Anti-Abortionists at UTSA

[Clandestino]

They have set up huge panels. Almost the size of those fake rock walls for climbing. They have aborted babies, babies growing through stages and just gross abortion pics..

This is in the very center of the 1604 campus.

I don't think this is an appropriate venue for something of this nature.

Any thoughts?

[MannyIsGod]

It's appropriate. Courts have ruled in favor of the group. I forget their name, but they had a court battle with UT Austin last year.

I don't mind. Abortion is a horrible thing, and people need to be aware of what it is instead of relying on it for birth control.

[travis2]

They have set up huge panels. Almost the size of those fake rock walls for climbing. They have aborted babies, babies growing through stages and just gross abortion pics..

This is in the very center of the 1604 campus.

I don't think this is an appropriate venue for something of this nature.

Any thoughts?

Why is it inappropriate?

[Clandestino]

It's appropriate. Courts have ruled in favor of the group. I forget their name, but they had a court battle with UT Austin last year.

I don't mind. Abortion is a horrible thing, and people need to be aware of what it is instead of relying on it for birth control.

Yeah, I had read that they were going to be here. I still don't think it is appropriate. The pics are pretty gross. I just walked by quickly.

Some people are against prostitution, but you don't see them posting pictures of men sleeping with prostitutes posted everywhere..

[MannyIsGod]

I'm for free speech, and that means for everybody. The only thing that concerns me is the accusations of false information.

I find it ironic that people woudl be offended by this but then go watch a movie where someone gets their head cut off.

Graphic anti-abortion exhibit to be shown next week at UTSA

Web Posted: 03/18/2005 12:00 AM CST

Karen Adler
Express-News Staff Writer

A graphic anti-abortion exhibit that led to lawsuits against two Texas universities will go on display at the University of Texas at San Antonio next week.

The outdoor exhibit includes 16-to 18-foot-high panels that offer information about human development and photos of aborted fetuses.

"This exhibit is meant to make people stop and think," said James Spencer, chief counsel of Justice for All, an anti-abortion group based in Wichita, Kan. "I think the purpose of this is to show what abortion really does."

The panels will be erected near Sombrilla Plaza, a high-traffic area where many students eat lunch and gather between classes on the Loop 1604 campus. The exhibit will be on display Monday and Tuesday and then will move to UT-Austin.

To counter the exhibit, Ladies Incensed by a Patriarchal Society has invited other student groups to participate in a march to celebrate women's rights Tuesday, said Denise Rodriguez, event organizer.

"It's an anti-choice exhibit and it gives a lot of false information," she said of the Justice for All display.

Justice for All has brought the traveling exhibit to college campuses all over the nation, but the display has generated the most controversy at UT-Austin in 2001 and the University of Houston in 2002. In both cases, the universities faced federal lawsuits alleging they violated free speech rights.

At the University of Houston, the Pro-Life Cougars, represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, filed a lawsuit after school administrators tried to restrict where the exhibit could be displayed on campus.

A court order forced the university to allow the display on Butler Plaza, and as part of a settlement with the anti-abortion group, the University of Houston agreed to change its free speech policy and pay $93,000 in attorney fees.

The Alliance Defense Fund sued UT-Austin, claiming it restricted free speech. Many of the contentions in the original lawsuit have been dropped, but the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has yet to issue a decision about how student groups distribute leaflets, Spencer said.

In 2002, UT regents approved several recommendations from the university's Task Force on Assembly and Expression.

Justice for All's Spencer said UTSA initially delayed approval of Students for Life's request to use facilities. The request eventually was approved for the campus group, which is the sponsor of the exhibit.

"UTSA did the right thing," Spencer said.

UTSA spokesman David Gabler said Students for Life was not treated differently from any other student group, though this is the first time the university has had an exhibit of this nature.

"We're committed to a safe and secure environment for our students to express themselves regardless of the issue and we have worked with both Students for Life and Justice for All to accommodate their requests," he said.

David Martinez, president of Students for Life, said he hopes the exhibit sparks dialogue. The traveling exhibit can be viewed at www.jfaweb.org.

"We have a diverse student body," the 20-year-old kinesiology major said. "There's going to be a lot of different reactions from different types of people. What I've been praying for is students approach this with an open mind."
[email protected]

[Spurminator]

I don't really have a problem with it from an appropriateness standpoint, but I question it from an effectiveness standpoint. I think it simply promotes the view many people have that the Pro-Life movement is made up of radical extremists.

[Clandestino]

I don't really have a problem with it from an appropriateness standpoint, but I question it from an effectiveness standpoint. I think it simply promotes the view many people have that the Pro-Life movement is made up of radical extremists.

I don't like having that shit up. It is about as appealing as graffiti. Why do they have to fuck my nice sunny walk to class with their disgusting pictures. And if you let one, you have to let them all. So, now there are a bunch of tables with both sides littering the campus with brochures.

[JoeChalupa]

For many abortion is out of sight out of mind. Those images apparently strike a nerve with some people.

[desflood]

Free speech is wonderful, when used wisely and appropriately. This is probably a display that some do not need to see (like, small children). Would it have been better to limit this to a less conspicuous place?

[Drachen]

nope
I am Pro-choice but I do believe in free speech, not in Designated "free speech zones" (underhanded jab at bush) but everywhere. The wonderful thing about free speech is I can express my views, and the other wonderful thing is I dont have to listen to others views if I dont want to.

[desflood]

I'm not talking about limiting people to certain areas to express their views. I'm talking about people maybe having a little sensitivity about where they do it.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, they are putting it up at a college campus. I think that's pretty much out of sight of most small children.

I think it's a very appropriate place for it, and I don't even share the views of the group putting it on!

People need to be confronted with reality in many things, including abortion.

[ChumpDumper]

Can't be any uglier than the Sombrilla itself.

[baseline bum]

I support a woman's right to choose, but I have absolutely no problem with a display like that. How are you going to tell people not to stand up for what they believe in?

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

We had a similar group here a few years back.

I wonder if they're coming to State.

[Clandestino]

actually, i see a lot of young kids at utsa. many parents take their kids to class with them.

what next though? all the fucking vegetarians are going to put up pictures of slaughterhouses and shit?

[MannyIsGod]

Why not? Whats so revolting about the truth?

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Actually, the free speech zone (at least at State) is for anybody to use at anytime so as not to cause congestion and class disruption in an already congested Quad.

Our free speech zone is about 200 feet from the center of The Quad at the outer edge of the Quad (still in a center position between buildings) at the Fighting Stallions statue.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

There's a good picture with this story showing our free speech zone.

http://www.universitystar.com/current/article.php?aid=159

[Drachen]

I was making an underhanded jab at bush for his free speech zones that are miles away from where he will be at any of his speeches. If anyone holds up a dissenting sign along where he and the media will be they are dragged away by cops

[Clandestino]

Why not? Whats so revolting about the truth?

would you want the pictures posted in your workplace? billboards? all over tv? school?

fuck no!

i don't care to have to see aborted fetuses if i don't want to. but when a group puts up huge 2 story pictures in the middle of your campus you are forced to see it.

[MannyIsGod]

Thats the whole point.

It's a public place. My workplace is not.

This is all about what Clandestino wants as opposed to what a groups rights are.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

This was the article from the group that was here on 11 November 2003.

