Why Not Just Shorten It To "Death Zone"?

Will such groups be exempt from paying CUSA fees?

And how will CUSA deal with Muslim groups? Last time I checked, Islam was markedly anti-abortion.

Carleton is living up to the handle that Frank Magazine hung on it a few years ago - "Cartoon U."

Carleton is living up to the handle that Frank Magazine hung on it a few years ago - "Cartoon U."

Nice.

Left-wing fascism & censorship of diversity of points of view in a Canadian university.

They're telling students to think as they're told, not to think for themselves, plus to only speak as told, not to speak for themselves.

Universities are rapidly transforming into centers of radical leftwing indoctrination.

Given this reality, prospective employers are going to grow wary of hiring university grads. Who wants to have a radical moonbat activist inside their company?

Was Tony Lee the XXX Hypnotist some kind of fucked up juxtaposition or am I tarded?

Syncro

Sorry about that last post. I followed the links and I'm torn between "Cheif Electoral Officer" and assistant asswipe.

Decisions...decisions.

I wonder what Kinsella or Cherniak would do?

Oh yea.....!!!! Asswipe it is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Syncro

I don't like our kangaroo court Human Rights Court regime but I play by their rules and expect others to do so. In that spirit, I hope this motion passes, because it so egregiously violates the human rights of immigrants, Muslims, Catholics, and anyone else who opposes the rabid abortion lobby that I think they'll get their asses handed to them in a HR tribunal and it will teach the left a badly needed lesson. It actually goes further than human rights violations: it incites mass hatred against identifiable groups and could be construed as a Hate Crime in accordance with the criminal code of Canada.

Ah, that's my University...

This is the same place where I took a course entitled "Global Political Issues", by the second lecture I was calling it "The Leftist Diatribes".

You should have seen their faces when I showed up for class right after work in Combats.

One disinformed young lady asked me if the "soldiers" using the soccer field for training were there to "Take over the campus". The soldiers were the Govenor Generals Foot Guards practicing for their ceremonies on Parliament hill.

So they are trying to change from their previous motto:
Carleton University. Where the "K" stands for Quality.

One of my bosses called it Pulse U, if you have a pulse, it will take you in. :-)

Having said that though it does have a very reputable Archetecture program, but then future archetects and engineers rarely have the time to get involved in follishness like this motion.

And you singled out Muslims why? The religion of constant seething is a "bit player" in North America for this topic.

There are many other religions that practice, and demand, anti-choice stances from there followers. And these religions have a much tighter grip on the elected bodies than any. Which is the largest in North America? Can you say "Catholic"? Can you say "Any derivative of Roman Catholic"? Do you not consider what is happening in the States and the control these groups have on they're polictacal leaders is not dangerous?

My only concern where other religions will have any effect is the overly-large amount of press they will receive in both the MSM and the Blogshpere. As usual: small voices with inflated impact.

If any had bothered to read the list of CUSO certified groups that already exist, you will see that the chances of this motion passing an open vote by the student body are pretty well NIL.

Not being a member of any group noted previously, nor a member of any group at Carleton, but as a past student at Carleton, I only have this to say:

The creation of controversy to bring forward and highlight topics of public interest has long been the method used by universities. Nothing gets notice faster than a student body going against the precepts of the "opinions of loud mouth special interest groups".

Carleton's student population will handle this motion in the way they see fit.

You want to pay attention to a student body that does have special interest issue? Check out the storys on Ryerson. Now, that is a topic worht getting rabid about.

Zip, you cracked me up! Your "young lady" probably thought they were Yanks.

JJM, you've brought up two issues (TWO!) in but three sentences. Are you trying to overload brains of the students of Carlton U.? Shame!

This is 'lifestyle choice' taken to macabre limits. At Angry in the Great White North, this comment (on income-splitting):

"Where I work having a family is considered a life style choice, and no one wants to 'subsidize' a life style choice. The argument is that if you choose to have children you choose to incur the costs that go with it."

I'm getting the feeling that people who express these views, along with the morbid moonbats at CUSA, don't actually believe in "lifestyle" choices at all. They believe in "deathstyle" choices.

