Mr. Fortissimo’s wrath was extinguished by a few kind words and an offering of friendship.

by Jacqueline Hawkins

There are times when the goal in a conversation needs to be defusing, instead of debating.  I learned this at Mizzou.

“This looks delicious!  It looks like sushi!” he said angrily.

We get that all the time.  Mostly from men.  They are trying to provoke us to anger.  This young man however, had a lot of rage be hind his eyes and in his voice.  One of my co-workers said he looked like he wanted to eat someone’s soul.  The tattoos, piercings, and mohawk supported that notion.

He stalked around the display.  Seasoned GAP staffers didn’t try to engage him, but as I saw him move towards the young and less experienced volunteers, I knew I had to cut in so they wouldn’t unwittingly find themselves in an escalating fight they couldn’t handle.

My heart was pounding as I made my way over to their side of the display.  Instead of engaging him in a debate, I wanted to try something different.  Would it work?  I didn’t know.

“This looks like f***ing sushi!  It looks delicious!” he said again.

I laughed and casually leaned against the barricade.  I replied,“You remind me so much of someone I knew in middle school.”

“I don’t give a f***,” he spat.  He gave me and angry, questioning look.  He obviously didn’t expect me to go from that angle.

“Well that’s fine.  I’m just saying that you remind me of someone I used to know . We called him the Cube.  You remind me of the Cube.”  (I really did know a boy who was referred to as The Cube in middle school.)

“Whatever.  This looks like gummy bears!”

“Now hold on, sir.  Wait a minute.  You just said it looked like sushi.  They can’t look like two kinds of food at the same time.”

He clarified. “This picture looks like gummy bears.  The other picture looks like sushi.”

“Oh!  I see.  Okay.  We’ll we’re just showing folks what abortion is.”

“I say kill them all.”

I frowned thoughtfully and shrugged deciding to inject a least a little pro-life rhetoric into the conversation.  “Kill the Jews, enslave the niggers, kill the babies.  It’s kind of all the same thing,” I said nonchalantly.

He didn’t respond to my statement.  Instead he replied: “I’d like to kill myself and take some people with me.”

He couldn’t see preborn children as valuable (nor me nor anyone else, for that matter), because he didn’t see himself as valuable.

Whoa.  “I see…Well, I would seriously have to discourage killing yourself and your classmates.  That wouldn’t be good,” I said with ease.

A pro-life student I had been speaking with earlier chimed in, seeming to sense that I was diffusing and not debating.

“Look bro, if you ever want to hang out and talk, look me up.  My name’s Jason,” the pro-life student said offering his hand.

“F*** off,” he muttered.

“Come on, dude!” I exclaimed with a bit of lightheartedness.  “He’s just being nice.  I would have given anything to have someone say that to me when I was in college.  I didn’t have friends when I was in school.”

“There’s probably a reason for that,” he spat, trying to egg me on.

“There was!” I agreed.  “I was a total introvert.  I just hung out by myself which made college lonely and miserable.  So I know what it’s like.  You shouldn’t have to go through that.”

He didn’t reply.

“By the way, I like your tattoo,” I said, pointing to the ff musical sign behind his ear.  “Forte, forte right?”

“Actually it’s fortissimo,” he corrected, but without any venom.

“Oh yeah, that’s right!  I used play music in school but it’s been a while.  Fortissimo. Awesome.”

He shrugged and I continued:  “But look sir, regardless of how you feel about babies or your classmates, you shouldn’t have to feel like you’re better off dead.  I strongly suggest you see the school counselor so you can feel better.  And while you’re at it make some friends so you don’t have to be alone.”

“Yeah, definitely look me up and we’ll hang out and be friends.  My name is Jason,” he said offering his hand.

Mr. Fortissimo gave Jason’s hand a side glance and said pointedly, but without any hostility, “I’d rather stay anonymous.”

“Hey, that’s cool, but at least you know you’ve got a friend,” I said.

He was silent for a few moments.  I could tell all the wind had been blown out of his sails and he was much calmer.  He came there for a fight but got something completely different.  The crazy pro-life lady (me) took all of his  venomous barbs and turned them into points of friendly conservation.  The clean cut, bright-eyed, pro-life student offered to be his friend and hang out with him.  It probably wasn’t at all what he expected, but he certainly wasn’t going to be all hugs and giggles in response.

