Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Genocide Awareness Project incites abortion debate

News reporter

Published: Monday, November 7, 2011

Updated: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 05:11

Abortion Demonstration

Teresa Kelly

The Genocide Awareness Project displayed imagery of aborted fetuses and battered children outside the Memorial Union yesterday. For more photos of the demonstration turn to page 10.


 

An array of poster-sized graphic images of aborted fetuses hung outside the the University of Rhode Island's Memorial Union yesterday, causing campus-wide controversy and sparking a counter-demonstration by students across the street from the demonstration.

The URI College Republicans (CR) hosted the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP), sponsored by the Center for Bio-Ethical Research (CBR) yesterday. In an effort to convey the effects of abortion on humanity, the GAP travels to college campuses, handing out brochures and presenting graphic posters of disfigured fetuses, lynched African-Americans and victims of the Holocaust, CBR Northeast director Leslie Sneddon said.

Essentially, the GAP attempts to convey is the conceptual similarities that exist between abortion and genocide, according to the group's brochure and website, with an ultimate goal of making abortion illegal.

"Our purpose is to show the humanity of a child," Sneddon said. "And the inhumanity of abortion."

However, URI lecturer Jeffrey Bachmann, who will be teaching a course in genocide next semester, said the CBR's rationalization is deceptive and incorrect.

"The GAP is attempting to redefine genocide to include a medical procedure that is protected by Roe v. Wade," he said. "Abortion is not genocide."

Sneddon justified their use use of graphic images by comparing it to Martin Luther King's use of graphic images to protest the lynching of African-Americans. She explained during that time period no one wanted to see the pictures either.

"When injustices are hidden, they are tolerated," she said. "But when they are exposed, they are untolerated."

CR president James McMahon said he agreed to host the GAP because he and other CR members believe in the importance of allowing a group to convey their message. McMahon said he not only expected controversy because of the demonstration, but that it was encouraged and hoped for.

"It's disagreeing that spurs conversation," he said. "Otherwise there is no opportunity to change your mind."

Approximately 30 students responded to the demonstration and held a counter-demonstration across the street from the Union, holding signs that said, "I support your right to choose" and "Abortion is NOT Genocide."

Sophomore Maddy Morrin, who led the counter-demonstration, said it wasn't the GAP's stance on abortion she was protesting , but the ways in which the group was demonstrating their ideas, including the use of swastikas and graphic images.

"I object to the use of graphic images for political gain," she said. "I don't think they are educating, more than they are psychologically manipulating."

Amanda Mazzu, a junior pharmacy major, said the graphic photos were irrelevant, tasteless and being used for "emotional warfare" rather than informational purposes.

"I saw the huge, obnoxious display and I was absolutely appalled at the behavior of the people in charge of the demonstration," she said.

Other students debated with GAP staff members, discussing their thoughts and concerns with the demonstration, while URI police officers kept close to ensure a peaceful atmosphere.

URI junior Alyssa Jeffers, who spoke to one of the GAP members briefly, said she found the demonstration to be ridiculous, offensive and religiously intolerant.

Women's Studies Director Jody Lisberger, who believes in the right to choose, named her main concern as the public use of hate speech, referring to the swastikas. While she believes in the first amendment right to protest and speak, she denounces the use of swastikas in their demonstration.

"I don't believe the message shows open discussion or reveals the complex elements of abortion," she said.

She added instead of handling hate speech instances case by case, the university should have a blanket no-tolerance policy against the use of hate speech.

However, [Vice President of Student Affairs] Thomas Dougan,  said the demonstration's use of swastikas is "no different" than faculty talking about genocide in the classrooms, which it is not a violation of policy.

"The College Republicans have a right to express their views," Dougan said.

Lisberger encourages students to express their concerns to higher education and create alternate routes to the Union so students can avoid the demonstration, while Bachmann said to avoid engaging with the CBR representatives.

"I think the best way to protest this event is to symbolically remove CBR's voice by ensuring it falls on deaf ears," Bachmann said.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

2 comments

Anonymous
Wed Nov 16 2011 20:19
Until the pro-life movement acknowledges the right for everyone to hold their own opinions, their entire raison d'être is moot. Even if you disagree with women's choices, that doesn't mean you have to bar them from the procedure entirely. While I think there are instances, such as women purposefully becoming pregnant to abort the pregnancy, that demonstrate poor judgement, determining that all abortion is evil (and using such language to depict it in this manner) is harmful and counter-intuitive.

Moreover, given the complexity of abortion -- i.e., the complexity of decisions to have an abortion -- we should be more compassionate to individuals who want one. Abortions can be traumatic, but so can pregnancies.

Lastly, the images pro-life movements use are often from miscarriages. Misrepresentation of information does nothing to inform. If we recall the videos and photos of women cheering in the streets after 9/11, they were not in response to the bombings. In fact, it was footage from another context, but used in such a way that it seemed like the women were expressing their joy at seeing the US harmed by the airplane attacks. They were not.

I am wary of any pro-life movement that uses such graphic images because I'm sceptical whether it's even an image of an aborted fœtus or something else.

Lastly, there are already regulations regarding abortion: many hospitals will not perform late-term abortions. I believe this is a correct stance. After this point, it becomes dangerous to the mother and the fœtus.

Anonymous
Tue Nov 8 2011 10:24
"Essentially, [what] the GAP attempts to convey is the conceptual similarities that exist between abortion and genocide."

Is it possible the students quoted above may have incorrectly contextualized the use of swastikas and the word "genocide" in the demonstration? Seems they were used as comparative tools, not "hate speech."





log out