booking-Space-on-Campus-Policy

human-rights-report-updated-2010

On November 11th, Carleton University’s Student Association informed Carleton Lifeline that they were being denied club status on the basis that CUSA is a pro-choice organization  that does not support pro-life groups.

The Student Union invited Lifeline to change their Constitution to reflect pro-choice values otherwise they would not be certified. Further, the Union cited their Discrimination Policy that can be read below. As a result of CUSA’s violation of their own internal policies as well as the blantent discrimination against pro-life groups found in the Discrimination Policy, Carleton Lifeline will legally defend their right to exist on campus. Please see “Correspondence” and ” Press Release” for full story.

Here are the relevant polices regarding Carleton University’s Student Association:

CUSA’S Constitution:                                      http://cusaonline.com/Downloads/cusa_constitution_09.pdf

CUSA’s Certification/Recertification/Decertification By-Laws (section IX):  http://cusaonline.com/Downloads/bylaw_dec_09.pdf

CUSA’s Discrimination Policy (pg 33 Section 6)  http://cusaonline.com/Downloads/cusa_policies_2010.pdf

This blog exists as a form of documentation of all that has happened in regards to the arrests, decertification and constant bullying towards Carleton Lifeline.

17 Responses to About

  1. John Crosby says:

    God Bless to you all for what you are trying. The lies and pathetic hypercritical actions of the pro choice people are terrible. But we all must keep trying. Their reasons and or excuses spoken on the CBC report were ridiculous. But please, do me and the other Pro Lifers a favour. When you are interviewed and the other side or the left liberal media calls you anti abortion…..or anti choice….or anti woman’s health……do not permit that name to be used. we know how they hate our true name ………..PRO LIFE. We must be called PRO LIFE.
    Thanks and God speed.
    John Crosby Prescott On.

  2. Pingback: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Student Union Maintains Position | Carleton Lifeline

  3. opinion says:

    This club is ridiculous. You say that the university is violating your human rights, however just by existing, this entire club is violating the rights of others. Why can’t women choose what they want to do with their bodies? How do YOU have any right to tell people what they should believe? You have no right to push your beliefs onto others in any way. This just reminds me of what has happened with the Church in the past…just because some people don’t believe in the same “God” they are punished. How is that right?
    The university gave you a room to display your disturbing images. What’s so wrong with that? At least you get to display them. period. Even though some people do believe in pro-choice, not everyone is proud to display pictures of dead fetuses like you are.
    Keep your beliefs to yourself. The wonder of humanity is that we are all able to be unique individuals with our own beliefs and ideas. If the world was made up entirely of people like you, it would be hell.

    • Robert says:

      How can anyone tell what is true if opposing opinions are not allowed to be heard? If the people proposing them are locked away in a room where no one can see them?

      Are these images real? If they are, then they should be displayed so people can see what abortion is. What’s worse: to display photos of a dead fetus or to encourage a woman to kill her unborn baby and not allow her to see what it looks like?

      What would be hell is a world where people who are not allowed to express their opinions. Where they are “punished” for not parroting the party line. Wait a minute — that’s what you are proposing, isn’t it?

      God bless Ms. Lobo and the other courageous students at Carleton!

    • nate says:

      Why should women be able to take away the rights of the unborn. They are still living human beings. The hypocracy of the pro choicers is that they agree with taking away a lifetime of choices from these murdered babies.

  4. opinion says:

    PS.
    I am glad that the university sent police and campus security to stop what you are doing. Without heroes like those, the world would be in chaos. Maybe if you protested in a positive way rather than flashing disgusting pictures around, people would actually listen.
    Use some common sense. Honestly.

  5. Ottawacitizen says:

    Wow. I just watched the video of the arrest, and I have to say, this “club” is a complete joke. How could you fight the fact that a university is public property? It doesn’t matter if you’re a “tuition paying student”. That does not mean that you have any rights to the property in terms of ownership whatsoever. You are paying to learn, not to own. The police were completely right about this being trespassing.
    Furthermore, what made you really think that those signs you were carrying around were going to sway anyone’s opinion on abortion. They were completely offensive. People like you are angry when the pro-life movement is put down, however the title of your signs were “the insanity of pro-choice”…or something like that. Are you not being complete hypocrites here? No one is allowed to put down your views, but you’re allowed to put down others’ opinions if you do not deem them proper?
    I am extremely happy that you were all arrested. Kudos to the Ottawa police and Carleton campus security.
    I thought that one of Jesus’ main teachings was to turn the other cheek. If you truly are Christians, you can find a way to believe in pro-life without putting down others’ believes and shoving your ideas down everyone’s throats. The way I see it, you are completely hypocrites and are not truly Christian for the way that you are so close-minded to the rest of the world.
    You should start thinking realistically. Sometimes abortion is needed.
    I’ve had enough of religious freaks like you. Pro-Choice ftw.

    • Robert says:

      This club is not a joke. You, “Ottawacitizen” are a joke. Those type of signs were instrumental is persuading me how wrong abortion is.