“I gotta go take a s***,” he said simply.  No anger, no ire, no venom.  But still some shock factor.

“Okay! I hope all goes well with that.  It was nice talking to you!” I said with a smile.

The young man who looked like he was going to eat someone’s soul walked away without anger and without venom, but with a whole lot to think about.  He probably had a reputation for being crazy and on the edge.  Plenty of people probably told him to get help.  But how many people told him to get help so that he would feel better?  Because he deserved more than living a miserable lonely life?  He’ll never forget the pictures, and I hope he’ll never forget that he was told that he deserved to feel peace in his life.  I especially hope that he and Jason do in fact become pro-life friends and hang out.

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.

by Fletcher Armstrong

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Observer:  People on both sides of the issue spent half their time trash talking people who opposed them instead of keeping it to the issue.  The pro-lifers compared the pro-choicers to Germans who ignored the Holocaust, while pro-choicers compared pro-lifers to racists who fought to keep public schools segregated.  This constant mud-slinging contest is exactly why people don’t like talking about important issues.

CBR Response:   Observer, thanks for your comment.  We did not invent the comparison of abortion to the Holocaust and slavery.  Martin Luther King, Jr. often compared racial injustice in America to the Holocaust.  Rev. Jesse Jackson later extended the comparison to abortion.  Both of them cited some of the same factors that we highlight in our display, including denial of personhood, dehumanization of the victims, etc.  But it would be wrong to accuse them of “trash-talking”.

It isn’t trash-talking to point out that perpetrators of genocide always redefine personhood in terms that exclude the intended victim class.  Our Supreme Court declared preborn children to be non-persons in the 1973 Roe v Wade decision, applying a developmental criteria (trimesters).  The Court did the same thing in 1857, by declaring Black men and women to be “subordinate and inferior” beings.  The Nazi court declared Jews to be non-persons in 1936.

Another common theme is the language used to dehumanize the intended victims.  For example, Nazis called their victims rats, pigs, vermin, and untermensch (subhuman).  We all know the language used to dehumanize Black men and women in this country.  So what do we call preborn children.  A wanted preborn child is called a “baby” — “look at the ultrasound of my baby” — but an unwanted preborn child is never a baby, but is often referred to as a “parasite”, “blob of cells”, “products of conception”, etc.

These are all true historical facts.  Stating facts is not mud-slinging.

Of course, these facts have relevance only if the preborn child is a living human being, but science tells us that the preborn child is both human (not a pig, cow, or horse) and alive (not dead, but growing).  So can anyone tell us why it OK to decapitate and dismember some human beings and not others?  And what criteria is appropriate to decide which human beings may be decapitated and dismembered and which may not?

Mrs. Shanley stand in prime location where she can see the ‘stealth appreciation’.

Here is what volunteer Patti Shanley had to say about the pro-life students who had practically taken their life-affirming sentiment underground:

 We know we’re in a hostile environment when our friends are afraid to be seen with us.  It happened to me at least a dozen or more times at the UNC Greensboro and North Carolina State.

I’m talking about stealth appreciation.  It’s a lightning-quick “thank you” that almost no one else can discern.  The person might stop for a moment, or just glide by with a bit of eye contact and a quick nod or thumbs up.  They don’t take our brochure.  They barely speak.  They just quickly say “thanks” and move on.  But they never, ever, want anyone to know they agree with us.

I understand.  It’s a dangerous world when accusatory social media posts target anyone considered an enemy and the gang of bullies descends.  Social circles are fragile and academic success is unsure when we swim against the current.  Who could have predicted that the tolerance crowd wouldn’t tolerate dissent?

At least one student at UNC Greensboro wasn’t afraid.  In full view of the pro-aborts, she told me she was really glad GAP came, and offered me a hug.  “God bless you,” I whispered in her ear.

We must teach the next generation to be better than this.  The anti-American Left has coopted public resources and institutions to advance their own agenda at taxpayer expense.  They are not bold; they are bullies.  They say we have no right to speak, and their President says we should sit in the back of the bus (his exact words).  Unfortunately, too many pro-lifers, conservatives, and Christians are cowering in the closet.  That is not a recipe for victory.  We will have to fight for our country or we will lose it.

