Doing What It Takes to Protect Their Reputation
— Posted by John (December 8, 2006 at 11:02 am)
An interesting series of events recently in Ottawa, Canada:
- While on the radio, Shawn Menard, president of the Carleton University Students’ Association, accuses a pro-life group, the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, of denying the Holocaust.
- The CCBR threatens to sue Menard for making false statements and slandering their reputation.
- Menard goes back on the radio, and says that his previous statements accusing CCBR of denying the Holocaust were “unequivocally false”.
Stephanie Gray, executive director of CCBR, commented:
We refuse to take abuse. When people defame us and our reputation, we will confront them. Mr. Menard’s response shows that when we demand accountability for public statements, those who slander us will have to back down.
Sometimes, you’ve gotta play hardball. This was one of those times.
Good for CCBR.
***
It’s also worth mentioning that the Carleton University Students’ Association recently voted to place special restrictions on the school’s pro-life club:
The motion the Carleton University Students’ Association approved says “campaigns, distributions, solicitations, lobbying efforts, displays, events, etc. that seek to limit or remove a woman’s options in the event of pregnancy will not be supported.”
That could effectively curtail the activities the campus pro-life group undertakes.
Sarah Fletcher, president of Carleton Lifeline, responded to the decision with concern about the future of her organization and its free speech rights.
“I’m not sure what’s going to happen to our club,” she told the Ottawa Citizen newspaper. “It means we no longer have the right to express our views in student space.”
The full story is here.
Related
This entry is filed under Club News, Culture Wars, The Front Lines. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
lauren says:
Hey John dont take this out of context, but did you hear about the cancer issues and RU486? I wonder why you’re not posting that. God knows if it was the other way around it’d be all over lifenews right now. Btw, im not advocating anyone take RU486 lol.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 2:01 pm
Phil says:
I heard about it, Lauren. From what I’ve read, though, while it does have a positive effect, its not as positive as other more specific drugs, and the negative effects are worse, and any benefits would be outweighed.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
John says:
Lauren,
I saw a headline about it, but I haven’t had time to read the relevant studies.
What Phil said sounds like what I would have expected to be the case.
It reminds me of the “But the Pill actually helps prevent ovarian and endometrial cancer” argument.
The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute spoke to this talking point in a recently published brochure (which, if memory serves, was written by breast surgeon Dr. Angela Lanranchi):
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 2:29 pm
mary kay says:
I also love how someone said that if it was proven to be true they would have to find a way to make RU486 safer for the general population…What happened to it IS safe? You mean if used to induce an abortion it’s NOT safe?
Hey Lauren,
Long time since we heard from you…
MK
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 2:47 pm
lauren says:
John,
I’m not going to address your “BCPI” research because frankly I dont have time because of finals and also you’re never going to stop hyping an abortion breast cancer and the cancer birth control links despite the fact that an independent panel of 100 scientists in 2003 completely threw ABC out the window and while birth control (like any medication) isn’t without risks doesnt send women to the slaughter. It’s a scare tactic and it’s ridiculous.
Anyways, I came on here to share something nice that I thought you all would like for Christmas. It’s by a singer I’ve loved for a long time name Mindy Smith. It’s a really pretty song called Come to Jesus. http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=6293491
THat’s her myspace page and you can listen to the song there.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
lauren says:
I know crazy busy with finals, etc. sorry i’ll be back not next week but the week after that.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
mary kay says:
14.
John says:
Lauren said: “As far as your question, I didnt really read that part, because I thought that was that state in the Frontline documentary. Regardless, it is Alabama we’re talking about. On my boyfriend and mine’s roadtrip to florida last winter we saw a bumper sticker that said “If I knew this was gonna happen, I’d pick my own cotton” alongside it naturally was a jesus fish and a pro-life sticker. They’re a little backwards down there.”
Lauren,
You do realize that these comments indicate that you have a prejudiced, stereotypical, elitist, and condescending attitude toward people in the South, don’t you?
Comment posted December 4th, 2006 at 11:07 am
Really wanted to hear your response to this…
MK
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
mary kay says:
Tried to hear that song, can’t find it…help…
MK
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
mary kay says:
Vatican confirms excommunication for US dissident group
Dec. 7, 2006 (CWNews.com) – The Vatican has confirmed an American bishop’s decision to excommunicate members of the dissident group Call to Action.
Call to Action is “causing damage to the Church of Christ,” wrote Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re (bio – news), the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, in a letter to Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska.
