GAP at the University of Michigan Diag.

Great article written by a pro-chioce student who saw GAP at the University of Michigan (UM) Diag and decided to attend a Students for Life meeting.  Full story here.  Excerpts:

At the time it seemed like the pro-lifers were seriously screwing themselves over.

But I do remember seeing one young woman, a student, standing nervously behind the display, pro-life pamphlets in hand.  I wish I had talked to her instead of openly laughing at what I perceived at the time to be really poor activism.  (emphasis added)

***

The Genocide Awareness Project] got us angry, but it also got us talking (albeit in raised voices) about a topic that for a lot of people is just another item on the political agenda.  The abortion issue periodically garners national attention, like when pro-lifers attempted to defund Planned Parenthoods across the country last year.

But in an era when people are constantly bemoaning the lack of student activism, look no further than the intense, ongoing pro-life/pro-choice debate, which is less about politics and more about deciding what we value as a society.

***

It’s pretty easy to be pro-choice at the University. …

It’s easy to get trapped in an echo chamber when you think the Truth belongs to your side.  But even if we can’t agree, we can occasionally step across the protest line, stop the chanting, and listen.

Several points to be gleaned from this article:

1. Even angry pro-aborts can be softened, if not converted.  The anger wears away; the education does not.
2. There is a sink-in factor at work here.  After seeing GAP, it was weeks later before Balfour was ready to attend a pro-life meeting.  She isn’t pro-life yet, but Balfour has an open mind and this isn’t over yet.
3. The pictures work in many different ways.  They neutralize our opposition, they convert the neutral, they activate the converted, and they energize the active.
4. The key elements here are (a) the truth, as presented by abortion photos, (b) abundant courage and the love of Messiah Jesus, as demonstrated by the UM Students for Life, and (c) an open mind, which Balfour provided herself.
5. We pro-life activists probably have more in common with pro-aborts who don’t know the truth than we have with pro-life Christian leaders who do know the truth and cover it up.

When Anna speaks, students take notes.

This is how pro-life activism on campus should work.  For a few hours every week, pro-life student Anna Maher takes an abortion photo out into the center of campus at George Mason University (GMU).  She works with Jonathan Darnel, CBR volunteer and pro-life activist in the DC area.  Anna e-mailed me recently:

[We] have started to do Pro-Life outreach every Monday (and now Friday) at GMU, in the center of campus. We usually have a big sign with graphics, or a message, and ask passers-by what they think.  Let me tell you…it is moving…truly the best part of my week.  Through this outreach I have gained several emails, of mostly GMU students, who are willing to give their support.  I e-mail them every week and let them know of outreach at GMU and of the status of Students For Life …

Pray that God uses her to help me open doors; for my resources are quickly running dry.  Please, Please PRAY! …

Find some time to relax during this special Christmas season and remember who started this all: the Lord Jesus Christ!  Thank you for all you do, and for finding me at GMU last summer.  This has all changed my life.

The future of the pro-life movement.  Anna is saving babies and moms at GMU, but God is at work in her life as well.  I thank Him for young people like Anna.  She will play a key part in overturning Roe v Wade.

Pro-life at GMU on the rise!  A few days after sending this e-mail, Anna called to say that she had found a new faculty sponsor for GMU Students for Life (SFL).  CBR actually started the GMU SFL back in 2003, but the leadership waned and the faculty advisor retired, so there hadn’t been any pro-life activism in a couple of years.  Until now.  It looks like we are back on track at GMU.  This is all part of our strategy to elevate pro-life activism in important swing states like Virginia.

No discrimination against pro-life students is allowed.  The faculty sponsor is important because the rules generally mandate that a student group find one as a condition of “recognition” (i.e., equal access to university facilities).  However, whether the university administrators realize it or not, the courts would never allow such rules to deny equal access for unpopular groups who simply cannot find a faculty sponsor.  Such policies, as written, give university employees (i.e., faculty members) veto power over free speech and equal access.  Even Clinton appointees wouldn’t allow that kind of discrmination.  And we’ll be happy to prove it in court, if it ever comes to that.

Anna Maher reaches students at George Mason University with a GAP sign provided by CBR.

Nicole Cooley speaks with a student at Liberty University.