That is why CBR and GAP are so important.  We are fighting.

You can fight, too.  Be sure to join us here.

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.

by Fletcher Armstrong

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Science Student:  Your “movement” implies that those who have had abortions are “murderers” and compares them to those who oversaw the holocaust [i.e. “Nazis”].

CBR Response:  We explicitly state that women who have had abortions may not be compared to Nazis.  In fact, aborting mothers are often more victim than perpetrator.  They’ve been lied to.  Many face enormous pressure and even threats of abandonment (or worse) by irresponsible or predatory males who should be supporting them.  Some “choice.”

We compare abortion to the Holocaust because in both cases, (1) the victims are denied rights of personhood, (2) perpetrators use dehumanizing terms to describe the people they intend to kill, etc.  But we also compare slavery to the Holocaust, for all the same reasons.  Does that mean that we believe George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and William Clark were as evil as Nazis, because they owned slaves?  Of course not.  These men are personal heroes of mine, but they were very wrong about a grave moral issue.  They grew up in a society in which slavery was an accepted part of daily life.

Perpetrators of genocide almost always discount the humanity of their victims.

God let it rain on Day 1, but …

by Jacqueline Hawkins

On the rainy Monday at the UNC Greensboro, a young man with a markedly deadpan attitude gloated, “You all came to start a fire on campus, but look. It’s raining. Where’s your fire now?”

The young man was a member of the the campus Christian group that originally committed to bring GAP but later backed out.  Unfortunately, Christians often have little regard for the sanctity of commitment, which is why we generally avoid depending on such groups.  As it turns out, the College Republicans are much more likely to keep their commitments.  Just sayin’.  Anyway, …

When the young man saw no students around the GAP display, he concluded that the rain and lack of response was a sign from God that GAP did not belong.  God was drowning out the “fire” CBR wanted to start.

He asserted that GAP was not the kind of loving thing that Jesus would do, but GAP volunteer Debbie Picarello pointed out that Jesus was full of both grace and truth.  We show the truth of abortion, but following the example of Jesus, we are gracious, loving, and peaceful in our conversations with students.

Debbie then reminded the young man that Jesus did not hide from controversy.  Jesus told people the truth about their sin and called them to repent, knowing they would crucify Him.  As Christians, we share the Gospel with them, even if it means persecution.  At CBR, we share the truth about abortion with them, knowing they don’t want to see it.

… He gave us a firestorm on Day 2.

He may have thought God was dousing the flame, but he needed only wait one more day.  Our Day 2 was beautiful and a massive crowd of people gathered.  This confused Christian could gloat no more, because God gave us the very firestorm he assumed had been washed away.

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.

by Fletcher Armstrong

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Justin Barr:  I agree with not calling people against abortion pro-life because 9/10 time they really aren’t pro life, their pro birth and than screw you afterwards.

CBR Response:  Justin, that is nothing more than an ad hominem attack. Name-calling and ad hominems are no substitutes for reasoned arguments.  If you have a reasonable argument that justifies decapitating and dismembering little human beings, we’d all love to hear it.  You could save us all a lot of trouble if you would make a coherent case.

by Jacqueline Hawkins

At UNC Greensboro, a female student begged us to give up protesting abortion and spend our time and energy promoting free IUDs (that she claimed were 99.5% effective).  She insisted this would end the need for abortion, apparently being unaware that the IUD is an abortifacient.  This obviously well-formed student wrote,

“Abstinence programs do not work because sex is a basic human need like food, water or shelter.  It is built into our genetic code to crave it and there is nothing we can do to curb this … very human desire … Please reconsider what you spend your time protesting.  Your time is incredibly valuable and people with protesting souls like yours need to take advantage of their gifts.  Please, please protest for free birth control.  IUD’s especially.”

This goes beyond the commonly held view that sex without responsibility is an entitlement.  In this woman’s mind, she and her classmates must have a regular romp in the sack or suffer something akin to starvation, dehydration, or hypothermia.  I have images of mythological nymphs frolicking through the forest in a decaying, oversexed society.  The world is collapsing down around them but all they can do is frolic and play, or die.