Somehow, we've bred a generation of death-wish dolts who seem to think that "freedom" lies in suppressing others' freedom of expression and religion (which, in their twisted logic equals freedom of expression and religion for them)--not to mention one's right to life. The thinking goes, "If it's my personal lifestyle choice to not have children, my rights trump the new life that my sexual activities have resulted in. No need to be responsible or accountable. This new life is expendible because it doesn't fit in with my personal lifestyle choice. And anyone who might disagree with me has no right to express their concern, [in other words,] has no right to their rights. Period."

I hear jackboots. I hear jail cells clanging shut. I hear silence in our streets and school yards. I hear knashing of teeth when all of these childless lifestylers wonder how come they can't retire at the age of 56. Children = jobs = taxes = pensions.

There's no one more myopic than a visionless moonbat.

"Without a vision, the people perish."

Wow. Who needs the Nazi SS when we've got "lifestyle-choice" foot soldiers in our institutions of "higher learning"? Yup. It stinks to high heaven, and they can't even smell the stench.

When killing off life becomes a modus operandi, enforced by "pro-choice" (sic) identifiers and motions to exclude any one/group who self-identifies as "pro-life," we're hurtling down the slippery slope right into the swamp. If we can't behave like a higher species, we're going to quickly descend to low-life forms. CUSA's already there.

why is any group, pro or anti abortion, getting any funding from anything near resembling the public purse????i mean, for crying out loud, my 3 children have to pay for all activities in school(the board claims poverty)yet their is money for this kind of bulls$%^....it really makes one want to become part of the underground economy, so i can live in peace knowing i am not funding this kind of garbage

Jazz says: "but as a past student at Carleton..."

Given your poor reading comprehension and weak argumentation characterized by fuzzified thinking, I believe you.

"you will see that the chances of this motion passing an open vote by the student body are pretty well NIL."

Except the (70% female) student body isn't voting on this, dumbass; the student COUNCIL is.

"Carleton's student population will handle this motion in the way they see fit."

Well seeing as they aren't voting on this human rights violating lawsuit-bait of a motion, that's quite irrelevant, isn't it? Given that the retards on CUSA council have a history of passing similarly obtuse motions such as making Carleton a "nuclear weapons free zone" I wouldn't be surprised if it passed.

JJM _ I'm sure they will give the Moslem Students Association a pass.

After all, they both have the objective of destroying Western civilization.

If that's what you want... fine. I respect your right to attempt to destroy all that I stand for and believe in.

Just don't expect me to be all that enthusiastic about paying for it.

Jazz said:

"If any had bothered to read the list of CUSO certified groups that already exist, you will see that the chances of this motion passing an open vote by the student body are pretty well NIL."

CUSA says:

"CUSA Council is the legislative body of CUSA. It consists of 28 elected representatives divided according to faculty and the six members of the Executive. There are also representatives from the Rideau River Residence Association (RRRA) and the Graduate Students' Association (GSA)."

I say : The motion passes with only the Rideau River Residence Association(the property owning adults) voting against the motion.

Bob, not surprised at your response at all. Typical "special interest" response to attack the person in a debate and little research on the details of the topic.

This is the constitution of the student body association. Like all constitutional motions, there is a process.

Some one puts forward a motion with the required particulars.
Council adds it to the motion list.
Council puts forward their agreement or disagreement.
Students vote in the general assembly, or other format as designated.
Motion is passed or quashed according to the rules of the constitution.

Open-minded debate is for the betterment of all. Vitriolic name calling and insults just tells me what level of intelligence I'm debating against.

I find myself really, really, really glad I didn't go to Carleton. They offered me a $10000 scholarship to go there... I turned it down to come to St.FX with no scholarship at all. Now I know why.

Jazz, your post is factually inaccurate, which is fairly typical of morally defective Carleton alumni. The motion, and virtually all motions passed at CUSA council, are not subject to a student plebicite.

I'm sure you'll recall that plebecites are fairly rare at Carleton and other universtities on such administrative matters; the motion to make Carleton a "nuclear free zone" for example was not passed by a student vote. See how you are lying now? Now, you can stop being a lying left wing snake, or I can keep pointing out in a factually accurate manner that you are a lying left wing snake. Either or.