------

http://www.universitystar.com/03/11/11/rally.php

Anti-Abortionists Rally In The Quad

Photos by Andy Ellis
Story by Kirsten Crow
Special to The Star

The Missionaries to the Preborn protested Thursday in The Quad among counter-protesting students and University Police Department presence.

Drew Heiss and Adrian Horien, members of the Milwaukee-based, anti-abortion group, displayed posters with pictures of third-trimester aborted fetuses next to photographs of Holocaust victims while they railed against abortion, certain kinds of birth control, fornication, alcohol consumption, masturbation and homosexuality.

Children from MTP passed out fliers titled "The American Holocaust Photo Display: Why We Show the Bloody Photographs of the Murdered Preborn," which depicted aborted fetuses in the first-, second- and third-trimester states.

The protesters held signs showing pictures of Holocaust victims titled "Hitler's Holocaust" next to pictures of aborted fetuses titled "Planned Parenthood's Holocaust."

Some students threw trash, attempted to take down the posters and spit on the group's members as the protesters proclaimed that the audience was going to hell, sodomy should be a capital crime and "women should stop opening their legs." Students grew irate when the protesters called them "whores," "whoremongers," "sinners" and "fornicators," drawing tears, shouts and heckling from students.

Ron Guzman, English junior, disapproved of the group's tactics.

"I am actually pro-life, and I am actually Christian," Guzman said. "I don't believe you can scare a woman into not having an abortion. I don't believe that the pictures of aborted fetuses are anything but shock tactics and will not change anything."

While many students expressed repulsion to the photographs, the MTP flier said they displayed the photographs because "the media has censored the preborn child from the 'abortion debate' ... We are simply attempting to bypass that media blackout by going to the streets and displaying these photographs ... Most believe the myth that abortion is just the removal of some benign tissue. These photographs expose just how mythical such thinking is."

Heiss said he came to campus to warn students about the repercussions of their actions. He said he felt his mission was accomplished.

"Generally, we speak for the little babies. We look at the Bible and address sins," Heiss said. "Today was excellent; we had good interaction (with the students) and good questions."

Horien said the group's mission was to provide a voice for the preborn.

"We speak on their behalf because they can't," Horien said. "They are innocent victims of what we call the American Holocaust."

Stephanie Pryor, psychology senior, said the protest did not change her abortion-rights stance.

"Before I saw them, I was pretty moderate on the issue," said Pryor. "After seeing them, it made me more pro-choice."

Paul Molina, College Democrats vice president and public administration senior, took the opportunity to encourage voting.

"If you're a woman and you believe you have the right to choose, this is how you choose," Molina said while handing out voter registration cards. "With this registration card, you can make a difference forever."

Whitney Weyer, international studies junior, said she felt the group unduly targeted women.

"There was a lot of blame and responsibility put on women," she said.

Joy Cukierman, English senior, said she also felt the group was unfair toward women.

"This is more about people trying to control women and using women's bodies as political platforms," said Cukierman. "More often than not, it's fanatical Christian men."

Several students joined the protesters on the Fighting Stallions statue with their own makeshift signs reading "pro-choice" and "keep your laws off my body."

Eric Dietel, exercise and sports science freshman, made his own abortion rights sign.

"We give the right to life. You should give people a chance for life," Dietel said. "But they're pulling people in the wrong way."

When students challenged the right to take away a woman's choice, Horien answered, saying: "We can do anything. We're Americans. We're indomitable."

UPD Chief Ralph Meyer estimated the top count of the crowd at 250-300 students, although students were coming and going from The Quad throughout the day.

Paul Chapa, UPD captain of operations, did not express concerns about violence at this particular demonstration.

"Any time there is a demonstration situation there is a concern about violence, but having a police presence counters that," Chapa said. "It's always important to take a proactive stance than a reactive stance."

While Otto Glenewinkel, UPD police officer, said the protesters were nonviolent, their Web site, found at www.missionariestopreborn.com, contains vague statements that suggest the organization does not condemn the use of violence.

Matt Trewhella, Mercy Seat Church pastor and MTP leader, has gone on the record saying he does not condone violence but does not condemn it either.

"When an abortionist is shot, I don't believe it is murder," Trewhella said in an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.

The Web site also claimed that "fourteen abortionists have stopped murdering babies" since the founding of the organization. On the Web site, Trewhella said Paul Hill, convicted of murdering an abortion doctor, will one day be considered the "sanest and bravest man of our age."

"It has long been established in law, not to mention Holy Scripture, that it is legitimate to use force in order to defend other persons from bodily harm," Trewhella said. "Therefore, this idea that the use of force or violence on behalf of the preborn is 'unthinkable' or 'wrong' is nonsense."

Also on the Web site, Trewhella has claimed the organization is nonviolent.

"For those who may be wondering, we here at Missionaries to the Preborn remain committed to nonviolent action on behalf of the preborn, but that does not mean that we will disparage those who use force, for to do so is to repudiate the humanity of the preborn," Trewhella said on the Web site.

Another affiliate of MTP, Rev. Michael Bray, has referred to Hill as "God's prophet."

University attorney Bill Fly said even if the group has made implications of violence, the university may not bar them from campus.

"Unless there is an imminent threat of violence on campus, violence in other contexts doesn't matter as long as (protesters) are going about their business in a nonviolent way," Fly said.

Texas State was the fifth school of MTP's two-week "Texas Campus Tour." The demonstrators visited Baylor University and North Texas State University before arriving in San Marcos. However, MTP was removed from the University of Texas and UT-Arlington campuses.

Ron Stedler, UT Police Department lieutenant, said the 14-member MTP group was at UT's South Mall and were charged with criminal trespassing.

"They were neither a registered student organization or sponsored by a student organization," Stedler said. "If they don't meet that criteria, it is trespassing."

Horien disagreed with UT's and UT-Arlington's choices to remove them from campus.

"This is a classic First Amendment question," Horien said. "There should be a federal case opened up regarding this exact issue."

Although Dean of Students John Garrison received complaints from students, he said he did not have a choice in deciding whether MTP could speak at Texas State.

"We had a number of students who complained about the activity. They were offended by the means this group chose to exercise their freedom of speech," Garrison said.

"What we did was reserve the free speech area. We don't approve or disapprove based on content. As long as (demonstrators) abide by our rules, they have a right to be here," he said.

He said the rules include that demonstrators do not disturb classes, prevent students from going to class or litter.

The fliers did not need to be approved since it is also a freedom of expression issue, Garrison said.

The crowd cheered and shouted obscenities when UPD escorted the protesters off campus, though they reappeared on Hopkins Street later Thursday.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Some photos from that 2003 rally.

http://www.universitystar.com/03/11/11/art/ae-031111-speaker.jpg

http://www.universitystar.com/03/11/11/art/ae-031111-wbible1.jpg

http://www.universitystar.com/03/11/11/art/ae-031111-joncheer.jpg

http://www.universitystar.com/03/11/11/art/ae-031111-fight.jpg

http://www.universitystar.com/03/11/11/art/ae-031111-supporter.jpg

[samikeyp]

I don't agree with their stance but I support their right to peaceable assembly. The only issue I have (and its with both sides of this debate) is when they cross the line. You have a right to voice your beliefs on an issue. You do not have the right to impose those beliefs on me. That happened to me once with an anti-abortion protester and she almost got bitchslapped, if it wasn't for the fact that I do not hit women and was extremely hungover.

