Trudeau: It’s My Party And I’ll Shut You Up If I Want To

FrontOne of the often reviled features of the campus left, across the planet, is the way in which anyone who dares to argue a different viewpoint is shouted down, sometimes threatened, occasionally harmed physically, or, on rare occasions, have their lives threatened.

Thankfully, the vast majority of those campus ferals often grow out of their totalitarian proclivities, if not their socialist ways, and develop the ability to string three words together in a voice which cannot be heard in two separate cities at once without technological assistance.

Those who tended not to grow out of their authoritarian attitudes end up joining parties of the ultra left, such as the Australian Greens or the Canadian New Democrats.

Now, there’s a new voice on the ultra left, shutting down dissent, a wolf dressed in sheeps’ clothing, looking to dine out on freedom of speech, thought and conscience.

Continue reading

Universities No Place For Tolerance and Genuine Choice

Bill-MuehlenbergBill Muehlenberg discusses how the radical left is trying to shut down free speech by pro-lifers at the University of Sydney:

If you want to go to a place where there is genuine learning, searching for truth, and openness of mind, then you better stay away from most Western universities nowadays. They can be the most closed, censorious and intolerant places around.

If the schools themselves are not enforcing fascist PC measures and ideologies, then you can be sure that plenty of students will be doing this. And we have a perfect example of this coming from the University of Sydney. For the first time ever a pro-life group just managed to scrape in there.

And already the tolerance brigade is spitting chips and blowing gaskets. Here is how one report has covered this story:

“The board of the student union at the oldest university in Australia has voted 6-5 to approve the nation’s first-ever pro-life student society

“The decision has been met with outrage by stunned pro-abortion students (one of whom described the pro-life society as ‘f***ed’ and ‘bulls***’), who have begun organising events, petitions and constitutional amendments which would ban pro-life groups from ever again gaining approval at the university.

“Yesterday, Friday June 1, the board of the University of Sydney Union (USU) approved the registration of LifeChoice Sydney, a nonpartisan, nonsectarian pro-life advocacy group which aims to ‘promote the dignity of human life from conception to natural death’ at Sydney University. The Ukulele society was also approved at the same meeting.

“Outraged students have begun composing a motion calling for the USU board to rescind the registration of LifeChoice, censure the board members who voted in favour of their registration, and amend the USU constitution to read: ‘The Board shall be forbidden from registering or providing any funding, resources, publicity or use of Union premises to a group discriminatory on the basis of sex, sexuality, gender diversity, class, race and ethnicity or disability, including any group which opposes a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion.’

“Meanwhile, an online petition has been created on the website of activist group GetUp!, demanding that the USU overturn its decision to approve the group. ‘This isn’t about freedom of speech or equal opportunity,’ the petition reads. ‘This is about funding and giving legitimacy to a group whose sole target is women. This “LifeChoice” Society is an attack on women’s rights and by allowing its formation the Union is failing its students and undermining the inclusiveness it seeks to promote.’

“GetUp! has previously removed a user-suggested campaign titled ‘Human rights for Unborn children’, though it was ranked third out of 446 campaign ideas on its website.”

Ah, the sweet face of tolerance, reason, and acceptance! And above everything else, don’t you just love how very pro-choice these guys are! They foam at the mouth about how pro-choice they are, but this is nothing more than disingenuous rhetoric. They are not pro-choice at all.

They certainly are not in favour of the unborn being able to choose life. And they clearly hate anyone who differs from them exercising their choice. What a pathetic bunch of hypocrites and frauds. And note this appalling “pro-choice” group, connected to GetUp [Ed: you mean run by GetUp!], demanding that the pro-life group not have any rights at all.

These anti-choice fascists are simply getting so angry because their lies and double standards are being exposed here big time. They do not give a rip about choice. They are only about denying others choice. They are campus fascists pure and simple.

Indeed, just how bizarre is all this? We have several hundred groups already on campus. For example the following clubs and societies are now operating on campus:
-Communist Club
-Students For Palestine
-Atheist Society
-Greens on Campus
-Queer Review Society
-Muslim Students’ Association
-United Nations Society

These groups seem to be all hunky dory. So why is it so terrible to have a club that stands up for the rights of the unborn? Well, we know the answer to that one. The secular lefties who dominate most campuses today – both in faculties and student bodies – hate anyone who dares to stand up to their pro-death hegemony.

When a group finally comes along with enough guts to challenge the anti-life stranglehold, they throw hissy fits and show their true totalitarian colours. That is just what we are seeing here. Choice only extends to those committed to their own deathly agenda. No one else is allowed their choice.

