Arrests on Carleton campus

[searchPersonhoodTV]

Heros....all 3 of them. And that gal who stood up to the police and the University suit, I'd hire her in a minute after she gets out of college. She is very well spoken.

[Pseudologic]

@searchPersonhoodTV Would you hire an equally well-spoken person who completely disagrees with you? Or are you a hypocrite?

[Pseudologic]

You have an ethical responsibility to safeguard people from potentially disturbing material, not just shove it in their faces. I'm a Carleton business grad and even I know that. I don't want to see Holocaust images being used for political gains by a group that has not suffered neither from abortion nor from the Holocaust... (far-right Christians most of the time) Why must I be exposed to this rubbish if I happened to be walking through Tory quad? Where are my rights? Very very bad practice.

[vikfan79]

Just declaring itself a private school doesn't just make it so unless it refuses to accept federal aid. By accepting the aid, Carleton is subject to whatever constitutional rights are allowed to the public, just as a person could protest at the Capitol. That's the difference between Carleton and any other institution. An office or gym may be private because they don't accept federal aid, offered through taxes. (This is assuming Carleton accepts aid and Canadian laws are similar to the US)

[vikfan79]

I don't know what the law is up in Canada, but in the US, if a campus is publicly funded at all (for example, a person is awarded financial aid through the FAFSA), then that campus is subject to fulfill federal requirements, making it "public", not private (Grove City College v. Bell). The only private campus I know of in the US is Hillsdale in Michigan.

Therefore, if I were to protest in a similar way at my university, I would be completely covered by my constitutional rights.

[hmacfarl]

Yeesh... the more I watch these videos about the arrest, the Carleton University sucks.

[shortbear4]

Any right placed in a box or restricted to a "zone" is no right at all. It is a right that is in prison. 

[BioGuelph]

Private property, end of story. The whole “I pay tuition” argument is kind of like saying I’m allowed to hold a protest in a gym because I have a gym membership. Now if they received permission for a peaceful protest then that’s a whole different case then this.

[mikefastener]

@BioGuelph "permission" from the university Fuehrer? This is the left-winger weirdo logic Canadians are now rebelling against!

Who could argue?

You, "Go girl!"

[mike000022]

@mikefastener It's bizarre that you think what you said makes any sense... private property is private property. If I refuse to allow protests on my front lawn will you compare me to the nazis as well? Crazy neocon pseudo-logic at its finest.

[mikefastener]

@mike000022 Interesting hypocrisy from the left-wingers! "We embrace diversity" unless, of course, it is not their diversity!

Oh well, hope I caused you to look in a mirror!

[BioGuelph]

@mikefastener You think enforcing property law is left wing? How silly.

[mikefastener]

@BioGuelph I do believe that hypocrisy is primarily a left wing trait.

Agreed?

[Pseudologic]

@mikefastener Speaking of hypocrisy. If it were left-wing protesters, the police wouldn't be trying to reason with them. Just detain them without a charge for 2 days.

[mikefastener]

@Pseudologic Yes, if they were breaking store windows or burning police cars, I agree, they would (and should) be detained.

Clear demarcation....don't you agree?

[Pseudologic]

@mikefastener Actually, those people were never arrested. When police saw the hooded morons approach they just left and allowed the hooligans to destroy a squad care. While the actually peaceful protesters were bullied, arrested and insulted. I agree with you that destruction of property warrants an arrest, but a lot of people arrested had nothing to do with hooliganism.

[mikefastener]

@Pseudologic I do agree....unfortunately, guilt by association and the police did not have (or want) the ability to separate.

[keeper64]

@BioGuelph FTW! They cite the Student Rights and Responsibilities Policy and they leave out section VII (The one that says Carleton in private property). These peopele fail hard!

[trolololoism]

I think the bigger issue is the lack of seatbelts in police vans. If they stopped suddenly, they could hurt the protesters.

[thelostcause]

Every opportunity? They were silenced merely because their message was offensive. The whole point of a protest is to make a point. And the fact is, the campus' written policy said NOTHING about having to move to a secluded room. Their freedom of speech was denied by this university. Regardless of your opinion of abortion, this marks a sad day for free speech.

[keeper64]

@thelostcause Carleton is private property. Carleton special constables can ask anyone to leave campus if they deem it necessary. They were asked to leave and didn't so what is wrong? They clearly were trying to make it offensive

[seanomoric]

Good job, Carleton. We don't need posters of foetuses greeting us as we walk about campus.

[latleboat]

@seanomoric If you attend university, you have to get use to people making protests on your campus. even if you don't like the message. university is for the exchange of ideas.If you can't handle walking past protests every once and a while, and you are annoyed by people voicing their opinions, you should not attend university. And the imagry was not that graphic, we've all seen pictures of the Holocaust and fetus's before.