[sbsquared]

Please stop calling them anti-abortionists - they are Pro-life!

The whole purpose of the exhibit is to show people what abortion really is - if more people were aware of what really happens, there would probably be far less abortions!

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Please stop calling them anti-abortionists - they are Pro-life!

The whole purpose of the exhibit is to show people what abortion really is - if more people were aware of what really happens, there would probably be far less abortions!

From The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law.

Page 5.

abortion Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life and abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice.

[travis2]

From The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law.

Page 5.

abortion Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life and abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice.

Cute...

[Clandestino]

Please stop calling them anti-abortionists - they are Pro-life!

The whole purpose of the exhibit is to show people what abortion really is - if more people were aware of what really happens, there would probably be far less abortions!

that is bullshit.. and that is what they are.. they are anti-abortion.. if are against something then your anti-it..

and people will not stop having less abortions bc they see a picture of an aborted fetus. a woman gets an abortion often bc she does not want to have a baby for whatever reason(it is her reason). i doubt a woman who gets an abortion has not thought deeply thought about it...

[Clandestino]

Please stop calling them anti-abortionists - they are Pro-life!

The whole purpose of the exhibit is to show people what abortion really is - if more people were aware of what really happens, there would probably be far less abortions!

oh yeah, they are pro-life, that is why they bomb medical clinics! :rolleyes

[samikeyp]

The whole purpose of the exhibit is to show people what abortion really is - if more people were aware of what really happens, there would probably be far less abortions!

I know what abortion is and I know which sides are pro-abortion and which are anti-abortion. I also know that you don't get in my face about it after I have politely declined to talk to you about it. (not you specifically bro)

[sbsquared]

Clandestino - why don't you get the facts before you start spouting crap! Planned Parenthood and other anti-life groups have tried for years to keep the reality of what abortion really is from the young women who come to them because they know that if a young woman sees what the developing baby looks like and what the reality of abortion looks like that many would choose life over murder!

[MannyIsGod]

All acounts from the newspaper today say it was a very peacful display. They are doing it right.

[samikeyp]

All acounts from the newspaper today say it was a very peacful display. They are doing it right.

excellent. hopefully a trend is developing.


so...I am not supposed to say "anti-abortion" but its ok for you to say "anti-life" [/double standard]

[Clandestino]

All acounts from the newspaper today say it was a very peacful display. They are doing it right.

i agree...it was peaceful, but still not something i think most students at utsa want to see on their campus. when the weather is nice a lot of students just chill on the grass and hang in the sombrilla.. they shouldn't have to see abortion pictures. and i have counted numerous children today at school... just like i thought..there are always parents with kids here.

[Clandestino]

Clandestino - why don't you get the facts before you start spouting crap! Planned Parenthood and other anti-life groups have tried for years to keep the reality of what abortion really is from the young women who come to them because they know that if a young woman sees what the developing baby looks like and what the reality of abortion looks like that many would choose life over murder!

anti-life? anti the mothers life if an abortion is needed to keep her alive.

regardless, that is not the issue here... the issue is those fuckign HUUUGE pictures! i wouldn't have minded if they were normal size pictures that people who wanted to could walk up and view, but 2 story high pictures of gross shit is out of line.

[Clandestino]

oh yeah, at UTSA children are not permitted in the computers labs, even with a parent, to prevent them from accidentally seeing material that may not be suitable.. so, why should monster diplays be allowed in full view?

[MannyIsGod]

Dude, there is no reason to stop these displays, and the courts have already ruled on it.

The computer labs are a limited space environment that are reserved for students, that is much different than the Sombria.

You don't care about the kids and what they see, so don't try to take that arguement. You're annoyed that you've been confronted with something that is less than appealing, and it's nothing more than that.

[Drachen]

As far as that anti-abortion/pro-life side-debate... I wonder how many pro-lifers are pro-death penalty.

[Uncle Donnie]

As far as that anti-abortion/pro-life side-debate... I wonder how many pro-lifers are pro-death penalty.

Or vice-versa.

[Clandestino]

Dude, there is no reason to stop these displays, and the courts have already ruled on it.

The computer labs are a limited space environment that are reserved for students, that is much different than the Sombria.

You don't care about the kids and what they see, so don't try to take that arguement. You're annoyed that you've been confronted with something that is less than appealing, and it's nothing more than that.

court rulings don't mean it is right. remember separate but equal?

the computer labs aren't because of the limited space environment. it is because of what they might see. they have it posted.

and i see you still haven't learned to spell...
:lol

[Clandestino]

As far as that anti-abortion/pro-life side-debate... I wonder how many pro-lifers are pro-death penalty.

ask manny, he is against killing murderers, but has no problem killing babies.
:rolleyes

[MannyIsGod]

Irony. I'm for killing babies yet I'm arguing for the rights of an anti abortion group to protest.

I'm very consistent in my beliefs. And while I'm not anal about spelling to the point I spellcheck my posts, I'm very confident in my ability to articulate myself on a much higher level than you, Clandestino.

I gave you a logical reason as to why kids aren't allowed in the computer lab. but here's another, liability. The school doesn't want to be liable for what kids seen on those computers.

Why doesn't that apply outside? Becaue those fetus being shown don't meet indecency standards that stuff on the internet does. You don't have to be over 18 to legaly see a dead fetus.

Now what? Whats your next BS arguement?

[desflood]

I was making an underhanded jab at bush for his free speech zones that are miles away from where he will be at any of his speeches. If anyone holds up a dissenting sign along where he and the media will be they are dragged away by cops
I take it you didn't see the "free speech zones" at the Democratic Convention, before the election. They were, literally, chain link cages. No jabs at Bush for something Kerry does also, please. Just to be fair.

[Clandestino]

Irony. I'm for killing babies yet I'm arguing for the rights of an anti abortion group to protest. the only thing ironic is that you don't believe killing murderers, but you have no problem killing babies...


I gave you a logical reason as to why kids aren't allowed in the computer lab. but here's another, liability. The school doesn't want to be liable for what kids seen on those computers. but both your reasons are speculation and not the true reason for the policy.


Why doesn't that apply outside? Becaue those fetus being shown don't meet indecency standards that stuff on the internet does. You don't have to be over 18 to legaly see a dead fetus.

Now what? Whats your next BS arguement?

so, showing children aborted babies is decent?


btw, i don't spell check my posts... it is just wierd that you, mr highly educated and articulate, can't even spell basic words you should've learned in the 5th grade.

[samikeyp]

btw, i don't spell check my posts... it is just wierd that you, mr highly educated and articulate, can't even spell basic words you should've learned in the 5th grade.

like weird? :lol

[Clandestino]

like weird? :lol

yeah! like that!
:lol

[MannyIsGod]

the only thing ironic is that you don't believe killing murderers, but you have no problem killing babies...


Wrong. I've stated many times, including in this thread, that I hate abortion. What is about that very simple statement that you can't understand? I'm not sure how much further I can break it down.



but both your reasons are speculation and not the true reason for the policy.


Ok, to play devils advocate then. Lets say the computer policy is as you say, and for the reasons you say. Then, if UTSA can't defend that policy, it would be removed.

That doesn't mean the group in the Sombria has any less of a right to be there and that makes the whole computer lab situation irrelevent.



so, showing children aborted babies is decent?


By the purely legal standard of what is indecent, yes. Differentiate between a words leagal meaning and the standard it is used in society, because they are 2 different things.



btw, i don't spell check my posts... it is just wierd that you, mr highly educated and articulate, can't even spell basic words you should've learned in the 5th grade.

It's obvious you don't spell check your posts, you didn't need to point that out.

Oh, and I never said I was highly educated (I don't even have an undergraduate degree yet, I would hardly qualify as highly educated). I said I was (and stand by) that I am smarter than you. Many of my spelling errors aren't spelling errors at all, but typos.

Also, using words correctly and in the appropriate context and being able to formulate a coherent thought is much more valuable than the ability to spell words.

[Jekka]

oh yeah, at UTSA children are not permitted in the computers labs, even with a parent, to prevent them from accidentally seeing material that may not be suitable.. so, why should monster diplays be allowed in full view?

Things that people look at on monitors is not the only reason kids aren't allowed in those computer labs - kids are impatient and are likely to mess up things on computers while they are waiting for the adult they are with, and they are also noisy - the lab is there for scholastic use first and foremost and people write papers on those things - they pay for the privilege of using those computers and being able to work on them, not tolerate people's kids running around (I'm making a generalization I know, not everyone's kids are ill-behaved). The bottom line, though, is that there is a difference between the computer lab - which you have to be a student to use - and the sombrilla which is truly a public area. And if you don't want your kids looking at that stuff, there is a daycare facility on campus now. I'm so sick of people bringing their kids to class - I know every once and a while a parent can't help it, but really, a university is no place for a child to be most of the time.

If you don't want your kids to see what's in the Sombrilla, then don't take them there. It's the parents' call as to what is "suitable" for their children, and it's up to them to avoid exposure to those things that aren't suitable. Freedom of speech in a pre-approved forum is not the place to argue censorship.

[bigzak25]

I wonder how many pro-lifers are pro-death penalty.


you can value the life of an unborn child while seeking to eliminate those that show no value for human life, via rape/murder, and still be consistant with your beliefs. there is no innocence like an unborn child. there is no guilt like a convicted murderer/rapist.


i'm glad those photos are up. awareness is a good thing. it's a college campus, not a day care...

[Drachen]

I take it you didn't see the "free speech zones" at the Democratic Convention, before the election. They were, literally, chain link cages. No jabs at Bush for something Kerry does also, please. Just to be fair.


No I didnt, and I apologize if this is fact. BTW this is the exact same way that Bushes free speech zones are described.

Revision to my above statement:
This was an underhanded jab at our politicians who purport to be patriotic, yet dont seem to give a flip about the bill of rights unless it supports thier views at that time.

[Clandestino]

Wrong. I've stated many times, including in this thread, that I hate abortion. What is about that very simple statement that you can't understand? I'm not sure how much further I can break it down.


You hate abortion, but you support it?


Manny, are you pro-choice?

yes

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12199

[Drachen]

you can value the life of an unborn child while seeking to eliminate those that show no value for human life, via rape/murder, and still be consistant with your beliefs. there is no innocence like an unborn child. there is no guilt like a convicted murderer/rapist.


i'm glad those photos are up. awareness is a good thing. it's a college campus, not a day care...


I could go much deeper into this arguement, but the post that you referenced was in response to somebody taking offense to us calling the opposite of pro-choicers, anti-abortionists, rather than pro-lifers. I was submitting that anti-abortionist is a much more accurate term as many of them that I have personally met are also pro-death penalty. I dont see where you cant be simultaneously pro-life and pro-death, so I say you are anti-abortion and pro-death.

[Clandestino]

i'm glad those photos are up. awareness is a good thing. it's a college campus, not a day care...

yeah, but we shouldn't have to see the anti-abortionists put their bullshit up.

[MannyIsGod]

Being pro choice is not supporting abortion. It's that simple.

[MannyIsGod]

yeah, but we shouldn't have to see the anti-abortionists put their bullshit up.

Who forced you to look?

[Clandestino]

Who forced you to look?

it is hard to miss a 2 story tall poster in the center of the sidewalk

[MannyIsGod]

Once again, who forced you to look? You couldn't look away? Take a different route?

In other words, were there any alternatives to looking at the display?

[Clandestino]

Once again, who forced you to look? You couldn't look away? Take a different route?

In other words, were there any alternatives to looking at the display?

once i looked, then yes, i didn't look again... but still, i never should have been forced to see it once. they could have made the pictures smaller so that anyone who wanted to could walk up and see what the fuss was about. not make it so large that it could be seen from 50 yards away

[MannyIsGod]

You weren't forced to see it once. You have the option of knowing what is going to be displayed there and avoiding it. There was a newspaper article on this last week. The University had posted about it before then. I discussed this display MONTHS ago at a meeting.

It was your choice to remain unaware of what was going on.

I agree, you shouldn't be forced to see anything. And you weren't. When someone actually forces you to look at anything, let the ACLU know. As much as you hate them they'll still fight for you.

[travis2]

There were also signs up as you entered the quad area that warned you the display was up. You could have gone around.

Those pictures are real life. Or real death, anyway.

I'm glad they put the exhibit up. I didn't have time to see the whole thing, to my regret (too much running around)...but I did see some of it.

[Clandestino]

There were also signs up as you entered the quad area that warned you the display was up. You could have gone around.

Those pictures are real life. Or real death, anyway.

I'm glad they put the exhibit up. I didn't have time to see the whole thing, to my regret (too much running around)...but I did see some of it.

why should any university student at any school have to alter their route just so some fucking protestors can come in and put up some bullshit exhibit?

[travis2]

They don't have to. They can choose to. But they have also been informed as to any conditions which may bear on that choice.

What you are saying is that some free speech is better than others. In particular, you have the final say as to whether certain speech should be allowed.

Oh, and it wasn't a "bullshit" exhibit. It was the truth.

[Clandestino]

They don't have to. They can choose to. But they have also been informed as to any conditions which may bear on that choice.

What you are saying is that some free speech is better than others. In particular, you have the final say as to whether certain speech should be allowed.

Oh, and it wasn't a "bullshit" exhibit. It was the truth.

i have no problem with an anti-abortion exhibit... it doesn't have to be made so that everyone sees it... it should have been smaller so that anyone who WANTED TO could walk up and see it... not have to see it from 50 yards away. and by the time you saw the signs you could already see the pictures...they did no good...

and yes, i do think it was a bullshit exhibit.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

why should any university student at any school have to alter their route just so some fucking protestors can come in and put up some bullshit exhibit?

I would argue that it's the protestor's rights as Americans to freely assemble. As long as they're being non-violent and overly disruptive (standing in people's ways preventing them from moving, etc.), then it's their right.

Also, shouldn't a college be the place for a free expression of ideas no matter how unpopular they are?

Many people talk about colleges being bastions of liberalism, doesn't the ability to allow anybody on campus with a viewpoint and have it questioned or accepted the very fiber of our beings?

One of the protestors/activists that was on our campus a few months ago preaching "confrontational evangelism" was back yesterday at the Stallions. I remember while I was interviewing him that he simply asked me to be fair in our news story - not totally associating his cohort's actions (which were widely more volatile in nature) with him, but that they were, in essence, preaching the same thing using different tactics.

Well, I noticed him as I was walking in The Quad as I was with other staffers working on a story and this guy (well, Ken) said hello to me and congratulated me for writing an unbiased story about his previous visit with Brother Jed (brojed.org).