      You say “one of Jesus’ main teachings was to turn the other cheek.” Would he have turned the other cheek if confronted by the real-life photos on these protestor’s signs. I think not. You say they are not Christian because they don’t mildly give in to evil. What type of “Christianity” are you familiar with?

      You call them religious freaks, yet you are the one trying to use religion in your favor. You call them hypocrites, yet you are unashamedly hypocritical.

  6. Robert says:

    I am inspired, absolutely inspired by your actions. I hope everyone contacts the president of Carleton to express their outrage. There should be no place in a democracy for such authoritarian measures by an institution of higher education.

  7. Melanie says:

    Abortion hurts so many men, woman and families and numerous people are ignorant of what it actually entails. I have had an abortion and it was the biggest mistake of my life.
    I know that these pictures are disturbing, but let’s stop for a second and think about why these pictures are so offensive. Would they be that offensive if they were not the blatant truth? Well they are. I don’t always agree with the scare tactic to demonstrate the truth because it can cause pain, but if it can at all help woman from hurting themselves and their little ones, then maybe it must be done.

    Thank you for your courage and humiliation in speaking the truth and standing up for your rights.

    • ruthlobo says:

      Melanie we are so grateful for your courage in sharing your abortion testimony. We need more men and women like you who refuse to stay silent about their abortion experience and who continue to expose the truth of what abortion is: a procedure that kills one and wounds the other.

      • D says:

        AHAHA! How incredibly hypocritical. The old, ‘I had an abortion’ so now I know it’s wrong is such a joke. Melanie if you were abiding by the rules and regulations of religion and this anti-feminist, anti-human rights, ‘pro-life’ lifeline group you would never ever have been permitted an abortion in the first place. That’s the saddest thing about those that preach there is always some level of insane hypocrisy going on. Ruth; so disappointed in you. As an intelligent and seemingly bright woman you are advocating something that goes against all women. Removing their right to choose their life, their fate, their future is the saddest thing of all. Women should be sticking together and as soon as choice is eliminated freedom is destroyed. You’re killing women’s rights here sister. Read up on our struggles a little more….

  8. Richard Harris says:

    The Christian’s Jehovah is Almighty God,
    he’s a capricious and cantankerous sod,
    and, so far as I can tell,
    Christians often are as well.
    (because)
    The Bible Bogey, and believe this, so they must,
    is omniscient, omnipotent, and supposedly just;
    but it’s a father, a son, and a friggin’ ghost,
    that with magic spells becomes wine and toast!
    With the problem of theodicy,
    it sure as hell is idiocy.
    (compare)
    The Jew’s Yahweh is a wrathful old jerk,
    setting strict rules on when to work,
    how to dress, and what to eat and sip,
    and giving baby boys the snip.
    Myths of Bronze Age, goat-herding nomads
    metaphorically have ‘em, by the gonads.
    (similarly)
    The Moslem’s Allah is a fierce great djinn;
    ‘Islam’, in English, means ‘Submission’.
    Apostasy is treated just like a crime;
    they’ll threaten to kill you, to keep you in line.
    Dare draw Mohammad in a comic cartoon,
    there’ll be riots and killings from here to Khartoum.
    (likewise)
    Hindu, Sikh, Jain, and Buddhist,
    Zoroastrian, Baha’i, Mormon, and Scientologist,
    Confucianist, Shintoist, and Taoist too,
    Wiccan, Spiritualist, and the New Age woo;
    Yea, verily, those of each and every religion,
    are mired in the miasma of superstition.
    (so)
    Why should yours be the “one true faith”,
    in the magical antics of an unseen wraith?
    Belief, without evidence, is just plain crazy,
    ignorant, stupid, or thoughtlessly lazy.
    Life needs no purpose, at a theistic god’s direction;
    evolution just happens, thanks to Natural Selection.

    I have sent you this poem in the hope that you will read it and realize that some people find your religious beliefs to be unwarranted and absurd. When I was a small boy, still in short pants, I understood that religious beliefs in deities were lacking any supporting evidence, and therefore had no basis in fact. Later, I realized that religion was a tool for controlling people. Religion should be a private matter, because when it gains political power, as with any ideology, it becomes a tool for oppression. Please consider the benefits of rational thought over superstition and wishful thinking.

    • ruthlobo says:

      Richard,

      thank you for your comment. I would like to point, however, that nowhere on this website is there a reference to religion and that the evidence we produce for claiming that the pre-born are human and persons is based on logic, and evidence. if you would like more information on how to better understand the pro life view in this way, please visit our “call to action” section of our blog. Thank you!

  9. Joe says:

    The word “truth” gets bandied about frequently on this site, so why not practice what you preach? Contrary to Ms. Lobo’s statement above, this “pro life” movement is undeniably driven by certain religious values. You are entitled to your opinions and to expressing them, but be honest about your motivations.