It is a moot point as to whether this group will long last given all this pressure from the anti-choice brigade. We need to support them and keep them in our prayers. The group’s Facebook page can be seen here: www.facebook.com/LifeChoiceSydney

Bill Muehlenberg is a Melbourne based author who lectures part time in ethics, theology and philosophy. He has an interactive blogsite called CultureWatch

An Unselfish Approach To Abortion

Paul-McCormackPro-life activists in Australia need to adopt policies that appeal to all people of good will, writes Paul McCormack.

I recently watched a film called Bella. It is a short film by Alejandro Monteverde. It is set in New York City and it is about a young man named José (Eduardo Verástegui) who overcomes his own trauma and finds redemption through helping a young woman named Nina (Tammy Blanchard).  The central themes of the story are love and friendship, both of which enable a difficult situation to be turned into a positive experience. On another level, the film also emphasises unselfishness and responsibility. For this reason, it provides many important messages and lessons. It also inspired me to consider some options for the pro-life movement in Australia.

Abortion is fundamentally a selfish decision. Men and women who are pro-choice have a view that women should have the right to regulate their own bodies. However, this is simply an excuse used by the pro-choice lobby to justify an evil practice that is borne out of complete selfishness. In a nation in which adoption is a choice for people unable to have or raise their own children, there is no legitimate counter-argument to say that abortion is indeed a selfless act driven by a desire not to bring a child into this world in a poor environment that precludes that child from having a good start in life. At its heart, abortion is motivated by a selfishness that views a child as an inconvenience rather than a gift.

In a world in which the right to life was treated as sacrosanct and laws were made to reflect this value, abortion would not be so prevalent as it is in our modern age. In a world in which people accepted responsibility for their actions and the consequences of their actions, abortion would not be so prevalent. In a world in which political leaders were prepared to defend the rights of their most innocent constituents, abortion would not be so prevalent.

What, then, is the way forward in tackling the evil of abortion? Given that I do not believe a majority of people will accept criminal punishments for women who have an abortion, the policies that pro-life people need to promote must be practical and be able to win the support of all people of goodwill. From my point of view there are three essential steps that need to be taken to start reversing the travesty that has occurred in our nation over the last fifty years. At the outset, I express my deep admiration for the pro-life activists and politicians in the United States, the nation from which my suggestions are largely inspired.

The first step for pro-life activists is to remove Medicare funding of abortion, unless the procedure is performed in order to save the life of the mother. Most abortions are not part of this category. They are given legal protection by the flimsy pretext of protecting the ‘mental health’ of the mother, which was part of the reasoning behind the Menhennit Ruling in 1969, subsequently codified by the Victorian Parliament in 2008. Abortion is almost always elective surgery. It should never be the duty of the taxpayers to subsidise the irresponsible sexual behaviour of people.

The second step is to promote the passage of a Bill that makes it compulsory for all women to receive ultrasound images of their baby prior to abortion. In addition to this, there should be a three-day cooling period prior to any abortion. Any woman who intends to have an abortion should be given contact information for counselling services and adoption agencies. It should always be the case that women have ready access to choices other than abortion. Women intending upon abortion need to realise that the people who truly care for their welfare are not the abortionists, whose pursuit is blood money, but the people (such as José in the film) who are prepared to go the journey with them and stand by their side.

The third step is to promote abstinence programs within the education system. It is a disgrace that certain organisations within the nation are trying to mandate condom machines within secondary schools. Sadly, there are too many weak-minded educators and educational bureaucrats in the system. I taught a Year 9 unit on Sexuality in a Religion class at a modernist Catholic school a few years ago. One of the resources given to me by a fellow teacher was a program called ‘Choices’ by a Canberra media producer named Jonathan Doyle. It is one of the best resources I have ever encountered for young people. Whilst I believe that sexual education would be taught by parents and not teachers in an ideal world, if there are to be topics that relate to sexuality in the classroom, the abstinence perspective must be the major priority because it brings the major benefits for young people in all facets: physically, emotionally, financially and spiritually.

If there is to be a fight back from pro-life people and not just a resignation of the reality of abortion, the above strategies would assist in reducing the rate of abortion in this nation so as to promote a culture that values healthy sexuality and discourages abortion. Abortion is not an option that reflects selflessness or responsibility. In contrast, rejecting abortion is an unselfish decision that reflects the message so brilliantly encapsulated in Bella: “True love goes beyond romance.”

Paul McCormack is a high school teacher in Wagga Wagga.