In March 1996, Bishop Bruskewitz had announced the excommunication of all Catholics in his diocese who were members of Call to Action or several other dissident groups which he described as “totally incompatible with the Catholic faith.”
The Nebraska chapter of Call to Action appealed the bishop’s decision to the Vatican. In his November 24 letter to Bishop Bruskewitz, Cardinal Re reports that Vatican’s finding that the disciplinary action was “properly taken.”
The Vatican has determined that “the activities of ‘Call to Action’ in the course of these years are in contrast with the Catholic Faith due to views and positions held which are unacceptable from a doctrinal and disciplinary standpoint,” Cardinal Re writes. He concludes: “Thus to be a member of this Association or to support it, is irreconcilable with a coherent living of the Catholic Faith.”
The excommunication that Bishop Bruskewitz announced covered not only to Call to Action, but also to members of Catholics for a Free Choice, Planned Parenthood, the Hemlock Society, the Freemasons, and the Society of St. Pius X.
The excommunication order applies only within the Lincoln, Nebraska diocese. But the Vatican’s judgment against Call to Action raises clear questions about the status of the group’s members in other dioceses.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
John says:
Lauren said: “I’m not going to address your “BCPI” research because frankly I dont have time because of finals and also you’re never going to stop hyping an abortion breast cancer and the cancer birth control links despite the fact that an independent panel of 100 scientists in 2003 completely threw ABC out the window and while birth control (like any medication) isn’t without risks doesnt send women to the slaughter. It’s a scare tactic and it’s ridiculous.”
So, because you’re telling us, sans references that would allow us to read further about what you’re saying, that because 100 scientists from an indepedent panel “threw ABC out the window,” the case is closed? We never have to look at it again? Ever?
What you’re saying sounds like a variation on the aphorism, “Millions of people can’t be wrong.” Except you’ve dropped the number way down, and what you’re saying is, essentially, “100 scientists can’t be wrong.”
The aforementioned Dr. Lanfranchi offers an interesting illustration of what she and some of her colleagues are up against because of their refusal to follow the herd when it comes to the abortion-breast cancer link:
Lanfranchi answers by telling the story of Ignaz Semmelweiss (1818-1865), the Hungarian physician who noticed that laboring mothers in the care of doctors in Vienna hospitals had much higher mortality rates than those in the care of midwives. Those were the days before germ theory, and Semmelweiss formed a hypothesis: The doctors, who went between morgue and maternity ward without washing their hands, were carrying some sort of odor particle that invaded their patients. To test his theory, he asked the doctors to wash their hands. It worked. The mortality rates went down. In response, the doctors drove Semmelweiss out of mainstream medicine—he died in a mental hospital. Lister soon proved he was right.
We already know that modern-day breast-cancer surgeons aren’t immune to the Semmelweiss syndrome, the blind refusal to make a paradigm shift. Many of them chafed at the suggestion that radical mastectomies weren’t always necessary in cases of breast cancer.
Another inexcusable reason for ignorance of the abortion/breast-cancer link is political ideology. While Catholics have faith, hope, and charity, abortion ideologues have “safe, legal, and rare” abortion. The “rare” part was never really true; activists are clinging for dear life to the “legal” part; but at least the “safe” part was supposed to be accurate.
This political ideology has hardened abortion proponents so that they are insensible to evidence for the link. Pro-abortion bias seems to be at play in mainstream cancer awareness Web sites where cagey language hides the abortion/breast-cancer link. Some sites use Clintonisms (using the term “abortion” in its broadest sense to include miscarriages and stillbirths as well). Some cling to aspects of researchers’ studies that the researchers themselves have abandoned. Many harp on recall bias without showing what studies the criticism applies to. All take frequent trips to the eternal well of Melbye.
Another reason many doctors are unaware of the link is the nature of the disease itself, Brind says. “Women don’t come forward complaining about it, because they’re either too sick, too traumatized, or don’t survive long enough.” Even if they did, they wouldn’t find doctors receptive to the information. The reason is simple: money. “Do you want to hear from a lawyer about why you haven’t been telling patients about the abortion risk for so long?” Lanfranchi asks.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:28 pm
Christine says:
I’m so disgusted at my country claiming we’re so free yet silence any speech that certain people don’t agree with
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
lauren says:
Who’s silencing you Christine?
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
lauren says:
” Lauren,
You do realize that these comments indicate that you have a prejudiced, stereotypical, elitist, and condescending attitude toward people in the South, don’t you?”