Nicole Cooley, CBR’s Virginia Project Director, spoke to the pro-life student group at Liberty University last night.  She described her experience with rape and abortion and spent another hour answering questions and speaking with students.

One student wanted to know how to help his girlfriend, who is post-abortive from a previous relationship.

Another student wanted to know about our use of pictures at the entrances to the campus back in August.  He asked how Christians can do more to end abortion, which is exactly the question we hoped to stimulate with our GAP appearance.  Nicole stressed that if we can’t get Christians to care about abortion, we have no hope of ever ending it.

She also spoke to the  issue of how Christian women can feel pressured to abort if they are condemned and punished for getting pregnant out of wedlock.  Notice that men never have to face this.  The irony here is that the sexual revolution was sold to America as an emancipator of women.  In practice, women are pressured to have sex.  Women become pregnant.  Women are threatened with expulsion from school.  In many cases, women bear the more severe symptoms of STDs.  “Men” get sex without responsibility and then they try to transfer their own guilt to the mothers of their own children by saying, “It’s a women’s issue.”  Yeah, right.

Pro-life students told Nicole that we had a huge impact on Liberty when we brought GAP early this semester.  Students were talking about abortion a lot for a month after we were there, and they still talk about it now, months later.  Even though many of them were angry at us, we still succeeded in making abortion a significant and ongoing topic of discussion on campus.  Mission accomplished.

We agree with Martin Luther King.  We don’t care what people think about us; we care what they think about injustice.  Read my letter to Liberty University here.

First Amendment in action at U of Rhode Island.

Eric Casey, a sophomore at the U of Rhode Island (URI), is circulating a petition to overturn the First Amendment at the University of Rhode Island (URI).  Story here.  To make matters worse, Mr. Casey identifies himself as a history major on his Facebook page.  YIKES!  I posted this online response:

Mr. Casey’s conception of the First Amendment is fundamentally flawed.  More about that, but we must first acknowledge that his petition is partly accurate. Abortion pictures are “highly disturbing” (his words). That’s because abortion is an act of violence that kills a baby.

Mr. Casey says that he doesn’t want to violate the free-speech rights of the College Republicans (CRs), yet his petition demands that URI prevent speech that he finds non-compliant with “the principles of respect and human dignity.”  Of course, he says nothing about those whose speech promotes the dismembering and killing helpless preborn children whose only crime is to be unwanted.  Would Mr. Casey sign a petition to remove that speech as well?

Do you see where this is going?  Once it is determined that non-compliant speech may be censored, then it becomes a matter of whose speech is non-compliant whose is not.  You can be certain that Mr. Casey will insist that people like himself be in control of whose speech may be disallowed and whose may be heard.  In this kind of environment, you can count on hearing the full range of political thought, from the far left to the extreme far left.  Fortunately, the First Amendment protects us from his kind of tyranny.

Our founders said that “all men are created,” that “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,” and that “among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  The First Amendment doesn’t “give” us the liberty to speak freely, because that right was ours already; the First Amendment merely recognizes a right that is “unalienable” because of our status as human persons.  Whether you believe in a Creator or some kind of natural law, it is clear that the same foundational principle that protects our speech from arbitrary power also protects our lives.  Mr. Casey shouldn’t be so quick to give that up.

In his petition, Mr. Casey demands that URI withhold funding from the CRs as one mechanism to regulate speech.  He should be aware that the University of Wisconsin (UW) recently earned the opportunity to pay $500,000 in legal fees because of similar viewpoint discrimination (www.adfmedia.org/News/PRDetail/4328?).  At issue was discrimination in the allocation of student fees.

Back to the subject matter of the GAP display, I have a question for Mr. Casey: If abortion is such a great idea, why do pictures of it make you so angry?  And how can it be that showing a picture of a dead child is extreme (your word), but killing the child is not?

Our purpose is never to condemn anyone who has had an abortion. If you need healing from a past abortion or help with an unplanned pregnancy, visit www.OptionLine.org. For more information on abortion, www.AbortionNo.org.  For more on freedom of speech, www.theFire.org.

CBR's Jane Bullington poses for Rodin at JMU.