[seanomoric]

@latleboat

I have no problem whatsoever with protest. In point of fact, I have no problem with this protest. I think that discourse on any number of subjects is healthy and ought to be encouraged. With that said, the images ARE graphic AND offensive. The comparison of abortion to the Holocaust demeans the Holocaust and is a gross simplification of the social implications of both affairs.

They were given a perfectly laudable alternative and declined because they wanted to offend people.

[latleboat]

@seanomoric They don't want to offend people, they want to make people stop and think, and consider a new point of view. Their protest wasn't given the same accomodation and respect by the university as other protests are. iv'e seen much more controversial protests on the Carleton campus than a pro-life protest. if they want to compare abortion to the holocaust, that's their buisness. it's not illeagal. i wouldn't compare them, but that's me.

[seanomoric]

@latleboat

It was given the EXACT same accommodation as any other protest. I have not once seen a protest even remotely as contentious as this one, certainly never one with imagery as liable to offend and certainly NEVER in the quad.

They have every right to draw the comparison should they like, but the university has a variety of things to consider, such as lawsuits that could have resulted from allowing the group to protest in the quad. The group turned down the alternative. That's it.

[Jimbothy]

EPIC FAIL CARLETON, EPIC FAIL.

[ktmerwin]

while I don't agree with their view on the subject of abortion, I am outraged that their right to protest peacefully on their own campus was violated. Carleton University should be ashamed of themselves.

[seanomoric]

@ktmerwin

It had to do with the posters they sought to post up. They were given the opportunity to set them up in a room outside of public view (it was essentially posters of dead foetuses) and have a booth in the University Centre to discuss the subject. They had been given every opportunity to protest, Carleton just wanted to avoid the presence of graphic imagery and denied them the opportunity to set up their posters in the Quad. They did so despite Carleton saying no. Good job, Carleton.

[keeper64]

@ktmerwin its not actually a right to protest on campus which is private property. I can't protest in an office building so why should it be different?

[solomino539]

Those students had enough guts to call a spade a spade. Abortion is killing babies and it has to stop. Murder is murder anyway you look at it, within the womb or out.

[violetkitten831]

Well, it's pretty bogus that these morons were released back into society... but I'm sure the arrest itself jostled them up a bit. Good. They deserve it. They all should've been held AT LEAST overnight for that stupid little stunt.

[keaysman]

@violetkitten831 its private property, and they pay tuition, they have full authority to do what they did.

[violetkitten831]

@keaysman You can be charged with disturbing the peace or lewd behavior on private property. Just because you pay tuition somewhere doesn't mean you have the right to be a prick there. If I were part of the schoolboard, I would give them their money back simply to make them leave.

[keaysman]

@violetkitten831 i do understand the signs were well, disturbing at the least, but still, your over reacting completely at it.

[violetkitten831]

@keaysman Much like how they overreacted to abortion? :-)

[keaysman]

@violetkitten831 its not an over reaction when its murder... sorry but i dont think a protest over genocide is an over reaction.

[violetkitten831]

@keaysman See, that's where you and I differ. I do not see this as genocide. I see this as a woman expressing her freedom to choose AND as an excellent form of population control, seeing as we have over 2,500 children dying DAILY due to neglect or starvation... and I'm sure over a hundred TIMES that number who wish they were dead rather than in the situations they find themselves in. Why is nobody holding peaceful protests for them?

[J1Militans]

@violetkitten831 Er... Have you never watched those TV commercials or gotten letters on the mail for that cause? Your argument is merely an excuse. If a fetus is a human being, and if killing a human being is murder, and if abortion destroys a fetus, then abortion is murder. Genocide is when lot of human beings are killed: In 2005, approximately 1.21 million abortions took place in the U.S. That's 1.21 million fetuses destroyed: 1.21 million human beings killed. Genocide or not?

[seanomoric]

@J1Militans

"If a fetus is a human being" is where the argument takes off and where there is no consensus.

[violetkitten831]

@J1Militans Sure... I've seen the commercials, no letters in the mail though. But why aren't there people holding protests?

I don't believe that a fetus is the equal of a human being... I believe it BECOMES a human being when it can fend for itself outside the body. I see it as more like an amputation. So no, not genocide. Just a massive amputation. :-)

[crycavity]

@violetkitten831...can an infant or toddler fend for themselves?

Aren't they still reliant on their parents?

Are we then only a human being when we no longer depend on anyone else?

When exactly is that???

[violetkitten831]

@crycavity No, they can not fend for themselves. Fine, nitpick. It's what you kind of people do best. Let me specify.

A fetus that cannot live outside the womb (i.e. does not have the physical capacity to maintain normal bodily functions like breathing...) is a fetus, and a toddler or infant can be cared for by anyone... not just the mother. Also, a fetus takes nutrients from the mother's body. An infant doesn't have to even take milk from the mother's body to survive.

[posat888]

Absurd!