Folks, please pray for these poor, deluded people.  That God would give them Light to see the way.

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.

by Fletcher Armstrong

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Thinking Logically:  [I] called you out on your shame tactics and blatant disregard for the emotional wellbeing of people who have gone through both the procedure in question … Can you perhaps choose another argument?  I think we all get that you are under the impression that abortion “decapitate and dismembers little human beings” or something along those lines. … Abortion isn’t genocide. Genocide is government sanctioned; there is propaganda (again government sanctioned and supported) demeaning the humanity of the targeted group, and military action is taken to eradicate the ENTIRE group.  Firstly, the government does not sanction abortion; there is massive controversy around the subject.  Secondly, you don’t turn on the television and see advertisements saying, “Eradicate the parasites known as the Unborn!” You don’t leave your house and walk down the street and see posters with demonizing pictures depicting “the unborn” and how we should “eradicate” them.  Thirdly, in saying that it is a genocide you are saying that we seek to eradicate ALL unborn children.  In what universe do you actually think that anyone would eradicate the potential life that fuels and sustains our population on earth?  Another thing is that genocide does rely on mob-mentality, bandwagoning, and most other appeals to people.  Does that sound familiar?

CBR Response:  Thinking Logically, If abortion is just another medical procedure necessary for the well-being of women and society, then why would a picture of it shame anybody?

I repeat the fact that abortion decapitates and dismembers little human beings because that is an important fact that is the crux of the matter.  If you can offer any compelling evidence to the contrary, we would gratefully thank you for the enlightenment and find something more productive to do.  If you could provide a coherent argument for why it is OK to kill some human beings without justification, and give us some rational way to decide who may be killed and who must be protected, then we would gratefully thank you for the enlightenment and find something more productive to do.

Knowing that such simple evidence/arguments would get us to shut up and go away, why don’t you offer them?  You don’t offer such facts nor such arguments because they don’t exist.  To cover up for your lack of facts/arguments, you respond with ad hominem attacks and falsehoods (e.g., preborn humans are not human).

We will offer relevant facts and arguments as long as pro-aborts offer no coherent response.

Your comments are confused because you didn’t read the UN definition of genocide, nor did you read what we said about it.  We use the definition of genocide as stated in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 96 (11 December 1946): “Genocide is a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, as homicide is the denial of the right to live of individual human beings; such denial of the right of existence shocks the conscience of mankind, … and is contrary to moral law and to the spirit and aims of the United Nations. … The General Assembly, therefore, affirms that genocide is a crime under international law … whether the crime is committed on religious, racial, political or any other grounds …” (source, accessed January 15, 2011)

Note that the action doesn’t have to be government-sponsored in order to be considered genocidal.  The genocide in Rwanda was not government sponsored.

You say that one of the defining characteristics of genocide is the demeaning of the humanity of the target victim group.  True.  Note that we often call a WANTED preborn child a baby, but an UNWANTED preborn child is never a baby, but is rather a fetus, embryo, products of conception, potential life, parasite, not a human, etc.  Can’t get much more demeaning than to call somebody a parasite.  The only difference between the baby and the parasite is that the one is wanted and the other is not. Personhood based on wantedness …  When have we seen that before?

You say that in order for it to be genocide, somebody has to be targeting an ENTIRE group.  With abortion, the entire group being targeted for destruction is UNWANTED, PREBORN children.  Not all preborn children, not all unwanted children, but all children who are both unwanted and preborn may be killed.

How can you say that the government doesn’t sanction abortion?  Haven’t you read Roe v. Wade?  Don’t you know that the abortion industry receives hundreds of millions of dollars from the US government every year?

You said that genocide depends on mob-mentality, bandwagoning, and most other [fallacious?] appeals to people.  You asked if such a characterization sounded familiar.  Yes, it does.

by Fletcher Armstrong

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Man:  You’re comparing a woman’s right to choose whether or not she wants to carry a potential child to term (and dramatically change her life, cause unforeseen health issues, potentially lead to a bad life for a child, etc) to an event which imprisoned/killed millions of [already born] people and caused the death of countless other via a global war?

CBR Response:  We are comparing killing human beings who are little with killing human beings for any number of other arbitrary reasons.