PS I just got off the phone with a CUSA councillor who confirmed to me that there is no process for students to vote on this matter if it is passed by CUSA council, which of course is entirely understandable in a representative democratic system.

Bob, getting a little broad with that brush aren't you

" fairly typical of morally defective Carleton alumni"

Both my wife and I are or were students at Carleton, neither of us is "morally defective".

If you really are a Carleton grad, fake alias commentor "zip", then do something other than feign righteous indignation and stand up for your school and stand up to those who would turn "Last Chance U" into "Militant Teenage Abortion Slut U". Oops, I guess that was insensitive too. Oh well.

They don't call it "Liberal" Arts for nothing.

Seems Carlton loves diversity in everything but thought, opinion and philosophy...and as such has collapsed the dialectic forum and closed the exchange of ideas and points of view which support civilised reason and the tolerant liberal democracy.

It is sobering when you see students rejecting the process through which we gain knowledge and failing to realize that competing theses are just that..2 opposing thesis and neither right nor wrong...just yet to be proven...in this case at what point does life start and is that life due the protection of citizenship? A daunting question of science, medicine, ethics and law that has stumped scholars and scientists for decades.

Obviously Carlton feels it has the elusive answer to such pervasive age-old perplexing questions: simply shut down debate....I don't have to elaborate as to how this same technique has been employed by all despotic statist regimes to repress dissent and persuit of truth.

Obviously the Carlton Quisling league believe that truth is subjective and the processes used to arive at the truth is a waste of time when you can simply dictate what they officially saction it to be.

When we see the rejection of debate (thesis-antithesis-solution)by extention we see the rejection of the learning process.

Carlton student's Il Duce bund has given incarnation to the old saw "educated idiots".

Students for Life at University of Toronto was prohibited by the Students Admiistrative Council (SAC) from distributing material to new students at the beginning of the year. At the time they hid behind "executive committee approval of material" and spread misleading information about their actions. It is time for SAC to come clean on the issue. Jen Hasum is the President of the Student's Activity Council and has taken no leadership on this issue. Email her at president@sac.utoronto.ca and ask her for clarification. Is U of T to go the same way as Carleton and eventually ban opposing views? Censorship seems quite acceptable to these people.

been around the block: "we're hurtling down the slippery slope right into the swamp"

Sad to say, like in Pilgrim's Progress, we have already slipped into the Pool of Despondency...

The jackels are running the plains.

Bob, your a moron.

I wasn't defending the actions of the students council at Carleton I was defending myself and my wife against your drive by smear of all Allumni as "Morally defective".

Seems to me that you are not too far from the students council after all, if it doesn't fit YOUR agenda slander and misrepresentation is the way to go.

"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
John Stuart Mill

zip says "Whaaa!"

Boo hoo hoo, I hurt the feelings of a Carleton grad, surely a near-mathematical possibility given their typically stoic nature and vaunted rejection of victimhood status...

Flamewar ends now, you two.

I am trying to figure out why anybody would feel that a blanket ban on abortion would promote life. When you consider that abortion bans lead to the practice being pushed underground and resulting in women undergoing unsafe procedures which lead to the deaths of both her fetus and herself, I really find the term pro-life rather puzzling.

But I don't see the benefit in banning "pro-life" groups either.

http://www.cusaonline.com/womynscentre/womynscentre_site.html

Womyn's Centre on this campus shares space in the same building with other groups, and has a lot to say about who gets to be in their building it seems.

They expect/demand their own members to behave in a particular way.

From their website:

"...When consensus works well, it becomes a creative process. Consensus is the process of group decision-making without voting, although it takes practice. The goal is to achieve a decision everyone can live with, even though it isn't everyone's first choice. Majority vote polarizes the group, presents and commits group members to decisions with which they may not agree.

