

UPDATE: The Carleton University Students' Association (CUSA) passed a motion to refuse recognition, funding and space to "anti-choice" groups or actions. The Ottawa Citizen story is
here. CBC Radio's report is
here.Suzanne Fortin was also there.You'll note if you follow the links to the Citizen that threats of violence were played up, as if all of them were coming from the Pro-life side. Judging however from the temperature of the room and some of the comments, the most heated, angry comments were coming from the odd member of the audience on the pro-abortion side. Given that CUSA representatives have used their power as a "collective" (the word they used to describe their speaking for the student body as a "collective") to force their views on others and to marginalize those who disagree, I think there's a whole lotta projection going on.
The pro-life speakers who got up were respectful, dignified, and no one who spoke was angry or hateful. And, to their credit, so were the vast majority of the pro-choice speakers.

I spent five hours listening to students at a Carleton University Student Association (CUSA) meeting debate a motion to deny recognition and funding to "anti-choice" groups on campus. When it was nearing 11:00 p.m., I gave up.
While the debate was civil and the CUSA representatives showed a lot of patience, there were some things said at this meeting that were truly troubling about the state of the intellects our universities are producing.
Like this remark from a CUSA rep: "A fetus is comparable to a parasite."
The gist of what CUSA folks who were pro the motion were saying is that you can be pro-life as long as you are pro-choice. As soon as you start advocating any legal defence for that parasitical fetus you are denying a woman her constitutional rights to security of the person and freedom of choice. Anti-choice actions such as lobbying for political change that might impede that choice, or leafleting, or posters will not be allowed.
And it makes women feel insecure, apparently, to even have people advocate these ideas. In fact there were lots of comparisons of pro-life views to hate speech, and analogies made to the KKK and racist groups and comparisons with holocaust denial and hate speech. This is a classic marginalization tactic to shut down debate.
"This particular movement is incredibly violent and it is time to start looking at it like any hate group," said one student about the prolife movement.
When the issue as raised about the rights of unborn children and the fact that the unborn child doesn't have a choice, the bright light that first introduced the motion on behalf of the Womyn's [sic] Centre said the CUSA decision applies to Carleton students and would "not apply to the unborn child since they are not a Carleton student."
"When someone is saying I have a right to choose is wrong, that's an attack on my person," said another bright young female student.
There were some good passionate defences of free speech and pro life views.
Carleton Lifeline treasurer Nicholas McLeod pleaded with the 150 or so attending the meeting to "see from my side." (He is the young man at the standing at the microphone)
The anti-abortion side is not trying to take away anyone's rights, he said. We are defending what we say are human rights. We are putting forward another idea of what human rights are. If you look at most injustices, whether against Jews, natives, or women, the issue always comes down to what are people. The fetus is a person and they have to be respected the same as you, the same as me.
An idea cannot hurt someone. It cannot be wrong to say an idea, he said.
Do you think my beliefs are hateful? he asked. "They are not based on hate. They are based on love.
Sad day for Carleton University.