On my way back home from the Rhode Island, I attended last night’s meeting of the James Madison U (JMU) Freethinkers. They were discussing abortion. I arrived early and introduced myself to the President of the group; she was most gracious to welcome me to their meeting.

Result of GAP.  Their selection of this topic was a direct result of our GAP there last week, and it was exactly the kind of discussion we hope to stimulate with our project. Members of the JMU Dukes for Life were in attendance, and they did an excellent job of articulating and defending the pro-life position.

Sound Bytes.  I tried to keep quiet, responding only when a critical point needed to be made. The pro-abortion arguments were just as easily rebutted as ever, but in this kind of large group discussion, you have to speak almost in sound bytes.

A faux pas.  The discussion was respectful, for the most part. There was only one ad hominum attack launched at the meeting, that by a professor who attended. He said it was contemptible (I think that’s the word) of me to mention slavery in the context of an abortion discussion. I responded badly. I should have just addressed his allegation, but I rolled my eyes. (In my defense, I had been working on a response to a Rhode Island professor who had accused us of “hate speech,” whatever that is.)

Fair-minded.  It was a small transgression, but I apologized to the group, anyway. As the discussion went on, this professor revealed himself to be a fair-minded person—he verified the accuracy of our photos—and we shook hands at the end of the meeting. On my way to the car, I had to laugh, because in a room full of college students, the only people who acted out were the adults.

On the road again?  Please support our work. I love going home, but I need to be on the road, winning hearts, changing minds, and saving lives. Click here to send me back out!

Jane Bullington winning hearts, changing minds, and saving lives at James Madison University.

“Thank you for being here.”  On the morning of Day 2 at JMU, Mick Hunt read from Ephesians 6, to encourage the team to “put on the full armor of God” in preparation for another day at JMU.  Their discussion was interrupted by a female student who approached the group.

She said, “Thank you for being here. Christians really need to see this. I know this is a spiritual battle.  Can I pray for you?”  Nicole and Jonathan approached her and thanked her for her timely encouragement.  They held hands while she prayed for God’s blessing on our team and for the students who would see images, asking God to move their hearts.

Breast cancer link.  One of our GAP signs presents the connection between abortion and breast cancer.  The hard-core pro-aborts dispute this, but there is plenty of statistical evidence to suggest that abortion increases the probability of breast cancer from the ambient 10% to about 13 or 14% (an increase of 30 or 40 percent).  This is not a trivial increase; it likely results in 10,000 fatalities per year (source).

As two female students looked at the sign depicting this link, Jane began to explain the cellular changes in breast tissue that begin to happen when a woman becomes pregnant.  One of them interrupted, “I am a biology major and I see where you are going with that.  That’s the most convincing argument right there for not having abortions!  You need to be telling women this!”  Jane laughed and said, “We’re doing our very best, please help us!”

You can help us with your gift to sustain this work.  If only 8 people would give $100 per month, we could go back to JMU every single year.  Click here to make it so.

GAP sign depicting causal link between abortion and breast cancer.

"Abortionists profit from human trafficking." This is a reference to recent revelations about Planned Parenthood.

Media.  It was another awesome day.  Unbelievable coverage on the front page of the student newspaper.  You can’t see it online, but they published a whole 2-page spread of photos that included some of our best GAP signs.  On the paper’s website, I noted that this was the first mention of abortion since 2008!  Yikes!

Southern Hospitality, in the North?  We were really struck by how polite everybody at Rhode Island has been, regardless of whether they agree with us or not.  Not sure why.  Perhaps the people of Rhode Island are just naturally polite.  Perhaps Rhode Island promotes a small-state, small-town culture.  Perhaps the presence of 4 police officers put everybody on their best behavior.  Perhaps Rhode Island is so blue (left-wing), they viewed us as more of a curiosity than a threat to their “rights.”

Opportunities.  Regardless of the reasons, we had many, many opportunities to present the pro-life message to students.  We had 10 or 15 staff and volunteers who never stopped handing out pro-life literature and speaking with students all day long.

Calm down?  The pro-abortion protesters gathered, but were relatively quiet.  Still, I overheard one student complain as she walked between their group and our display.  She said, “Why can’t both sides just calm down?!”  I had to laugh as I thought, “This is as calm as it gets!”