We are comparing the dehumanization of unwanted preborn children with the dehumanization of other people groups singled out for destruction.  For example, you claim that the preborn child is only a “potential” child, because you want to kill him or her.  Similarly, Nazis said that their intended victims were “untermensch” (subhuman).  Where does that end?  Why not kill infants because they are only “potential” teenagers?

If you think somebody is going to have a bad life, you can kill that person?  Where does that stop?  We all know many people who came from difficult life circumstances; do you think they should be dead?  How can the potential for future difficult life circumstances be used to justify killing anybody?

You mentioned the process of birth?  How does that change anything about that baby?  What is essentially different about a baby 10 minutes before birth and that same baby 10 minutes after?  Why do you believe it is OK to decapitate and dismember the one and not the other?

Perpetrators of genocide almost always discount the humanity of their victims.

by Fletcher Armstrong

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Sara:  The important part about choice people don’t understand is that it is about giving every woman her own voice to make her own decisions.  If you don’t agree with abortion, don’t get one, but don’t force other women to believe that same things.

CBR Response:  Sara, we all want choices, but the choice of abortion kills another human being, often by decapitation and dismemberment.  If you doubt that, then please watch the video at www.abortionno.org.

You claim to be pro-choice, but forgive me if I doubt you on that.  I don’t know where you are politically, but people on the political left are not pro-choice at all.  I am much more pro-choice than they.

For example, unlike most on the extreme left, I believe Big Government shouldn’t force me to pay for my neighbor’s abortions.  You say, “If you don’t agree with abortion, don’t get one.”  Very clever, but your political allies are doing everything possible to force me to pay for somebody else’s abortions.  How is that “pro-choice”?

Many on the far left believe that if I am in medical school or nursing school, I should be forced to participate in abortions as a condition of getting my medical degree.  I should have no conscience protections.  How is that “pro-choice”?

Unlike many on the left, I think I should be able to choose for myself what kind of medical insurance I buy (or sell).  The current Administration has said that Big Government should decide for me what kind of insurance I can buy and even whether I must take the blue pill or the red pill.  How is that “pro-choice”?

But all choices have limits.  The way I learned it down on the farm, your right to swing your fist ends where somebody else’s nose begins.  When your choices cause death, harm, or risk of harm to another human being, then that is one circumstance in which Government, acting on behalf of civilized society, should step in to protect the weaker from the stronger.  That’s why we have laws against murder, rape, fraud, speeding, dumping toxic waste, etc.

We all want choices, but the choice of abortion kills, often by decapitation and dismemberment, another human being.

BTW, I should point out that slave-owners could make the same argument you made, i.e., “If you don’t agree with slavery, don’t own one.”

Finally, if you can prove that the preborn child is not a living human being, but something less than human, then I’m more pro-choice than anybody.  Can you offer that proof?

All-star pro-life student Aubrey Griffin exposes the deeds of darkness.

by Jacqueline Hawkins

North Carolina State University student Aubrey Griffin is a pro-life all-star!  The industrious young woman is the President of the NCSU Students for Life (SFL).  Having seen how effective GAP was when we came in 2014, she and her comrades brought us back for an encore performance.

Both days were filled with intellectual discussion and debate.  There was a pro-abort protest group, but they seemed rather halfhearted about the whole thing.  Their presence, although perfunctory, brought even more attention to the pictures!

I love it when a plan comes together!

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.

Jane Bullington addresses members of the huge pro-abort throng at UNCG.

by Jacqueline Hawkins

At high noon of Day 2, they descended upon us with rage and fury.  It was our first time at the University of North Carolina Greensboro (UNCG).

Day 1 of the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) had been cold and rainy, so almost no one stopped.  But everyone saw the pictures, and they held their response for better weather.  Along with the sunshine, their opportunity for hysteria had now arrived.

They came with notebook paper signs, vulgar chants, and even satanic ritual, but we held our ground and let the signs do the work.  Seasoned GAP veterans said this protest was one of the largest and most vitriolic they had ever seen.  The protesters stayed all afternoon, until we carried away the last sign.

The shouting, jeering crowd was perhaps wearisome at times, but their 5-hour exposure to the GAP display was a huge victory.  If 3 seconds gets the point across, who knows what 5 hours can do?

