Well, well... thought I had disappeared? Me too. It's been a long while since I've written up a post for this site (completely avoiding the month of March), but I'm sure you will all forgive me. With so much time passing and so many things going on, there's certainly no shortage of things to mention here, so I'll try to be brief and quickly move from one subject to the next [editorial interjection: Ha!].
First up, in case you have been living under a large, heavy rock with poor lighting, or are unaffiliated with this organization, you’ve probably read about the dreaded Women’s Center controversy (soon to be a major motion picture). I could go into detail describing the controversy here, but it’s been done so well in other locations. Basically however, the Women’s Center didn’t want much to do with us despite some earlier encouraging statements, and after some standing up and calls for action, we got what we have a right to as Carolina students. Many good things came out of this controversy, most notably being lots of attention – something we always welcome with open arms. We’ve received tons of emails and even calls from people offering to help us out or just thank us for what we do – not to mention increased traffic to this briefly neglected site. Hopefully this is just a sign of things to come.
It’s not just us anti-pro-choice enthusiasts who are paying attention to this ordeal. Several pro-abortion advocates have taken notice of our new presence in Women’s Center activities and there’s quite a bit of response. My personal favorite comes from the liberal journal known as The Independent Weekly which has a lovely cover story detailing several conservative related issues on campus, and kindly includes us. Of course, as would be expected, our critics are flawed, and I’m more than happy to point those flaws out to you, the loyal reader (all three of you). In the article entitled “Mainstream manipulation,” Cat Warren writes about all the reaction from the press concerning recent conservative related controversies on the UNC campus. A sizeable portion of this article discusses our beloved group, and several claims and insinuations are made. What follows is my assessment of all that is wrong with this article in regards to our organization.
First of all, and most incorrectly, the author seems to suggest that perhaps our organization is being funded and/or puppeteered by the conservative Pope Foundation and prominent conservative figures in our community. Now, don’t get me wrong, we do have contact with people from the Pope Foundation and conservative representatives and groups – but we are in no way affiliated with them or any political stance other than that concerning abortion. While some of us may share political views that are conservative, I know there are many of us who don’t – and for us to achieve our goals with this issue (however impossible), such diversity is essential. If you want any further proof, I’m sure our treasurer would love to brag to all who are interested about the gobs and gobs of dirty, ill-gotten cash we are rolling in over here.
So now you’re probably asking “is that all the beef you have with this article Smith?” to which I would respond “You ask way too many questions – stay away from me.” But seriously folks, there’s much more to be had from this delicious article. Warren goes on to write that...
“anti-abortion groups fight against the clearly stated mission of the women's center: women's equality.”After taking a cold shower to calm down from this succulent nugget of ridiculousness, I started to realize that perhaps Cat Warren is on to something here. When it comes to abortion, women are murdered just as often as their male counterparts, truly achieving equality. And what better way for us as a society to make women the equal to men than by forcing them to kill their unborn children so they won’t be bothered with that nasty pregnancy thing that so tips the scales in favor of men in the workplace and at school. As recent speaker Sally Winn suggests, abortion makes women equal by changing them to some societal norm instead of society changing to accommodate them (unlike all other major civil rights movements). In reality, we feel women’s equality and a pro-life world are very agreeable concepts, and indeed compliment one another quite nicely.
Just in case these things weren’t enough to make you question Warren’s logic, I’ll give you another quote that I’m sure many of you will find interesting.
Reproductive choice has been at the core of the fight for women's equality worldwide. Should the Freeman Center for Jewish Life at Duke be forced to allow a group of Holocaust deniers to link off their Web site?Moronically mangling the issue with phrases like “reproductive choice” describing the killing of an unborn child is one thing, but that absurd Holocaust analogy is quite another. Seems to me quite odd that someone advocating the murder of millions and millions of humans (who are, without any dispute, biologically human) would paint her opposition as a Nazi-like organization, supporting (or denying) the Holocaust. If anything, the analogy should be – should a pro-Holocaust website be forced to supply links to Jewish groups? Which, is too ridiculous to even defend – kind of like the Women’s Center’s previous dealings with us (or lack thereof). Of course, we’re not in anyway saying we think the Women’s Center would fit such an analogy, but if indeed they should be considered automatically pro-abortion because of second wave feminism’s embrace of the “right” to kill the unborn, then the analogy would be appropriate. However, we don’t hold the Women’s Center to such low standards, and appreciate their service to women, and their newfound cooperation with our group.
Before I finish my run at this Independent Weekly article, I’d like to counter one last statement of Warren’s. The sentence regarding equality above was not posted in full, and was printed with this clause before it: “Stephanie Evans, who ‘had worked so hard’ on this issue…” Now, I understand that putting quotes around “had worked so hard” is a standard device for acknowledging that the statement is derived from another source – however, it seems painfully obvious to me that these quotation marks are used in a derisive manner, implying that the statement is untrue and Stephanie Evans (our President) doesn’t work hard. I would just like to say, without any prompt from Stephanie or anyone else, that she is hands down the hardest working member of this organization and without her efforts kicking this organization into gear, we would not be where we are today. Also, just in case “journalist” Cat Warren intended to imply otherwise, Stephanie, herself, wrote the long memo which ignited the controversy, and I created, on my own, this “glossy, state-of-the-art” website.
But the fun doesn’t stop there kids. The fruits of all of this controversy came in the form of our involvement with Carolina’s Women’s Week in March, for which we provided two speakers: the previously mentioned Sally Winn as well as Olivia Gans. Sally Winn is the Vice President of Feminists for Life and gave a very interesting talk on how abortion adversely effects women. Personally, I found her point of view fascinating and a lot of what she said was a new approach to the issue for me. The concept that feminism is hurt by abortion, and that the movement has become tarnished by this one issue is altogether new to me, and I’d imagine some of you as well. Consider that Susan B. Anthony and practically all other founding members of the movement for women’s equality were pro-life. Also consider that a pro-abortion stance was pushed on the women’s movement by men, and that it simply makes women compatible with a male-oriented society as opposed to making the society oriented to no single gender. Of course, I’m more than likely completely butchering Sally’s brilliant message – but needless to say, I am incredibly glad she came. Afterwards, Sally took questions from the audience, quite skillfully answering questions posed by pro-lifers and pro-abortion attendees (who despite several answers from Sally seemed to think their questions ignored).
Olivia Gans came the previous week and wowed a crowd of listeners with her assuredly touching story. Sadly I was unable to attend this event so I am unable to say first hand just how good it was, but from what I understand, I missed a great discussion. Olivia Gans is the director of the American Victims of Abortion outreach program of the National Right to Life Committee. She speaks about post-abortive issues from her own horrible experiences of being pressured into an abortion. As distinguished a speaker as she was, I believe we were lucky to have her. (CSFL members: Any takers on an account of the event?)
Well I guess that about sums up this edition of the CSFL re-cap. There’ve been a few other things going on which I’m sure I’ll remember by the next time I write up a post (projected to occur in the year 2008), but I suppose this is enough for now. I’ll make sure to update the other sections of this site with upcoming events and the newly elected officers for the 2004-2005 school year as time permits. In the meantime, take solace in the fact that Chapel Hill isn’t the only place this battle over the rights of the unborn is fought. These past few weeks have given rise to some incredible new developments in this controversial subject. Most notably is the passing of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, along with an upcoming broadcast of an actual abortion on British television. I’ll try and go more into these topics a little later, but for now you can just read for yourself.