Don’t forget us!  As usually happens, some Jewish people complain because we compare abortion to the Holocaust.  On the other hand, a Ukrainian employee of the University approached me and suggested we add the Ukrainian genocide to our display.  A few years ago, a gentleman who was interested in the history of Native American oppression actually praised our inclusion of the Wounded Knee massacre.  Go figure.

More to come?  We’ll do more of this, but only if you help.  If only 8 people give $100 per month, we can add another major university to our schedule every year.  Perhaps you can’t give $100, but you can give something.  The best way to maintain the status quo is to do nothing.  Please do something.

Silent No More at the University of Rhode Island: "I regret my abortion; Please ask me about it."

At the University of Rhode Island (URI) yesterday, 4 women and 1 man wore t-shirts identifiying themselves as “Silent No More” (SNM).  This outreach has a powerful effect on students.

URI student “Adam” asked if most abortions are performed very early in pregnancy.  GAP/SNM volunteer Hannah explained that she didn’t even know she was pregnant until late in the first trimester.

Nicole added that after being raped and convinced by her pastor to abort, she called an abortion clinic.  “When I called, I was at 3-1/2 weeks.  The clinic told me to wait until 6 weeks because it would be safer for me.  What they didn’t tell me was that in 3 more weeks, my baby would have arms and legs.  What made the abortion ‘safe’ was their ability to count body parts.  When I learned this after the abortion, I was devastated.”

Adam winced as Nicole told her story and took our literature to read more about the genocide comparison.  He also returned later in the day to talk to Hannah further.

The most dramatic witness came later in the afternoon from another rape victim who taped the words “RAPE VICTIM, PRO LIFE” on a black shirt, stood defiantly in front of the abortion pictures, and faced the protestors across the street.  They gaped at her, and half of them immediately abandoned their protest.

A dramatic witness for life at URI.

Bubba Gene Garrett explains prenatal development to a student at James Madison University.

Where can Christians learn the message not to kill their own children?

Not at church, apparently.  That’s why 1 in 5 women who have abortions identify themselves as “born again” or “evangelical” Christians.

The secular campus is a great place to reach these good people with the truth that the pro-life church is covering up.  This was also true at James Madison University.

Joe had recently become a Christian, but had never considered abortion in any form or fashion.  He spoke with CBR GAPper Bubba Garrett.

As they looked over the pictures and discussed the implications of abortion in terms of the genocide comparison, his heart was deeply moved.  Bubba helped him to understand that authentic Christianity must include protecting the helpless from systematic slaughter (Proverbs 24:11-12).

Joe asked Bubba to pray with him that more Christians would get involved in stopping abortion.  Afterwards, he told him that his spiritual mentor was nearby and also needed to learn about abortion.  As a result both young men experienced a change of heart concerning the consequences of abortion and a newfound determination to do something about it.

CBR Maine Director Leslie Sneddon opens the PLTA at the University of Rhode Island. More than 25 people participated in this training program.

The Pro Life Training Academy (PLTA) trains you to articulate and respectfully defend the pro-life position.  Today, we were at the University of Rhode Island (URI).  Tomorrow and Tuesday, we’ll display our Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) at URI, Lord willing.

Featured PLTA speaker was Jay Watts, the VP of Communications at the Life Training Institute (LTI).  As a former pro-choice atheist, Jay is uniquely prepared to show you how to deal with people like … well … his former self.

Let us know when you want to bring the PLTA to your city!

Jonathan Darnel speaks with students at James Madison University,

We just wrapped up our Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) at James Madison University (JMU).  Story here.  All the usual responses from pro-aborts.  They were angrier at us for showing the pictures of dead children than at the abortion doctors for killing the children.  About 20 of them showed up to protest on each day.

The JMU pro-life student club did not sponsor our presence on campus and pretty much kept their distance.   Observing the pro-aborts rally against us, one JMU pro-lifer wrote, “This response is one of the main reasons we decided not to sponsor [GAP] in the first place.  They seem to be missing the argument against abortion entirely.”

But consider the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who wrote:

Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.” But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven,” called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests.

Slave-trade advocates didn’t like Thomas Clarkson, abusive child labor advocates didn’t like Lewis Hine, and segregationists didn’t like Martin Luther King, Jr.