A college campus should be the open expression of ideas. If some people feel that it's not, then this display at UTSA is certainly a start in that direction, isn't it?

I understand your questions about the size of the display, but by limiting the size of the display, you inherently limit that person's right to freely assemble.

I saw the ads on their Web site, yeah, they're pretty graphic. But graphic does not equal obscene - which would then be against the law and a violation of the silent agreement about freedom of assembly.

And look at it this way, Clan, this activism may drive you to your own activism in whatever direction you choose. Everybody will have the same rights to question your activism, yet you still have the near-total freedom to express THOSE ideas.

[mysterious_elf26]

It's appropriate. Courts have ruled in favor of the group. I forget their name, but they had a court battle with UT Austin last year.

I don't mind. Abortion is a horrible thing, and people need to be aware of what it is instead of relying on it for birth control.


I'm also anti-abortion, but there were for some reason some kids on campus. If they were my kids, I wouldn't want them seeing those pics. And yes they did put up warning signs, but the location was at the center of UTSA. I had no choice but to view those discussing pics because that was the only way I could get to class.

[travis2]

I'm also anti-abortion, but there were for some reason some kids on campus. If they were my kids, I wouldn't want them seeing those pics. And yes they did put up warning signs, but the location was at the center of UTSA. I had no choice but to view those discussing pics because that was the only way I could get to class.


Not true. There are plenty of ways to get from one side of the campus to the other without going through the quad. You just didn't want to use any of them.

[MannyIsGod]

Uh, there are several routes to get to any class at UTSA without going through the Sombria. There was definetly ways to avoid the display.

Also, Jessica above posted about the day care center on campus.

College campuses are not meant for small children. The issue is not whether a protest is approriate there, but whether small children are.

[mysterious_elf26]

And why should I change my route. The point is that those images had no place on campus to begin with.

[MannyIsGod]

They did have a place there.

It's explained in the first amendment of our constitution. You don't have to change your route, but you don't have to look at them either. You have to make a choice, but the constitution is there to protect rights, not convience

[Duff McCartney]

This is all about what Clandestino wants as opposed to what a groups rights are.

That can be applied to more than just Clandestino.

[Drachen]

i have no problem with an anti-abortion exhibit... it doesn't have to be made so that everyone sees it... it should have been smaller so that anyone who WANTED TO could walk up and see it... not have to see it from 50 yards away. and by the time you saw the signs you could already see the pictures...they did no good...

and yes, i do think it was a bullshit exhibit.


So in other words, your idea of a great protest is one held privately in one's home with invitations sent out so that those who want to see it can see it.

[Clandestino]

So in other words, your idea of a great protest is one held privately in one's home with invitations sent out so that those who want to see it can see it.

look, i pay to go to school to get a degree. i don't pay to go to school to be bombarded by protestors. i can do that for free if i wanted to.

[Drachen]

Go to a private school, then you may not have to worry about that. Unfortunately for you it is public land and is therefore open for public use.

[mookie2001]

i went to a private high school they showed us an abortion video
of nothing but late term abortions
it was pretty gross
my friend eric had a seizure during the movie
no shit

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Update: This group was at UT-Austin either yesterday or the day before.

[NeoConIV]

Update: This group was at UT-Austin either yesterday or the day before.
God Bless em. They got BALLS to set up in Austin. I'd wear a flak jacket for sure.

[MannyIsGod]

Flack jackets, huh? It's not the first time they've been there. Just because you're prochoice doesn't mean you're going to attack people who are presenting opposing views.

In fact, if any side needs flack jackets, it wouldn't be the one who has had people killing doctors.

[Dre_7]

Being pro choice is not supporting abortion. It's that simple.

Um, ok?????

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

From Express-News Editor Robert Rivard

Robert Rivard: Anti-abortion exhibit at UTSA infringed on the rights of others

Web Posted: 03/27/2005 12:00 AM CST


San Antonio Express-News

It's a shame that the leadership of the University of Texas at San Antonio wasn't able to mount a serious legal challenge to last week's bizarre and offensive anti-abortion exhibit staged in the heart of the main campus near Sombrilla Plaza.

Students and faculty returning from Spring Break, especially those who left the city the previous week, had little or no opportunity to avoid or prepare for the tasteless and offensive visual onslaught. Instead, the morning walk to class or to the office became a forced march past 18-foot tall panels that featured photographs of bloody fetuses, black men hung from trees by lynch mobs and, worst of all, Holocaust victims of Nazi gas chambers.

The images and the linkages were obscene.

A spokesman for Justice for All, an anti-abortion group based in Wichita, Kan., told Express-News reporter Karen Adler that the point of the exhibit was to simply make "people stop and think."

Anti-abortion advocates certainly have the right to state their case, but not to the extent that they violate the rights of others. They are enjoined, for example, from violating the physical space of women using clinics — by laws that were born out of the movement's propensity for violence and intimidation. Protesters can't take over a campus with a sound system that assaults the ear and interferes with classroom discourse, to give another example.

So why couldn't UTSA officials insist that the exhibit be mounted in a manner that didn't visually or spatially assault those with business on campus?

UT System leaders, of course, want to avoid costly, prolonged litigation, not sponsor it. Anti-abortion advocates have successfully sued both the University of Texas and the University of Houston in recent years to gain broader access to campuses. It's doubtful, then, that there will be any significant challenge to Justice for All's graphic and revolting traveling road show.

A legal challenge might have made another equally important political point. Right now, different courts are offering different interpretations of what constitutes free speech and assembly.

While the anti-abortion groups have silenced any challenges to their right to assault students, faculty and other passers-by with traumatizing images, others trying to make a political point are routinely blocked or arrested. Try mounting oversized images of Iraqi torture victims on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol in a way that prevents lawmakers from entering or leaving the building without being filmed with the images as a backdrop and see how long it takes for someone to invoke Homeland Security concerns.

A poster or banner with the F-word will likely be confiscated long before the person carrying it can maneuver into the field of a television cameraman on the presidential campaign trail. Yet it is somehow OK to surround students who aren't even legal adults with images of extermination and murder alongside oversized photos of fetuses outside the womb.

I am no advocate of free speech zones, and neither were the Founding Fathers, but it's become increasingly clear in recent years that a citizen's or group's right to demonstrate or protest depends entirely on the cause or target of dissent.

Request a permit to protest the Bush administration's war in Iraq along the Inaugural Parade route, for example, and you will be assigned a take-it-or-leave-it position and an extensive list of do's and don'ts that have more to do with managing television images than public security.

The same restrictions, which often render free speech exercises meaningless by publicly marginalizing people, were enforced at last year's political conventions in Boston and New York, where protesters didn't even share the same subway stop as delegates and elected officials.

Anti-abortion advocates at UTSA last week didn't have to worry about being consigned to some guarded corral in a distant parking lot.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Few people actually know the First Amendment, and there are surveys that indicate the majority of Americans might not support such bold guarantees today, were the matter put to a vote. The Constitution gives every citizen the same right of expression, but protects no group from conducting themselves in a manner that infringes on the rights of others.

[Clandestino]

yeah, i saw this in the paper today. i started laughing because we had this same discussion already. it took him a week.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

yeah, i saw this in the paper today. i started laughing because we had this same discussion already. it took him a week.

Could it actually be that his column runs once a week on Sundays?