But it wasn’t just the pro-aborts who responded.  After seeing our signs, Ashton boldly announced that she would organize a new pro-life club on campus.  At the end of the day, 3 brave pro-life students pitched in and helped us break down the display as their peers vented their rage.  Talk about guts!  They had never met each other before, but now they were working on their first pro-life project together!

Pro-Life on Campus at UNCG was a huge success!  Thank you for supporting our work!

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.

Continuing our See you in the funny papers series (explanation), this one from the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Science Student:  Given that you’re pro-life, I’m assuming that you’re also religious — Weird to see you attempting to cite “science” for something in that context.

CBR Response:  Famous scientists who believed in God: Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, and many, many others.

According to 100 Years of Nobel Prizes, a review of Nobel prizes award between 1901 and 2000, 65.4% of Nobel Prizes Laureates have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference.  Overall, Christians have won a total of 72.5% of all the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, and 62% in Medicine. (source)

Science is a way of discovering truth about the natural world.  Some scientists claim that all phenomena have a naturalistic explanation, but that is a statement of philosophy, not a conclusion of science.

Science can only tell us that the preborn child is both human and alive from the moment of conception.  Science cannot tell us whether killing humans is immoral or not, nor can science tell us which human beings may be decapitated and dismembered and which may not.

Answering a question about dehumanization at Grand Valley State University.

Online discussions can be a lot of fun.  When we do it social media, only our friends see it.

But when we do it on a newspaper webpage, most people who read it don’t agree with us.  That is our target audience!  So we monitor and respond to online comments.

We clarify confusion and challenge sloppy reasoning.  We reinforce the visual images these students saw when we were on campus.  Unlike many commenters, we avoid ad hominems and make only rational arguments.

Here begins a series presenting reader comments and our responses on an online article about GAP in the Grand Valley State University Lanthorn.

Annoyed Protester: We support the rights for those to chose what they wish to do with their body and the potential life they carry. … I just do not approve of the way they decided to compare it to genocide and had the nerve to basically call me a murderer because I support the right to choose.

CBR Response:  Annoyed, thank you for your comment.  Our purpose is never to condemn those who may have aborted in the past or those who support abortion.  Our purpose is to clarify the confusion that exists about the baby in the womb and his or her moral status.  We don’t say that you are a murderer, but we do say that you are the victim of a confused culture that has taught you that decapitating and dismembering little human beings can be justified.

For example, you call the baby in the womb as a “potential” life. Science tells us — and your own common sense will bear this out — that the baby in the womb is both human (not a pig, horse, or cow) and alive (not dead but alive and growing).  The abortion industry dehumanizes this child so that they can justify killing him or her.

We compare abortion to genocide because abortion kills 1.2 million children per year, many by decapitation and dismemberment, and some of them by torturing them to death.  Yes, late-term babies can feel excruciating pain.

As long as free speech rights exist, university officials cannot censor our message.

by Jacqueline Hawkins

“No!” the female college professor said firmly when Bill and Jeanette Schultz offered her literature.  She did have a question.  Not surprisingly, her one question turned into a series of challenges with rude interruptions to any reply.  After Jeanette advised her that a conversation would not be possible if she continued to interrupt, she finally asked: “Why were you not here last year?”

Without an interruption Bill replied, “We should have been here last year and will make up for it by coming back next year and in future years.”

“You are not welcome at my university!” she retorted with strong indignation.

To that Bill responded, “Madam, this university belongs to you and the many open minded and gifted students who have visited with us.  Even now, students are continuing to express an interest in our truthful message.  We will be back for them!”

Without a single word, she abruptly turned and marched away, passing alongside the “All Black Lives Matter” display as several university student continued their dialogue with CBR volunteers.

In the leftist den of confusion that is the modern campus, some professors apparently believe that they own the school.  Sadly, in many ways, they do.  Together promote left-wing propaganda and punish nonconformity whenever they can.  However when GAP shows up and exposes the facts for all to see, it becomes much harder for professors to lie to their students.  Their monopoly over the debate is broken, and they don’t like it.  Not one little bit.

Jacqueline Hawkins is a CBR Project Director and a regular FAB contributor.