    And while we’re speaking honestly, you can also stop spinning this supposed persecution as having anything to do with your message. I have no connection to Carleton University, but it’s clear to me their objection was not to your position, but to your choice of associating abortion with genocide. Using graphic depictions of actual atrocities to support such asinine reasoning as this is irresponsible and amounts to nothing more than religious propaganda.

    As a Canadian taxpayer, it irks me that you are forcing our government to waste valuable resources to deal with your nuisance lawsuit. Your chances of receiving any sort of restitution are as weak as your argument against a woman’s right to choose.

    Per your call to action page, I will be writing a letter to Dr. Runte in support of the school’s actions, thanking Carleton for supporting the rights and freedoms of ALL Canadians, not simply those with a misguided agenda.

  10. Sarah says:

    In the description above, it says that “GAP has been found to be educational and effective for helping women and saving babies”. Now, I object to a lot of the statements and claims on this website, but this one is completely unsupported. I followed the link and read through all the relevant information provided, and nowhere is a single shred of evidence to support this statement presented. Granted, there are personal testimonials; but not only are such statements easily fabricated, assuming they are real, testimonials have no part in a scientific process or intellectual debate. Correlation (if it even exists) does not equal causation; anecdotal evidence is not evidence. If the group is serious in their claims that GAP plays a significant role in reducing the occurrence of abortion, then a study should be conducted on the subject. Otherwise, this statement should be removed or modified in the name of “truth”.

    What is the goal of the group? From your constitution, my guess would be that the group is advocating to re-open the tired debate on legislation, with the view of making abortion illegal. If I am correctly reading the Policies of the group, then I do not support Lifeline and I am glad that you have lost club funding. If, however, the goal of the group is simply to raise awareness and reach out to women who are in the process of making a choice, without seeking to limit their choices, then I would neither support nor oppose the existence of the group. I do oppose the GAP displays and the lawsuit.

    I wanted to bring up a sentiment I find to be both offensive and dangerous. I know that this was not posted on your website, but it was contained in the CCBR Unmasking Choice website that was linked to above. I can only assume that the group supports this organisation and the content on the website, considering the site was linked to and they help organize the GAP displays, which Lifeline obviously endorses. If I am incorrect, I apologize.
    The following was posted in the FAQs about the GAP event: “What’s really disgusting is that abortion is happening and that people are more concerned about their comfortable lives being bothered than they are concerned about the babies’ lives that are being violently ended”.
    It is statements like this that make my blood boil. The idea that abortion is a choice that is made lightly by women who just don’t want to be bothered to raise a child. Though this type of woman certainly exists, these statements belittle the emotional turmoil most women experience when making a choice (and deciding one way or the other) and ignores the myriad of reasons a woman might consider abortion. It is not a matter of decadence and laziness; sometimes it is a matter of physical or mental health! If carrying a pregnancy to term represents a significant risk to the life of the mother, she should not be forced to die! If the baby was conceived as a result of rape, the mother should not be forced to suffer emotional turmoil, possibly suffering from postpartum depression potentially resulting in both her suicide and murder of the baby! This last is an extreme example, but so is the comparison of abortion to genocide. The images prove nothing; I could play that game and show you equally graphic and disturbing images of women mutilated while trying to end their own pregnancy, of women beaten to death upon discovery they were pregnant (out of wedlock, for example), of babies carried to term and dumped in trash cans. It does nothing to further the debate or inform students about their options. It is simply a shock and awe tactic employed to trigger an emotional – rather than a rational – response. It is not a valid form of debate but rather a propaganda tactic.
    The GAP display takes certain “truths” to be self-evident: that fetuses are conscious, alive, and deserving of the status of “people” (whatever that means), that we are offended by the images because deep-down we know abortion is “wrong”, that aborting an unwanted baby causes more mental and emotional suffering than bringing a baby to term, and that we all share the same values and morals, and particularly approach life from a theistic perspective (the CCBR website specifically talks about a religious pro-life perspective). I would refute the claim that these ideas are self-evident, and start the debate from there.
    I think the university has acted rationally and fairly; this is not about “freedom of speech”, which you were granted with what I consider reasonable, constitutionally-sound restrictions, but rather about broadcasting your message to everyone, even those who don’t want to hear about it. University is a place of learning, and therefore a place for debate – informed debate. It is not a place to propagate half-truths and logical fallacies. The tactics employed in the GAP displays do nothing to further anyone’s understanding of the issue, but simply polarize people and force them to take sides. There is no place for this at University.
    I support a person’s right to choose – whether it is to choose to end their pregnancy or to be shielded from ill-informed propaganda.

  11. Kelsey says:

    Every woman has the right to choose to have an abortion, or not. I am glad the security guards and or police removed you from the premises, because you are trying to force your opinion on others, why do you think that’s a good thing? To try to pressure people into changing their mind by showing graphic images of aborted fetus’s? I’m sure if you and your obviously ignorant fanatics had your way, you would hold a gun to every women’s head and force them not to have an abortion, even if it meant the mother and baby would die during child birth due to underlying diseases or illness’s. You disgust me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s