[Clandestino]

Could it actually be that his column runs once a week on Sundays?

haha... it could be that too!

[MannyIsGod]

The major flaw in that arguement, is that it fails to take into consideration that information on everything that goes up is available long before it goes up.

People actually did have time to prepare. I spoke about this exhbit with some people in the PSO because they wanted to run an exhibit countering it at the same time. They did.

The conversation was back in Janruary. We're in March. You do the math.

[Clandestino]

The major flaw in that arguement, is that it fails to take into consideration that information on everything that goes up is available long before it goes up.

People actually did have time to prepare. I spoke about this exhbit with some people in the PSO because they wanted to run an exhibit countering it at the same time. They did.

The conversation was back in Janruary. We're in March. You do the math.

the PSO did a piss poor job of countering their exhibit. i didn't even know they were there.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, the PSO has maybe 5 active members and no funding outside of what we put in. People like you who love to complain about things don't nessecarily like to act out on that. Bitching or writting a column is much easier.

But, the point wasn't the counter exhibit. It was that the information on who was going to be in the Sombria had been avaialbe for a long time.

[Clandestino]

Well, the PSO has maybe 5 active members and no funding outside of what we put in. People like you who love to complain about things don't nessecarily like to act out on that. Bitching or writting a column is much easier.

But, the point wasn't the counter exhibit. It was that the information on who was going to be in the Sombria had been avaialbe for a long time.

hold a fundraiser instead of bitching...

[MannyIsGod]

We hold several. I'm just saying don't expect the PSO to have the same kind of resources as a large group such as Justice for All.

[Clandestino]

5 active members? sounds like you guys are growing! haha...

[JoeChalupa]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod




Being pro choice is not supporting abortion. It's that simple.









um, ok?????

I agree Manny. But some don't get it.

[MannyIsGod]

Probably not, UTSA's student population can hardly be considered progressive.

[cherylsteele]

yeah, but we shouldn't have to see the anti-abortionists put their bullshit up.

So if a pro-life exhibit were to to put images up of the actual birth and all the blood that would be appropriate?
Would object to pro-lifers doing that on campus?


Here is my postion on this subject.......I am against abortion but it is noone's place to tell someone what to do.....I feel if you want to get an abortion it should be required to go to some ceritified class or something before you can get one....one should be required to get as much info on the subject first.

I would prefer that if someone wanted an abortion, that they should be told no, and said either you keep it or give to the authorities for adoption.

[NeoConIV]

From the article:

Students and faculty returning from Spring Break, especially those who left the city the previous week, had little or no opportunity to avoid or prepare for the tasteless and offensive visual onslaught.
So let's end the murderous f'ing onslaught of the unborn, then maybe this group would stop 'forcing' the ugly reality on people.

Let's think about the REAL victims...spare me the damaged psyche bullshit.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

From the article:

So let's end the murderous f'ing onslaught of the unborn, then maybe this group would stop 'forcing' the ugly reality on people.

Let's think about the REAL victims...spare me the damaged psyche bullshit.

Funny how different arguments bring together different people. I agree with the group's right to display.

As long as it wasn't obscene and the people weren't harrasing those passing by preventing them from moving, then have at it.

[samikeyp]

I would agree with Blaze. I believe that nobody has the right to tell someone else what to do with their bodies but I support the right of those who are against abortion to assemble peacably as this group apparently did. You can tell people "I am against this" but you do not have the right to tell people "you have to be against this".

[desflood]

Abortion isn't something that happens to a woman's body. It's what happens to the body of the baby (or fetus, if you prefer). If it was just something that a woman did to her body (like piercing or tattooing) there wouldn't be nearly the controversy!

[samikeyp]

So the woman's body feels nothing from the effects of an abortion?

[MannyIsGod]

You're right Des, if you discount the whole pregnancy.

[samikeyp]

I disagree. The procedure involved with an abortion can have physical effects on a woman's body. That being said....I go back to the original topic.....I support a woman's right to choose, but the anti-abortionists have a right to express their views. My apologies for moving this off topic.

[desflood]

So the woman's body feels nothing from the effects of an abortion?
Of course, but she chooses it. The baby (or fetus) does not. But, if you believe Planned Parenthood and the feminazis, there will be no repercussions from abortion at all except being happy about getting rid of the intrusion into your life, even though science has turned up evidence otherwise.

[samikeyp]

I agree but she still feels the effects. I don't believe people that say there are no repercussions because I know better. My point was, that while I feel, no one has the right to tell her how to choose or that she cannot choose, people who feel differently have the right to express those feelings.

[desflood]

Right you are!

[samikeyp]

thank you. and from what I have heard, they kept it peaceful. Some of their friends I ran into a few years back could have used some lessons.

[mookie2001]

what the stuff is flack?

[SequSpur]

Activists need to stay out of the public.

Rent some space at the convention center or something and invite the well wishers to come see your shit.

Because I personally ain't interested, and if I was, I would attend.

This goes with everything.

[Useruser666]

I'm pretty annoyed at any booth or table set up on campus. Especially those free t-shirt credit card ones. I don't think it's right to display the type of pictures described in open public. I wouldn't have a problem with it if it were indoors or in a tent.

[Clandestino]

I'm pretty annoyed at any booth or table set up on campus. Especially those free t-shirt credit card ones. I don't think it's right to display the type of pictures described in open public. I wouldn't have a problem with it if it were indoors or in a tent.

imagine if that booth were 2 stories high and took up the majority of the sidewalk!

also, at IUW some fake credit card booth was set up to steal people's identities recently. people thought they were signing up for credit cards... they'll found out what they signed up for soon enough!

[baseline bum]

Free speech is the most fundamental part of being an American. I applaud this group for having the balls to stand up for what they believe in, even though I hold a vastly different opinion on abortion laws. State-sponsored Censorship is wack and no American should put with it. If displaying 2-story tall photos is how this group feels it can best argue its case then by all means it's how they should do it.

[Useruser666]

Free speech is the most fundamental part of being an American. I applaud this group for having the balls to stand up for what they believe in, even though I hold a vastly different opinion on abortion laws. State-sponsored Censorship is wack and no American should put with it. If displaying 2-story tall photos is how this group feels it can best argue its case then by all means it's how they should do it.

But if those photos get in the way of the students learning and campus function is that still alright?

[SpursWoman]

Activists are a pain in the ass and have never changed my opinion about anything. :)

If I'm interested in a cause I'll pursue it...I don't need it shoved in my face.

Having an informative, peaceful rally is one thing....having 2 story photo boards of mutilated babies is shoving it in my face, so to speak.

[Spurminator]

But if those photos get in the way of the students learning and campus function is that still alright?

Any student whose "learning" is affected by having seen a demonstration on campus needs to reevaluate their path... You won't get very far in college if your learning is affected by distractions outside of class.

[MannyIsGod]

I'd love an explanation on how that exhibit is affecting learning.

Also, activism is not designed to change peoples mind overnight, or argueably even to change minds. It's more about getting information out and drawing attention so that people think about whats going on.

[SpursWoman]

I don't particularly care for demonstrations, period....regardless of their intent. :fro

[MannyIsGod]

Yes, well, a lot of people feel that way. But whether or not people care for them, a lot of times they are exposed to information they would not be, and it gets factored into opinions and decision making later on down the line.

