Monday, April 6, 1998
Abortion/Holocaust comparison accurate
I, too, have walked by the Palmer Museum and the Willard Building and seen the graphic displays of abortion. Yes, they are sickening, and maybe a little too realistic. At first, I had mixed feelings on the issue of the posters, but now I agree with the work that Gregg Cunningham is doing.
Let me explain that while many people are so very angered at the
comparison between abortion and such things as lynching and the
Holocaust, they are totally missing the point. Abortion is not
consensual when it comes to the life of the child. Just like
the Jews had no power against the Nazis, neither do the children
have any say or power against the will of their mother.
It is not just an issue of a woman's choice. We are so easily
forgetting that the life of another human being is affected by
that choice. Babies are just as helpless and nonconsenting as
the people of the lynchings and the Holocaust, it is just that
their voices cannot be heard.
And all the while, we beg for the world to look at pictures of
what the Holocaust victims were put through, to actually see the
torture that occurred, so that a horrible genocide like that would
never again occur. But people protest at seeing the reality of
an aborted fetus.
It is sickening, but it is very real, and it is about time that
we start to take a very close look at what abortion really involves
-- not just the right of a woman to choose, but the life of an
innocent child who does not want to die and just needs somebody
to speak up!
Cara Byerly
freshman-division of undergraduate studies
Abortion decision hard one to make
I am pro-choice. However, I respect the opinions of those who are not. That is the beauty of democracy -- we can all have our own opinions.
As I passed the "genocide awareness project," I was
taken aback by the absurdity of their comparisons. But it was
when they basically said that their view was right and everyone
else's was wrong that I became inflamed. So far, they have been
quoted in The Daily Collegian as saying that people who are pro-choice
are in denial, confused and without a functioning conscience.
These self-proclaimed gods of moral righteousness may be shocked
to learn that the truth is not theirs to hand down. I, too, was
once naive enough to be hard-line pro-life. Then, at the age of
15, I became pregnant and had an abortion. I vividly remember
the sound of my fetus being sucked out of me and emotionally,
I have endured tremendous pain -- does that sound like denial,
lack of a conscience or confusion? Although I never gave birth
to a baby, I saved two lives that day. For a woman who must make
this decision, it is the single hardest one she will ever have
to make.
Although you may scream the chants and pray the prayers against
abortion, it is not until the decision is yours to make that you
will discover how you really feel about it. I often wonder why
all of these Christian pro-lifers are not adopting more babies
-- they're the ones who insist that they be born. These "Christians"
parade around on their moral high horse preaching the sins of
abortion. Then they cry the woes of children suffering due to
single parent homes, dual career couples, poverty and the general
lack of the good Christian family values which encourage women
to have unwanted babies in the first place.
Anonymous University student
Talk will tackle issues of affirmative action
Governments, universities and corporations are all caught up in the same "diversity" craze. But diversity is not the problem. People often misinterpret what true diversity means.
Genuine or real diversity is an added benefit in this country.
One of the wonderful things about America is that people have
come here from all over the world. Knowing men and women with
different views and philosophies can enrich our lives.
The problem is not real diversity, but the use of discrimination
in service of a counterfeit "diversity." Real diversity
grows when free and equal people make choices about their lives
without government control or manipulation. Quotas and discrimination
can never produce a real variety. They only enforce an administrator's
view of who people are and what they should do and think. The
result is conformity. Our universities, corporations, politics
and media don't need imposed sameness. In a country breached by
"culture wars," we need the challenge of differing and
well-formed ideas. But our universities are remarkably alike.
In the humanities and social sciences, the faculties are routinely
secular and liberal. What is desperately required is not more
ethnically and sexually "diverse" liberal clones, but
people with alternate political, cultural and religious views.
We are left with the ambiguous proposition that there is something
called a "woman's voice" or a "black voice."
But women who are conservatives are not well represented by women
who are radical feminists and vice versa. Nor are all African
Americans well represented by secular liberals.
However, one would never realize this by examining the speakers
brought here to Penn State. Although Penn State stresses diversity
and multiculturalism in all of its activities, we actually witness
a series of events which feature speakers, diverse solely by the
color of their skin, who spew the same liberal orthodoxy over
and over again. For example, Yolanda King, Frank Wu, Thomas Sales,
Cornell West and John Singleton, all convey the same message;
one that advocates racial preferences.
Although, on Wednesday, Penn State Young Americans for Freedom
will sponsor a lecture featuring Proposition 209 campaign chairman,
Ward Connerly. The lecture will be held at 8 p.m. in Schwab Auditorium.
Connerly will address issues pertaining to the problems with racial
preferences and quotas.
Christopher Gillott
vice chairman-PS YAF