Umm, well for starters my family is from the south. Secondly, my boyfriend’s family is from the south. And you know what, I will be elitist to a bumper sticker like that. To deny that the south has an inherent race problem is ignorant at best. Why is it that when someone makes an intelligent observation these days they’re suddenly elitist? So should I be populist and an idiot? It’s truthiness at it’s finest.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
CC says:
Ok, I think there are some really good things about Canada and all… but… they have problems, too. The consentual age in Canada is 14.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
lauren says:
I have a bunch of links to provide you with from WebMD that fly in the face of what you’re saying John. My point is you are using a scare tactic and it’s pretty disgusting and beneath you. Seriously these sorts of things take this website’s all legitimacy away. If you want to say what you believe which is that life begins at cellular division, then fine.. But don’t try to skew science to scare women, it’s pathetic. Just go to Webmd.com and type in abortion breast cancer and all the studies will come up that refute what you’re saying. I’d post the links, but i can’t post em cuz of the regulations u put on the board.
“A possible link between abortion and breast cancer has reared its head in the media — and been researched extensively — over the last two decades, says Carmen Rodriguez, MD, a senior epidemiologist with the American Cancer Society. Early studies were flawed and showed inconsistent findings, but one large study should have laid the issue to rest, Rodriguez says.
Based on the scientific evidence, she tells WebMD, “We really think there is no association between breast cancer and abortion.” Rodriguez and others feel that political action groups are likely pushing the issue into the public arena, despite the research findings. “Some groups are always interested in getting the topic in the news, but we feel there is no evidence.”
In fact, a large-scale epidemiological study published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 1997 involved 1.5 million women in Denmark. Researchers compared health registry data of women who had abortions and women who had breast cancer and found no association. “The Danish study really showed that abortion does not increase risk of breast cancer,” Rodriguez tells WebMD.
Earlier studies relied on women’s reports of their reproductive history, a type of data that always can carry the possibility of inaccuracy because it relies on memory. “Some studies found an association, but more have found no association, ” she tells WebMD. “Even more importantly, those that found an increased risk were inconsistent.”
One problem, Rodriguez says, is that many of the studies did not differentiate between miscarriage and induced abortion. “A woman may have miscarried because of a genetic or hormonal abnormality, which also can be associated with breast cancer,” she says. Also, the studies are complicated, and one number can easily be taken out of context. The results, then, can be misinterpreted. ”
MK, open the site i sent and look to the right and see where she has four songs listed. Turn up your volume and click Come to Jesus.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
CC says:
Lauren is actually right on that one. I’m from Texas, and though it’s technically not the south, racism is abundant here. And people think it’s cool. At least a third of all cars here have a confederate flag bumper sticker on them, and yes, it’s because they think the South should have prevailed.
It’s frightening.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
lauren says:
Thank you CC.. I think the north has a race problem too obviously. The only difference between southern and northern racism is that like we said CC it occurs in open, proud displays of ignorance in the south, and in the north it occurs at family dinner tables.
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
Phil says:
This link here, from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (a World Health Organization group) notes the increased breast cancer risk from birth control pills.
http://www.iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 4:48 pm
mary kay says:
Lauren,
In her biography it states “Adopted at birth by a minister and his wife, the music director of her husbands church, Smith grew up in Smithtown, Long Island”
Even here you can’t get away from the truth…Her mother also had a choice to make, and could easily have chosen abortion, then you and I would never have heard her amazing voice…
She reminds me of Gillian Welch. I think the first lines say it all:
“Oh my baby, when your older. Maybe THEN you’ll understand.
You have angels dancin’ round your shoulders…”
She took the words right out of my mouth. Right now you are all piss and vinegar (just a turn of phrase’) but ‘Oh my baby, when your older..maybe then you’ll understand…”
Thanks for the song and the songstress. Glad her mom made the “right” choice. I’ll be listening to more of her.
MK
Comment posted December 8th, 2006 at 8:08 pm
lauren says:
Relax mk, dont read too much into it.. She has a pretty voice and I know that she had religiously themed music. It’s something I thought you’d like. No more, no less.
Comment posted December 10th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
mary kay says:
Lauren,
I don’t think I was reading too much into it. She was adopted. Her mother chose life. She is alive today. No more, No less.
She does have a pretty voice, I did like it, and I will be listening to more of her.
Thanks,
MK
Comment posted December 11th, 2006 at 7:48 am
Generations for Life » Blog Archive » So Much for Free Speech says:
[...] isn’t the first time pro-life students at Carleton University (in Ottawa, Ontario) have been [...]
Comment posted October 5th, 2010 at 3:01 pm