Reply With Quote
You hate abortion, but you support it?
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12199
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.
You hate abortion, but you support it?
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12199
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.
yeah, but we shouldn't have to see the anti-abortionists put their bull up.
Being pro choice is not supporting abortion. It's that simple.
Who forced you to look?
it is hard to miss a 2 story tall poster in the center of the sidewalk
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
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.
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 ing protestors can come in and put up some bull exhibit?
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 "bull " 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 bull 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 o 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.
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.
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.
And why should I change my route. The point is that those images had no place on campus to begin with.
They did have a place there.
It's explained in the first amendment of our cons ution. 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 cons ution is there to protect rights, not convience
That can be applied to more than just 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.
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.
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
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions