Imagine this: As you walk down the street one bright summer morning, you take notice of the children playing. They seem to be having a good time with smiles on their faces. It is almost beyond reality just watching the kids play like they don’t have a care in the world.
Suddenly, a dark cloud appears and darkens the sky. Everything seems to change, as a new face enters the scene. The man has an odd walk, and you know something is not right. He sees you, and slowly makes his way over to you and whispers: “I am going to murder those kids.” As you stand there, aghast at the man’s remark, your mind races as you try to think of something to do.
You could run and try to stop him, but suddenly you are surrounded on all sides by a glass wall called the law. So, without wasting anymore time, you begin to yell. You try to do everything in your power to try to get the man to stop, knowing that if you could simply change his mind somehow, there might be hope for the children. The purpose of the Genocide Awareness Project seemed to be just this. I spoke with the people who were behind the barricade. They care about those kids that have been killed and the ones that will be killed.
They were willing to go to the extreme to try to save a life and to allow themselves to be objects of ridicule. A few questions: To what length would you go to save a life? Would you stop and bother yourself in the first place? Would you try to save lives by being drastic? What is drastic when life or death is involved? My hat goes off to those who care so much about the precious babies that are murdered each day. God have mercy on us.
Tim kloos
STUDENT
Attention: Students have rights, as well
Genocide is defined as the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political or ethnic group. But Mark Harrington, director of the Midwest Division of The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, and anti-abortionist, decided that the term also defines the killing of innocent fetuses.
I understand the concept to mean killing a unified group because of what and who they are. But this was honestly one of the most ridiculous and irrational scenes I have ever witnessed. The right to speak your mind is one thing, but the right to view images at your own will is another; you cannot always help what you see.
In the eyes of passionate pro-lifers, this abstract and graphic approach to protesting an act of choice may seem valid and a fair way to express anger over abortion, but how necessary is it to scold college students with such stress-inducing scenes that they may or may not have taken part in? And while I’m asking questions here, have you ever noticed that the ones with the loudest voices protesting abortion are usually men?
In a conversation I had with Harrington regarding the point of the display while on my way to class, he stated, “our culture says it’s OK for women to hurt themselves in this way.” Who ever heard anyone say it’s alright? Certainly not me. And especially not here in the Midwest where the occasional story on the six o’clock news reports a newborn found in a dumpster. And why is this? Because the young woman was too afraid to get help and commit one of the ultimate taboos in our nation: abortion.
Just because abortion clinics exist in this nation, it does not mean that our culture condones it. It does mean that women are given the options to do with their bodies as they please. True, some women do abuse the choices given to them on a regular basis and I do not agree that it is OK to have an abortion each time a woman annoyingly finds herself with child. But I do agree that there are some circumstances where giving birth to a child is not an option and that women are allowed to decide for themselves when that circumstance comes. If men could get pregnant, there would be abortion clinics at every truck stop and sports bar and this would not be an issue.
People should be educated about this issue. It should be included as unbiased information in sex education courses in high schools. Maybe there should be oblique “genocide warning” signs lining the parking lots before walking into a wall of death (actually I would never want anyone to be forced to view it because it’s almost impossible to ignore the huge images).
As clever as Harrington thinks he may be, he should consider issues such as overpopulation, killing innocent animals for food and capital punishment. What is the difference between killing one living thing or another, and why can people choose who dies in one way but find it unethical in another way? The Genocide Awareness Project’s tactic is rude and excessive and we shouldn’t be forced to swallow their messages the way we were.
Alicia Corman
STUDENT
GAP does not represent all the pro-lifers
After reading and hearing reactions from the campus community regarding the large “genocide” displays on Monday and Tuesday, I feel that it is necessary to state that the Genocide Awareness Project does not, in any way, represent me, nor do I suspect they represent those who regard themselves as pro-life. To the contrary, many of my pro-life friends and I were disgusted with the pictures, and even more so with the equation of abortion with genocide. While I do believe that abortion is morally wrong, I do not believe that it is equivalent to the systematic and hateful elimination of an ethnic or religious group. GAP insults the memories of those who have perished in genocides by making this comparison. Many in the pro-life movement, I believe, would agree with me on this point.
To those who were offended by the displays, I sincerely apologize and ask that you not judge the many dedicated individuals who are pro-life by the actions or words of a radical few. GAP represents neither myself nor the pro-life movement at large, and I would ask that they state this more clearly next time they exercise their free speech rights in Bowling Green.
James Gilmore
STUDENT