For instance, I'm sure many people didn't care for the civil rights demonstrations of the 60s, or for those punk ass kids at Kent State, but how much have those demonstrations changed the fabric of our society?

[Drachen]

Activists need to stay out of the public.

Rent some space at the convention center or something and invite the well wishers to come see your shit.

Because I personally ain't interested, and if I was, I would attend.

This goes with everything.


Well, go live in North Korea you may find a suitable atmosphere for your suggestion.

[Useruser666]

I'd love an explanation on how that exhibit is affecting learning.

Also, activism is not designed to change peoples mind overnight, or argueably even to change minds. It's more about getting information out and drawing attention so that people think about whats going on.

If I have to get to a class or into a building that has tons of demonstrators or displays around it, it inconveniences me. Now considering that I PAID to be there, I think my rights to the use of the campus FAR exceed the rights of people to protest there. I don't approve of credit card sign up tables, jewelry sales, or protests on a college campus that effect any students not wanting to participate. I see no reason why they can't use an auditorium, conference center, or other meeting complex. Whether I agree with the cause or not, I don't want to see them on campus.

And to say that large pictures of fetuses or other images might not have an effect on people is very short sighted. Some people may not want to get an education at a place that hosts displays that may be very offensive to them. Is that fair?

[MannyIsGod]

If I have to get to a class or into a building that has tons of demonstrators or displays around it, it inconveniences me.


It's not about your convience.



Now considering that I PAID to be there, I think my rights to the use of the campus FAR exceed the rights of people to protest there.



Well, they are sponsered by a student or a student group. Someone who also pays has to ask them to come, they can't just come on their own.

Also, I also pay for you to go there. It's a public university, not a private one.



I don't approve of credit card sign up tables, jewelry sales, or protests on a college campus that effect any students not wanting to participate.


The information that this group was going to be there, where it was going to display, and when it was going to be there, was readily avaiable beforehand for a good amount of time. You could have avoided it entirely.



I see no reason why they can't use an auditorium, conference center, or other meeting complex. Whether I agree with the cause or not, I don't want to see them on campus.


There is no reason why they can't do that, they can do that. They won't do that because hiding your protests away, doesn't tend to be very effective.

I wonder how effective a sit in the 60s would have been had it been done in tucked away venue? I'm guessing not very.



And to say that large pictures of fetuses or other images might not have an effect on people is very short sighted. Some people may not want to get an education at a place that hosts displays that may be very offensive to them. Is that fair?

I never said it woudln't effect them, in fact the exhibit would be pretty useless if it didn't effect them. What I said is that you ahd options and choices. Next time, if it bothered you that much (and I know it didn't, but for the sake of the arguement we'll say it did), do you plan on being more informed about the exhibits that are being put up in order to plan your route more carefully?

And if you don't like the that kind of freedom at a public university, you can always go to a private one.

[Useruser666]

Manny, your are full of shit. If a giant pro death penalty exhibit of a pro life protest was going on in front of the cafeteria, and it delayed you from getting your coffee, you wouldn't be very happy about that would you?

I don't care if they are sponsored by student groups, or only have students in the events. The university is not there to be a political statement proving grounds. It's sole purpose is to provide people with an education. There are plenty of public places for organizing protests that won't interfear with the educations of others.

One person's freedom of speech ends when it harms another individual's right to an education. I don't think I should have to plan for these events and take MY OWN TIME to firgure out a way around them. That is BS.

Why should I have to go to a private university when I pay for an education at a public one? I think it's ridiculous to have such distractions in the middle of a campus. What right does one person have to hinder another from getting what they payed for?

[MannyIsGod]

Manny, your are full of shit. If a giant pro death penalty exhibit of a pro life protest was going on in front of the cafeteria, and it delayed you from getting your coffee, you wouldn't be very happy about that would you?

I don't care if they are sponsored by student groups, or only have students in the events. The university is not there to be a political statement proving grounds. It's sole purpose is to provide people with an education. There are plenty of public places for organizing protests that won't interfear with the educations of others.

One person's freedom of speech ends when it harms another individual's right to an education. I don't think I should have to plan for these events and take MY OWN TIME to firgure out a way around them. That is BS.

Why should I have to go to a private university when I pay for an education at a public one? I think it's ridiculous to have such distractions in the middle of a campus. What right does one person have to hinder another from getting what they payed for?

Are you going to answer my question?

Next time, if it bothered you that much (and I know it didn't, but for the sake of the arguement we'll say it did), do you plan on being more informed about the exhibits that are being put up in order to plan your route more carefully?


Tell you what, since I'm full of shit, I suggest you sue them for hindering your education. I mean shit, you must have some form of recourse!

Just for shits and giggles though, explain to me how it was hindered?

Oh and I would hate a pro death penalty exhibit. BUT I WOULD FIGHT FOR IT'S RIGHT TO BE PUT UP IN THE SAME SPOT AS THIS ONE.

[Useruser666]

Are you going to answer my question?

Next time, if it bothered you that much (and I know it didn't, but for the sake of the arguement we'll say it did), do you plan on being more informed about the exhibits that are being put up in order to plan your route more carefully?


Tell you what, since I'm full of shit, I suggest you sue them for hindering your education. I mean shit, you must have some form of recourse!

Just for shits and giggles though, explain to me how it was hindered?

Oh and I would hate a pro death penalty exhibit. BUT I WOULD FIGHT FOR IT'S RIGHT TO BE PUT UP IN THE SAME SPOT AS THIS ONE.

Yeah, like I should have to take even MORE TIME to plan my route out around every protest that may be a nuisance. Or your other suggestion is even better, take the TIME AND MONEY to sue them!!! Maybe the protestors would be considerate of my rights to an education while trying to spread their own message.

[Clandestino]

i'm still trying to figure out how manny is anti-death penalty, but pro-abortion... beats the shit out of me...

[Drachen]

I dont get it, as much as conservatives complain about the liberal agenda being spread on college campuses and the conservative agenda being severely handicapped in the same place, I would figure that conservatives would be happy that such a display went up.


i'm still trying to figure out how manny is anti-death penalty, but pro-abortion... beats the shit out of me...


probably the same way many conservatives are pro-death penalty and anti-abortion.

[desflood]

i'm still trying to figure out how manny is anti-death penalty, but pro-abortion... beats the shit out of me...
Manny doesn't think babies are alive.

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, like I should have to take even MORE TIME to plan my route out around every protest that may be a nuisance. Or your other suggestion is even better, take the TIME AND MONEY to sue them!!! Maybe the protestors would be considerate of my rights to an education while trying to spread their own message.

:lmao, no no, you're confusing your right to an education which wasn't obstructed, to your right to have everything just the way you want it with no disturbances, which isn't actually real.

It's a shame it was a nuisance, but that hardly kept you from getting an education. It obviously didn't bother you to the point you'd take time to do something about it, other than bitch. (you could have done the former in the time it took you to do the latter)

[baseline bum]

Your kidding me. Your right to get a quick coffee is more important than their first ammendment right?

[Useruser666]

:lmao, no no, you're confusing your right to an education which wasn't obstructed, to your right to have everything just the way you want it with no disturbances, which isn't actually real.