It is true that hard-core pro-aborts missed our arguments against abortion, but they are going to miss every argument against abortion.  They are committed zealots.  That’s not our audience.  We are trying to reach those who are still open-minded and who still have functioning consciences. 

Many students were combative when they first approached one of our party.  But once they realized that we were not going to respond in kind, many of them were willing to engage in civil discourse.  Several students said they very much appreciated our presence.  Many were obviously disturbed by the photos, which is a first necessary step toward change.

Members of the Catholic campus ministry stopped by to talk, including their dog Trinity.  Trinity is a beautiful Labrador Retriever who was born with only three legs.  Despite her disability, however, it was obvious that she enjoys her life very much and does not at all consider herself to be sub-canine!

Several good stories to follow, including changed hearts and minds.

Many, many students at Radford were NOT closed-minded; Virginia Director Nicole Cooley speaks with two of them.

The President of Radford University’s Young Democrats took exception to the presentation of abortion pictures on his campus.  Of course, he agrees with us that abortion is ugly, disgusting, distasteful, etc.  But he believes abortion is perfectly acceptable to do, even though it’s too horrifying to see.  You can read his letter here.

Here is my online response:

Fletcher Armstrong here. I am the Southeast Director of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, the human rights advocacy group that brought the Genocide Awareness Group (GAP) to Radford University.

I am heartened to see that you agree with us on the most important aspect of our display. You describe abortion pictures as ugly, disgusting, distasteful, etc. Those are your words and we agree. Abortion is all of those and more. But here is a fundamental question: How can pictures of abortion be too horrific to see, but the act of abortion is OK to do? Please explain that to all of us; we can’t wait to hear your explanation.

I should perhaps clarify for you what we were doing on the Radford campus. You refer to it as a “protest.” Not really. We were merely showing you the violence that you advocate. The Democratic party has for many years advocated that rights of personhood be denied to preborn human beings.

You say that our display was “hate-filled.” You should know that name-calling and ad hominem attacks are no substitutes for reasoned arguments.

You say that Radford University was a “victim” of the pictures, and that we were insulting and disrespectful to show them. Please explain how it is that Radford is more of a victim by seeing pictures of abortion than are the children who are being killed by the act of abortion. Who is more disrespected, the born person who is being confronted with a picture of abortion, or a preborn child who is being killed by the act of abortion?

You ask for dialogue, understanding, and a willingness to respect differing viewpoints. I have to wonder where you were hiding while we were on your campus. For two full days, I observed people on both sides of the abortion debate engaged in civil discourse all around the GAP display.

It is clear that you did not want us to be on the public spaces outside the Student Center. You wanted us to choose another time and place, presumably a location that you and other abortion advocates can avoid. In that regard, you are like those who wanted Dr. Martin Luther King to confine his activities to the Black church. They didn’t mind if he spoke about racism, but he should speak about it only in the Black church, among people who cared about racism. They didn’t want to be bothered with it. But Dr. King knew that in order to effect change, it was necessary to expose evil and thus make people uncomfortable with the status quo. He intended to bother them as much as he could.

Your letter suggests that abortion pictures bother you plenty. Congratulations, you still have a functioning conscience. Prepare to see these pictures over and over again, because we won’t stop showing pictures of abortion until the killing stops.

You say that “less controversial slogans could have been chanted.” I can assure you that we have no interest in chanting slogans. But please tell me, why is saving babies so controversial, and killing them is not?

You say that we should have found less troublesome ways of “adequately express[ing]” our views. Please let me clarify one point. Our views about abortion are really of little importance. What is much more important are the facts about abortion. The photos of abortion demonstrate for all to see that the preborn child is really a baby, even in the first trimester, and abortion is an act of violence. It is these facts about abortion that will lead many people to change their views, and that is much more important than us simply expressing our own views.

Regarding the First Amendment, you are correct that Radford University fully respected the First Amendment rights of the College Republicans. But it would be incorrect to say that Radford understands the First Amendment “better than a majority of other institutions of higher education.” We have displayed this project nearly 200 times at more than 50 public universities around the country. Only 2 universities resisted, both were sued, and both were forced to back down.