Guidelines:

Respect differences: non-judgmental
No side talking
One person speaks at a time
No interruptions
Use "I" statements
Be aware of how much "air space" you use
Respect the right to pass or be silent: right to leave
Respect confidentiality
Provide a "safe" place (i.e. non-racist, non-homo/biphobic, non-sexist, ETC.....)
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EVERYONE TO ENSURE THESE GUIDELINES ARE FOLLOWED "

-----
The problem comes in that they want to live in their bubble of protection, forever.

They seek to prohibit any intrusion of alternate thought, or physical presence, anywhere near their meeting room or building, or campus. Now that is some kind of education on tolerance.

To demand that another voice be shut out of the campus, for fear of tainting their delicate balancing act, is inviting a equality challenge.

I hope they get one.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; 80% of the *soft* social sciences departments should just be shut down. The "academics" inhabiting them are borderline illiterates spewing out realms of nonsensical PC discourse that hinders, poisons and undermines the development of a healthy intellect.

They are post-modernist trainwrecks!

CS, at 4:30 am you said: "Universities are rapidly transforming into centers of radical leftwing indoctrination."

I think that process was actually completed not long after I left the university world in the early 1970s.

"I hear jackboots. I hear jail cells clanging shut. I hear silence in our streets and school yards. I hear knashing of teeth..."

Well if the Pro Choice movement's ultimate aim is totalitarian government then there sure are taking their time since we've decriminalized the procedure for over 30 years now. Even the neocons only took a few years to bring us people being whisked off to secret prisons without trial to be tortured. And they're administratively incompetent. I wonder what the Pro Choice Nazis are waiting for?

To anyone who claims we're currently engaging in genocide I suggest armed insurrection. If you balk at the idea of doing anything about genocide other than whining then perhaps deep down you don't really believe your own rhetoric.

Memorial University of Newfoundland did the same thing a few years back, when they banned the Group 'MUN for Life' from being a ratified society on campus over the bogus reason of 'not having enough members', despit the reality that they clearly did. The next year, the student newspaper helped out the Fascists at the Women's Resource Centre by running a Hit piece on a local pro-life women's shelter that set up a booth at the volunteer fair. The usual lies and slander were put up, (i.e. the people manning the booth were making the campus an 'unsafe atmosphere' for women...despite the fact that an elderly lady and a young women were running it, that they 'threw plastic fetuses at students' and other such rubbish.) They were allowed back only if the MUNSU executive could screen their materials the next year they came, which they did. The president showed up with a balck sharpie and censored any pamphlets containing any information he didn't agree with. Last Year, the Campus took an official 'Pro-Choice' position, and banned all pro-life groups from appearing on campus.

This year, the Student Union Caved Big time; because they couldn't afford to be sued for their gross violation of Charter Rights, they backed off and are now allowing pro-life groups on campus.

Heh.

And because they're so massively in debt, they had to cut a deal with university administration - the university assumed their debt, but also control over much of the Student Centre; including the areas where the student volunteer fair is held. The university administration is decidedly more business friendly as well. I think I jumped in glee when reading about it.

Tanya,

Outlawing abortion won't lead to more deaths of women. The fact is the rate of deaths from abortion started falling long before it was made legal due to improving medical techniques, drugs etc. Most illegal abortions would have been done by doctors.

Also, think for a second about all those so-called "back alley" abortionists. What do you think happened to them when abortion became legal? They all became shop front abortionists.

If anything legalizing abortion probably made it less safe. After all now if you provide an abortion and you kill the girl, you don't get jail time, just a negligence lawsuit.

"To anyone who claims we're currently engaging in genocide I suggest armed insurrection. If you balk at the idea of doing anything about genocide other than whining then perhaps deep down you don't really believe your own rhetoric.

Posted by: Jose at November 24, 2006 12:18 PM"

Be careful what you wish for, Jose. There are more than you think who do believe their own rhetoric.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/03/1062548909836.html

Tanya comments, "I am trying to figure out why anybody would feel that a blanket ban on abortion would promote life."

I don't think anyone on this thread has actually said that, Tanya. I've wondered allowed how the abortion culture (now well over 100,000 abortions a year in Canada, and 1.5 million in the U.S.) justifies itself when it comes to the future of our country. We worry constantly, now, about who's going to be paying the taxes when the baby boomers (I'm one) are going to be pulling massively on Canada's health care resources, for a start. It's a question that governments have been avoiding for a long time, as they fund, on the one hand, abortions with Canadians' tax dollars and massive immigration, on the other. Other problems for another time.

