Press Release: Lakehead University Student Union Votes to Ban Pro-Life Club
November 3rd 2009
Lakehead University Student Union Votes to Ban Pro-Life Club
On October 29th the Lakehead University Student Union (LUSU) voted 7:6 in favour of banning the campus club, Lakehead University Life Support (LULS). This development occurred after the club had battled with LUSU for over two years and was finally granted club status in March.
Fair treatment of LULS was short lived however as their club status was called into question after a false complaint was made against the club after a clubs day display table event. LUSU never proved that this accusation was true nor did they even attempt to verify its veracity but it played a significant role during the discussion at the meeting.
LULS was denied club status with a motion brought forward by Josh Kolic, LUSU’s VP Finance. Kolic’s justification for taking away their status was that LULS is an “exclusive” club with “extremist views on abortion”.
Maggie Ten Hoeve, LULS President, explains, “We are disappointed yet again in our student union. It is understood that on a university campus ideologies and beliefs will be expressed that may be opposite to others. Instead our student union is anxious to shut down these discussions at the first mention of a false accusation without any investigation.”
The club will be appealing this decision.
Maggie Ten Hoeve, President Lakehead University Life Support, 807-620-5926 / firstname.lastname@example.org
Emil Booyink, Lakehead University Life Support Executive, 807-251-5710 / email@example.com
This report is not accurate. The club was not banned. It was denied club status as the student body should not have to attach its name to an extremist organization.
Which extremist organization are we talking about, the LUSU or LULS? Because I’m sure some students — members of the club perhaps — might consider your activism here to be pretty extreme. Or, others might find it extreme that an aspiring leader seeks to discriminate against the students he purports to serve in an academic institution on the basis of their beliefs.
But I suppose you do the same for all extreme groups, right? I doubt you let the Zionists congregate on campus. Oh, wait, sorry, are they the extremists or is it the Israeli apartheid folks? (Or are you guys actually used to dissent and varied perspectives at Lakehead?)
See, the problem with making political decisions based on “extremism” is that you need to define extreme. I’d love to hear your definition. I’d also love to hear why you don’t think it’s just as subjective as anyone else’s.
A subjective criterion, like how “extreme” you consider something to be, is a pretty lousy criterion upon which to base such a judgment. Extreme is subjective. You’re on a crusade based on your own personal beliefs.
Any moron in a hurry or abject imbecile would realize that Lakehead University Life Support is a student group at the university that doesn’t represent the views of everyone there. I call bullshit.
I sincerely hope you have better things to do than deny club status to any group that some students might not want carrying the Lakehead flag.
Oh, wait — you are subjecting all Lakehead clubs to similar scrutiny, right?
“Oh, wait — you are subjecting all Lakehead clubs to similar scrutiny, right?”
The existing LU-sanctioned clubs do not have highly controversial agendas. Furthermore, I’d be willing to bet LUSU exec have never had their safety threatened by the LU Business Association 😉
The fundamental ideology of the group in question is that women should NOT have the right to make their own decision. To endorse such an agenda would be a poor representation of the values and beliefs of the student body as a whole.
Actually, the fundamental ideology of the group in question is that human life has intrinsic value from conception to natural death. It is a very special form of idealism that speaks on the dignity of all human beings, whether they be inside or outside the uterus. Life Support has a wide array of discussion topics from suicide prevention, to accesibility for those with developmental disabilities, to euthanasia, to abortion. Abortion is a pretty big issue for Life Support because it is: a)so prominent in university and b)probably the most divisive and discussed aspect of pro-life values and views. We have made the personal choice to oppose abortion peacefully. Whose rights are we taking away by believing these things?
Ps. I have had my safety threatened by numerous people.
PPs. No life support member has threatened Josh Kolic’s life
That’s a pretty strong citation-free accusation to make, that Life Support has somehow “threatened the safety” of the LUSU. And Meagan, what decision in particular are we talking about?
In short: What Alexandra said.
Sorry Blaise, I would have thought it to be obvious.
The decision I refer to is whether or not to terminate a pregnancy by way of this neat medical procedure they came out with called a therapeutic abortion. It is my right as a woman to make this decision. I would appreciate it if you, and the rest sitting in the pro-life camp would respect that.
The decision you refer to is obvious. I ask the obvious question though, with the hope that you’ll shift away from utter vagueness and euphemisms. Allowing someone to make their own decision sounds all nice and cute, until you realize that “terminating a pregnancy” also terminates a unique human life.
You don’t need to agree with the pro-life position to recognize that this supposed “right” is quite controversial. You don’t need to be pro-life to realize that abortion is a topic that we should be able to discuss openly, Canada being somewhat of a liberal democracy and all.
Thanks for your comments.
From my knowledge of pro life groups, they provide help and counselling to pregnant girls to help them through it and also for those who have had abortions, counselling is most important. Pro Life does provide that, not so pro choice. So it is important and necessary for young girls to be informed as to what pro life stands for and the very serious reality of the damaging result of abortion. If pictures make them uncomfortable, I think awareness of the reality should help them to avoid abortion. Pro life asks the question, why can’t we love and help them both? To be pro life is to be pro woman and to be pro woman is to be pro life. Human beings are made to be raised up not thrown in the garbage. Unborn babies need advocates as they cannot speak or protest or vote. Mothers and fathers considering aborting a child need to know that there are alternatives and that help is available. My concern is for the pain of deep grief and regret over a choice they can never reverse. Many suffer in silence because others tell them it’s no big deal. Abortion is not widespread out of the actions of wicked people, it has become widespread because of the silence of good people. That’s why it’s so important to allow the knowledge of the horror of abortion to get out there. After all, it has now come down to the talk of partial birth abortion. How grotesque is that? We also need to acknowledge the reality of the many women who have died from so-called “safe, legal” abortion and try to save other women from making this tragic mistake. Remember, the number of women who have abortions because of rape or incest is less than one percent, and of that one percent, they need counselling to help them heal through it, not by stuffing it down so it haunts them for the rest of their lives.
So I say, pro life students need to be allowed to regain their club status and the powers that be should work with them, not against them.