The University of Calgary Gauntlet®
  2009-04-02
(NOTE: Archived content:
Current issue here)

[image]
Previous Issues

News
BSD finally has a home
Grad students lose vote to bylaws
Paying back student loans harder thanks to fewer jobs
Alberta's smallest Dino not a very good b-baller
Dining Centre switches to more sustainable fish
Stigmas harm problem gambling recovery
UN commissioner calls for freedom from want
News for the unnewsed
Online Only - Russian towns defy scholarly projections
Moustache March

Opinions
Politics after the purge?
Letter - Wrong about rights
Of mallards and millionaires
Alberta minister amends human rights
Decreasing dementia, one furious child at a time
The wrath of Kenney
Sex questions with Lesley-ann Barrett
Letter - Voltaire and Campus Pro Life

Sports
Report Cards
Women's volleyball
Men's hockey
Women's hockey
Men's basketball
Men's volleyball
Track and Field
Women's basketball
Swimming
Wrestling
Henry Bekkering takes his final bow
Night of the Dino

Entertainment
100 shows fill That Empty Space
The Polyjesters bring music around the world
Festival helps student artists take flight
Constant Season gears up for summer
April brings aural delights to Calgary
Digging up Marianas Trench

Features
4 Nights 4 the Homeless



  Letters
Letter - Voltaire and Campus Pro Life





[Print] Print this story

ADVERTISMENT

ADVERTISMENT

Letters
OPINIONSLetter - Wrong about rights
OPINIONSLetter: Beer, brats and Bach, study in Hamburg!
OPINIONSLetter: Prohibition bites
OPINIONSLetter: Unfunny jokes are hurtful
OPINIONSOnline Only - Letter: CPL VP responds

Editor, the Gauntlet,

It seems that everyone on campus right now has an opinion on the whole debacle that has arisen between Campus Pro-Life and the University of Calgary, so I suppose I feel inclined to express my own. To begin I would like to start off with a quote from Thomas Paine, who was a writer and patriot during the American revolution. "An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot." The situation regarding CPL is clearly an issue of freedom of expression, however there is a underlying principle that does not often get talked about that goes much deeper than this particular situation. To address this issue I pose this question, who the fuck is anyone, including the University of Calgary, to tell anyone what to do with their lives?

If one would argue that the University has all the right to tell CPL not to show their display and take legal action, all that you are essentially saying is that we, as a society, should value private ownership of property more than the seemingly basic human right of freedom of expression. Don't get me wrong, personally I feel that CPL has an extremely twisted world view that I don't understand or agree with at all. I am very much pro choice. However, to say that they should put their display inward is nothing but censorship and censorship is always arbitrary.

Ultimately, if I am walking past science A and science theatres and their graphic display is up facing outwards, it is entirely my choice to look at it or not. Just because I don't agree with what they are saying and that the depictions are exceedingly graphic, that does not change the fact that I could look at the prairie chicken or the library as I walk past their display. It is my choice. To say that CPL should turn their signs inward is entirely based on the content of the posters and is a purely emotive argument. It is a violation of freedom of expression. If CPL was pulling my hair or sticking a gun in my face to look at their display, I would agree that they are going too far. That, however, is not the case. It is my choice to look at their display or not.

I also feel that the Students' Union has been very spineless in the way they have dealt with this issue. For a student run advocacy organization, they certainly seem to try their hardest to not ruffle the feathers of the university administration on this issue. What is the point of the SU if it is just going to appeal to the ideas of the authoritative body as opposed to the people they actually represent, the people who actually elected them to their positions? I understand that this is a contentious issue, but please, for the love of whatever god you want to believe in, can we not appeal to reason instead of the university administration who don't like how this whole scenario plays on their image?

It is as Evelyn Beatrice Hall said in paraphrasing Voltaire's ideas on freedom of speech, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." If we do now truly live in a society where we value the arbitrary decisions made by owners of private property more than something seemingly so basic as freedom of expression, well then fuck you humanity, you have reached your lowest point. However, given my nature, I will still fight for you. History is never made by the complacent and obedient and the given authorities of the time were not big fans of Tom Paine or Evelyn Beatrice Hall or Voltaire and I doubt authority in my time will be a big fan of me. Let us appeal to reason, people, or we are doomed to value things we shouldn't and devalue things that have true meaning and inspiration.

Share this story: del.icio.us digg Fark NewsVine Reddit YahooMyWeb


Reader Comments:

 Add your comment or send a letter to the editor

Posted: 2009-04-05 22:12:36
#1 - Good point. We all need to be fair enough to see that even if we disagree with a point of view, people still have a right to express it. Otherwise we need to be prepared to lose our own right to express our views when people disagree with us. If popular views are the only ones that can be expressed, then freedom of speech doesn't exist.

Being pro-choice is supposed to be about giving people choices. But I've noticed that when it comes to choosing whether or not to see the GAP display, many people who call themselves pro-choice actually want to take that choice away from everyone else.


–Kamil, student


Posted: 2009-04-13 10:20:24
#2 - You actually believe you're on the same level as Voltaire? Wow, you are so far up your own ass that you must be able to watch the food you eat enter your stomach.


Dave, Student


Posted: 2009-04-14 11:39:33
#3 - Thank you Dave,
I don't know whom you're addressing, but your comment demonstrates that the arguments presented are so good that you're unable to refute them. Instead you resort to a personal attack.


–Kamil, student


Posted: 2009-04-17 01:14:53
#4 - I'm not trying to refute the argument. By in large I agree with the opinion expressed. It just pisses me off when people compare themselves to important historical figures (such as Voltaire). It's extremely arrogant and shows a high level of narcissism. That's what bothers me about the article.
I actually respect your view Kamil, it was not an attack on you.


–Dave, Student


Posted: 2009-09-10 13:45:14
#5 - Show me the quote where Voltaire says "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to express your oppinion by whatever inappropriate and extreme means that you deem necessary" and I will agree with you. Honestly no one ever said CPL couldn't express themselves. They just have to find a more reasonable and respectful way to do it.


–J, student


 Views expressed are those of the posters and do not necessarily reflect that of the Gauntlet.

ADVERTISMENT

ADVERTISMENT

RSS icon RSS Feeds:
[ Main - News - Opinions - Entertainment - Sports ]
Volunteer at the Gauntlet®
.