But the larger question here is the repression of lively debate, censorship of a particular point of view, on a subject that is, admittedly, controversial. You're right when you say, "I don't see the benefit in banning "pro-life" groups either."

Too bad the "educated idiots" at Cartoon U. can't understand that. When debates are shut down at so-called institutions of higher learning, it is a harbinger of dire times ahead.

Rather an interesting Freudian spelling in my post above.

I meant "I wondered aloud," not "I wondered allowed," but the way things are going these days, I must have beent thinking about needing permission to even wonder...hmmmm...

"I've wondered allowed how the abortion culture (now well over 100,000 abortions a year in Canada, and 1.5 million in the U.S.) justifies itself when it comes to the future of our country."

I wouldn't call belief in a right "a culture" after all we don't have "abortion music" or "abortion cuisine" now do we.

But to answer your question people who believe in pro-choice don't have to justify their belief on population management grounds, personal liberty trumps any desire of the state for certain demographics.

Can you believe it? Back in the 60's when I was a teen, radical universities like UC at Berkley complained that the "establishment" gave them no voice and the protests went on and on. Now we have student bodies that want to take voice away from their own. Oh the times they are a changin.

I believe in a woman right to not have a baby. The time to make that determination is before the physical fun starts - not after. Its called taking responsibility.

Oh ya,If anyone at Carleton U wants to deny me the right to express the above opinion I have only one thing to say, "Bring it, baby"

And another thing! Its obvious that this self-absorbed group of radical feminist and their male wimp supporters completely missed the important messages we are reminded of every November 11th. My father, several of my uncles along with thousands of their great generation fought long and hard so that we could live in a country where the freedom to one's opinion is treasured, honored and guarded from any threat. That student body at Carleton U owes that great generation a huge apology. I'm not holding my breath.

Do you ever wonder whether this PeeCee BS will vanish into the dark pages of history?
How long can people stand this constant tongue clucking, finger waging scold attitude and behaviour?

This generation of aging hippies and communist assholes who are currently manning the bastions of academic institutions needs to be PUSHED out. I grew up with these jokers and I know that they are ALL full of shit. When will a new generation get wise to this?

This is truly disgusting. They are trying to subvert democracy here. Someone said on here that they are leftwing facists. I would agree 100%. These people, no matter what their opinion is on abortion, should be stopped as they should not be able to force just one side of this very divisive issue. This is just awful. Contact them folks, I have and I have put this on my blog as well.

"And you singled out Muslims why? The religion of constant seething is a "bit player" in North America for this topic."

Hey Jazz, wakey wakey. Your finally up from your decade long snooze.

In case you didn;t notice its the muzzies who seem to get whatever action they want these days, regardless of their size OR how irrational their demands are.

Horny Toad

Universities are about learning, and this is a great opportunity for the Carleton council to learn about the following little entry in the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion;

As past president of the pro-life student's club at Carleton, let me tell CUSA hasn't always been nice to the pro-life club but they've never tried to ban us until now.

The motion they are voting on is so broadly worded that yes it would prevent a Catholic priest from speaking to the Catholic club on CUSA property (the university centre etc.) about abortion. That goes for Muslims, Evangelicals or even a secular group disagreeing with abortion. In other words, this is not just a motion about the pro-life group getting funding but free speech on campus.

On top of that, the reason why the club is being banned is because they invited me (I do full time pro-life work now) to participate in an abortion debate on campus against Planned Parenthood. CUSA got complaints about that and now want to ban the club.

Hi,

I am a member of the executive for Carleton Lifeline and I would like to extend a thank you to everyone who are supporting us on bringing free speech non-discrimination back to Carleton. If anyone would like to help or lend support please email us at carletonlifeline@gmail.com . CUSA has only tabled the motion so yes it is not official but we are trying to lobby so that it is not passed. Aswell the CUSA President has sadi he is fully behind this motion. I urge everyone to contact him and tell him what you believe about this motion.