Liberty University is a unique case because they are a private university, and the students give up some of their expressive rights by attending a private school. It is true that the Liberty administration did not allow us to set up on campus. The students invited us and the administration cancelled our visit. CBR comes in many different sizes and shapes. There’s the 5-minute version, the 2-day version, and the “we-never-quit-coming” version. Liberty has chosen the “we-never-quit-coming” version, which is their prerogative.

If you really seek dialogue and differing viewpoints, may I suggest a debate on your campus?

For those of you who did not see the display, may I suggest you visit http://www.AbortionNo.org.

By the way, I will retract everything I have said and abandon my pro-life postion if you can provide compelling scientific and philosophic evidence to show that the preborn child is not human.  I look forward to hearing that evidence.

GAP at Radford University

Does the possibility of adverse economic circumstances justify killing your child?  One student at Radford University thought so.  Read his letter here.

Here is my response:

Responding to Mr. Schall, would you be stunned to learn that millions and millions of Americans have children and don’t go on welfare?

A few years ago, a student asked me “What about a woman who gets pregnant and has to drop out of school, so she and her baby are doomed to a life of poverty?”

Another student overheard and jumped in, “Hey, I know a woman just like that. She was waiting tables and got pregnant and had that baby.” He paused, then said, “And boy am I glad, because I’m the baby.” He said that after his mother had him, she got serious about her life, went back to school, and got a nursing degree. Now she’s the head nurse at a hospital and makes $90,000 per year. He made one final observation, “You know, I think that if my mother had aborted me, she’d still be waiting tables.”

Mr Schall, this student’s mother was not a weakling, and you don’t have to be, either. Part of being an adult is taking care of your responsibilities.

You are justifying killing another human being—your own child, in fact—because that child will be inconvenient to you. You might have to rearrange your life a bit. Yes, parenthood does have it’s responsibilities. It’s always been like that. Others have done it; you can, too.

Fear of poverty is no excuse for killing your child. If you think that’s a good justification, imagine what the judge and jury would say if you tried it on your born child. Tell the judge that your child was getting in the way of your career. If he’s not sympathetic, say “I feel really bad about my choice.” See if that works.

Look, if you can’t take care of your child, there are many couples willing to adopt her and provide the loving home that you are unable (or unwilling) to provide. I speak for many pro-lifers all over the country when I say, “Bring that child to me; I’ll take care of her.”

We never said a woman should be forced to have a child; we said a woman shouldn’t kill a child she already has. If you don’t want to have a baby, that is your choice. Don’t get drunk and don’t have sex. Millions of people wait until marriage to have sex. It doesn’t ruin their lives.

Bottom line: Grow up.

If anybody wants to see what Mr. Schall thinks is such a great idea, see the video at http://www.AbortionNo.org.

GAP stimulates informed dialogue.

After our appearance at Radford University earlier this fall, Radford freshman Joan Laguzza wrote a letter to the RU Tartan, the student newspaper, commenting on GAP.  In her letter, she complained about our presence, but actually agreed with us about one of the most important aspects of the project.  Read her letter here.

Here is my response:

Responding to Ms. Laguzza, my name is Fletcher Armstrong and I am the Southeast Director of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, the group that brought the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) to Radford University.

First of all, we agree with you about the most important aspect of the project. You say that the photos were assaulting, violent, difficult to look at, nauseating, shocking, traumatizing, etc. Those are your words and we agree. Abortion is all of those things. But here is a fundamental question: How is it that pictures of abortion are too horrific to see, but the act of abortion is OK to do?

You say that the pictures “assaulted” you, and that you had no choice but to look at them. I would point out that had you desired, you could have turned your head away from the pictures and walked right on by. We watched many people doing exactly that. Apparently, you didn’t turn your head; in fact, the details in your letter suggest that you studied the images very carefully. We’re glad you decided to study the images, but it was clearly your choice to study them or not.

You apparently claim the right not to be offended by anything you see, that Radford University should prevent you from seeing anything that offends you. Have you considered the implications of your claim? Would you grant to pro-life students the power to remove anything on campus that offends them?

You wonder if Radford is anti-abortion. No, they are not. But as a public institution, Radford has no ability to censor the speech of its students. The right of pro-life students to present their views and, just as importantly, their right to present the facts upon which those views are based, are protected by the US Constitution. That right extends to all citizens, not just those who go along with the ideology of those in power. During your time at Radford, you will be exposed to many ideas. Some of them will offend you; some of them will offend others who disagree with those ideas. That’s just part of living in a free society.