It's a shame it was a nuisance, but that hardly kept you from getting an education. It obviously didn't bother you to the point you'd take time to do something about it, other than bitch. (you could have done the former in the time it took you to do the latter)

Uh, planning ahead for every rally and protest takes time. Sueing those same people would take even more time and TONS of money!!! Why should protests or displays like this be allowed in a place that is designed to be a place of learning?!! Why? I know they want to reach people, but the people that are there do not spend their time and money to hear a bunch of causes. I didn't go to school to hear people's causes. I went there to get an education. And not that hearing these people isn't educational, it's just not part of the requirements to graduate.

I don't care about protests that are in areas that don't effect me getting to classes or school. I just don't think that it is fair that just because you want to be heard, you make it difficult for others who are trying to get around on their daily business.

[Useruser666]

Your kidding me. Your right to get a quick coffee is more important than their first ammendment right?

Did I say anything about me getting a coffee? No. Did I say people should not be allowed to have the freedom of speech? No. Just don't get the freakin way when I'm going to class. Is that so hard?

[MannyIsGod]

Well, this thread speaks for itself, there's not left for me to add.

[Spurminator]

Did I say anything about me getting a coffee? No. Did I say people should not be allowed to have the freedom of speech? No. Just don't get the freakin way when I'm going to class. Is that so hard?

As long as you're not suggesting these groups be banned from the campus, you have every right to want them to shut up. So long as you're not condoning "shutting" them up. Therein lies the difference.

[Clandestino]

probably the same way many conservatives are pro-death penalty and anti-abortion.

not even close... the death penalty is to rid society of murderers and rapists or other criminals...

[Useruser666]

As long as you're not suggesting these groups be banned from the campus, you have every right to want them to shut up. So long as you're not condoning "shutting" them up. Therein lies the difference.

I'm not saying they should be shut up. But there have been times in the past that certain groups have made it difficult to get from one place to another. I'm not saying the messages shouldn't be heard, but a campus is not the best place for a human traffic jam.

[MannyIsGod]

But do you acknowledge their right to be there?

[Useruser666]

But do you acknowledge their right to be there?

Are you saying they have a right to interfere with my education?

[Spurminator]

If free speech and peaceful assmbly on public grounds interferes with your education, then yes.

[MannyIsGod]

Are you saying they have a right to interfere with my education?

They didn't interfere with your education in anyway.

[Useruser666]

They didn't interfere with your education in anyway.

In any way some groups have interfered. I have been taking more net classes though so it's not a big deal to me now. At Sac it was always the credit card sign up tables or the jewelry sales. Manny, would it be wrong to keep these things off the common sidewalk areas?

[MannyIsGod]

THey never interefred with my education, and I think you'd have to fucking reach so hard you'd pull every arm muscle you have to find out if they had.

Personally, I don't like the credit card tables there, and I don't know how they get there. The jewelry ones don't bother me as much, but I don't care.

Either way, I think comercial endeavours are not even close to being the same thing as a protest, which is a pure expression of first amendment rights.

[Drachen]

My friend Joel's dad is one of them that owns a jewelry booth that sets up at sac (and TSU), Joel usually works that one. If you are down there it is the "avalon jewelry" one. He is pretty cool to talk to.

[Useruser666]

THey never interefred with my education, and I think you'd have to fucking reach so hard you'd pull every arm muscle you have to find out if they had.

Personally, I don't like the credit card tables there, and I don't know how they get there. The jewelry ones don't bother me as much, but I don't care.

Either way, I think comercial endeavours are not even close to being the same thing as a protest, which is a pure expression of first amendment rights.

Yes Manny, you are right because you say so. I can't even be right about my own personal experiences.

[bigzak25]

if they were disrupting classrooms, that would be a valid point. otherwise, spare the dramatics.

"i can't learn.....those big bad pictures are in the parking lot"

i mean really....c'mon...

[Useruser666]

if they were disrupting classrooms, that would be a valid point. otherwise, spare the dramatics.

"i can't learn.....those big bad pictures are in the parking lot"

i mean really....c'mon...

I'm not saying that the case that started this thread is the same as the instances I'm talking about. I am refering not to what is on these displays, but to the delays and other effects that come to having them smack in the middle of the campus. I don't spend my money and my time to have to figure out away around these types of things. They shouldn't be there. Some people may like to have to walk around and through crowds of people. They may like to have to go around the outside of buildings or around barracades to get to where they are going. I don't.

P.S. And they better not be on the fucking parking lot either. Parking is already at such a premium as it is to waste space like that.

[Clandestino]

no, if they had been in the parking lot people would've ran them over...there would have been real drama!

there were in the middle of the campus on the sidewalk...

[bigzak25]

well guys, i understand your points, you are paying for an education and if you feel it interfered with your education unfairly, then so be it. does UTSA make a habit out of having these things? not anti-abortion stuff, just big displays in general? because either it was a one time thing and really shouldn't be made such a big deal about, or it's a repetative thing, and the university really needs to listen to it's student body with regards to complaints such as yours....Good luck.

[Useruser666]

A case of a similar point. Target stops the Salvation Army from bell ringing in front of it's stores. Target would be have to open to having anyone from any charity stand in front of it's stores and that would be an inconvenience to it's customers and possibly a safety hazzard.

[bigzak25]

Target would be have to open to having anyone from any charity stand in front of it's stores


really? why's that? i don't ususally see any one other than salvation army in front of walmart of dillards during the holidays....and why a safety hazard? you mean like if there's a fire? i'm sure santa will get his pot and run too....

[Useruser666]

really? why's that? i don't ususally see any one other than salvation army in front of walmart of dillards during the holidays....and why a safety hazard? you mean like if there's a fire? i'm sure santa will get his pot and run too....

Target had to stop allowing them to collect because then it would have to allow everyone to collect. If everyone wanted to camp outside it could get very crowded.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not familliar with the Target situation, but it seems to me that Target would be able to allow anyone they wish and disallow anyone they wish from using the grounds seeing as it is a private entity.

Also, the public grounds, including those of a publcly funded university must be open for all equaly to express their first amendment rights. There's nothing new or complicated about this.

There is a difference between a vendor and a protestor, and I don't know what the qualifications are for a vendor to set up shop, but they are not allowed the same protections as protestors because they are not the same thing.

[Clandestino]

but yeah, for a while target only allowed the salvation army..then they stopped saying, if they let target, they'd have to let everyone.... the salvation army lost a considerable percentage of their christmas funding bc of this decision by target.

[MannyIsGod]

Yes Manny, you are right because you say so. I can't even be right about my own personal experiences.

Hey, you can be rightin your mind, and I can be right in mine. What matters is who's opinion the court is going to enforce, and I suspect that it's going to follow the first amdendment and do what it can to make sure those rights are protected.

I don't see anywhere you would have a legal arguement that your rights were breeched by an exhibit in the middle of campus.

[MannyIsGod]

but yeah, for a while target only allowed the salvation army..then they stopped saying, if they let target, they'd have to let everyone.... the salvation army lost a considerable percentage of their christmas funding bc of this decision by target.

I'm having a hard time understanding what you are saying in that post, but I think I know what you mean.

The question is, was Target forced to make this decision based upon a judgement, or was it an internal decision because thats what they deemed to be correct?

[Clandestino]

I'm having a hard time understanding what you are saying in that post, but I think I know what you mean.

The question is, was Target forced to make this decision based upon a judgement, or was it an internal decision because thats what they deemed to be correct?

haha...i'm on allergy medicine... they just made the decision by themselves.. but they screwed the salvation army in the process...