Pro-lifers and conservatives have the right to get their message to those who want to receive it. You have the equal right to get your message out. You and everyone else also have the right to listen or not. What you don’t have is the right to interfere with people who want to offer a message, nor with those who want to receive it. What you witnessed earlier this month was an interchange of information from people who had a message they wanted to offer and other people who wanted to examine that message and consider its meaning.

You said you wanted a more balanced approach. You said you want more diversity. You should confer with your pro-choice friends on the faculty before you say that again, because that’s the last thing they want. In much of academia today, college professors represent the “full range” of political views, from the far left to the extreme far left. The Washington Post reported that on college faculty today, 72% are “liberal” and only 15% are “conservative” (www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html). In practice, it’s even worse than that, because most of the conservatives are teaching engineering, science, etc., where abortion is not a topic of interest. Trust me, in your time in academia, you will hear more pro-abortion propaganda than most fair-minded people can stomach.

You wanted an opportunity for intelligent and reasoned thought. You wanted inspired debate. I can tell you that we saw debates about abortion taking place all around the GAP display. The difference between those debates and most debates about abortion is that once people have seen abortion pictures, abortion apologists can no longer get away with asserting the myth that the preborn child is not a baby, but just a blob of tissue. People can no longer pretend that abortion is anything less than an act of violence that kills a growing child.

You say you welcome the opportunity to be exposed to different views. Perhaps you found this presentation so disturbing because we pro-lifers not only presented our views, but also the facts about abortion that make those views compelling.

You wanted filers on a table, so that you could ignore them. Your complaint reminds us of what they said to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., when he marched against racial injustice. They wanted him to confine his activities to the Black church, where he could talk about racism among people who cared about racism. Everyone else didn’t want to be bothered. But Dr. King knew that in order to change the status quo, he had to show people that racism was much worse than they imagined. It was pictures of Black men and women being attacked with dogs and water cannons—those picture appearing on TV and in magazines reaching millions of American households—that turned the tide against segregation in the South.

Our operating principle actually comes from the King family. Dr. Martin Luther King said that, “America will not reject racism until America sees racism.” His niece, Dr. Alveda King, now says that “America will not reject abortion until America sees abortion.” That’s why we are working to make sure that every American sees abortion for what it is, an act of violence that destroys a growing child.

For more information about abortion—no matter what you decide, you want your decision to be informed by the facts—visit www.AbortionNo.org.

Nicole Cooley

So many students we meet on campus are really hurting.  Most of us have no idea what some of these folks have been put through.  This story is from Nicole Cooley, our Virginia Project Director.  She encountered a student on a recent GAP excursion.  We are changing his name and withholding the name of the school.

A desperate need for healing.

Stewart approached our poll table and declared his belief that abortion should remain legal.  Standing next to a large visual exhibit comparing abortion to other forms of historical genocide, I asked Stewart why he felt that way.

At first, he told me he was a “Darwinian Christian” and said that a person’s inner strength is vitally important.  We explored his views for quite a while as I struggled to understand them.  He admitted to a personal childhood of abuse, and given my own experience with rape, I found a link.

I silently prayed for God to help me reach Stewart and then these words came out:  “Stewart, you don’t believe a woman should have the right to abort her child, you believe an unborn child should have the ability to abort himself.”  He looked at me and the tears began to fall down his face.

He told me, “You don’t understand what I went through … for ten years!”  When I asked him if I could give him a hug, he willingly came into my arms and sobbed while I held him.  I spoke quietly to him until he calmed down and then I looked deep into his eyes.

When he affirmed that he could hear the voice of the Holy Spirit as a born-again believer, I told him how to be healed.  I told him that the only way out of the pit of despair was to allow the “Wonderful Counselor,” Jesus, to peel away the layers one at a time.  I understood that at a moment of trauma, how Satan had lied to him and told him that he would have been better off dead.  That lie, spoken into his subconscious in the midst of abuse, now led him to accept abortion.

I have prayed for Stewart ever since that day and I will never forget him.