Graphic images draw criticism from students

Mechelle Hankerson

News Editor

Mark Robinson

Assistant News Editor

VCU student Troy Stanford protested the anti-abortion group, the Genocide Awareness Project, in the Commons Plaza on Wednesday. Photo by Amber-Lynn Taber.

Thousands of students took notice of a graphic display by a national anti-abortion group featuring photos of abortion procedures and historical genocides Wednesday in VCU’s Commons Plaza.

The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform runs the Genocide Awareness Project on college campuses, which shows photos comparing historical instances of genocide to what they consider America’s contemporary genocide: abortion.

Some VCU students took offense to the group’s setup in the Commons Plaza on Wednesday, questioning not only the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform’s decision to equate abortion with genocide but also VCU administration’s allowance of the controversial group’s display on campus.

A VCU student, who wished to be referred to as Mckenna, said she saw the display when she walked to her first class.

“I have never seen anything like that in my life,” Mckenna said. “I was furious. I pay tuition to go here, and I do not think it’s appropriate to show incredibly graphic images like that.”

After seeing the display, Mckenna sent emails to the VCU Students for Life organization, which invited the Genocide Awareness Project to campus, and the Student Commons Association to object to its placement on campus.

Mckenna was not alone. Fellow student Joe Woods also decided to contact the VCU Student Commons Association to object to the Genocide Awareness Project’s display.

“I have attempted to raise my concerns with the sort of rhetoric they’re permitting on their property,” he said. “I’m just interested in hearing the logic behind why these graphic and hateful displays were permitted.”

Woods said he understands that it would be unfair for the university to deny a certain group’s demonstration, but he was still concerned about VCU’s allowance of not just offensive content, but content Woods claims is false.

Woods stood in the Plaza with a megaphone for part of the day letting anyone walking through know that the photos in the display are not how real abortions look.

As of press time, Woods had received no answer from VCU.

Another student, Troy Stanford, carried a sign that read read “pro-choice” while protesting the group’s presence.

“I can’t stand to look at it,” he said. “It makes me sick.” Stanford said he was also upset that VCU gave the space to the group.

“I think VCU should take into consideration what they allow on their campuses.”

Throughout the day, the university was also hosting tours for prospective students.

Associate vice provost for Student Affairs and Enrollment Services Charles Klink said the university does not regulate any demonstration’s content because there is no fair way to do so. If an organization abides by the time, place and manner restrictions the university has in place, its content will not be censored, he said.

“One of the hallmarks of any university campus is the legally protected right to express a variety of opinions,” Klink said. “When you have an environment where people are able to do that, certainly some perspectives are going to be offensive to others.”

Official VCU policy states “peaceful, reasonable and lawful picketing and other orderly demonstrations in approved areas shall not be subject to interference by the members of the University community,” but also that “those involved in picketing and demonstrations may not engage in conduct that violates the rights of any member of the University community.”

All other guidelines from the university address security and parking restrictions and policies.

Director of Virginia Programs for the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform Nicole W. Cooley said the Genocide Awareness Project aims to point out comparisons of abortion to genocide, but don’t believe they are exactly the same.

“There’s points of comparison; we’re not saying they’re identical,” Cooley said.

The group says that a denial of personhood, attempting to serve a higher purpose through genocide (attempting to get rid of “unwanted” children) and the use of dehumanizing language all bear a resemblance to historical genocides like the Holocaust and Rwandan Genocide.

“In genocide you see dehumanizing language to describe the victimized class … when we have a wanted preborn child … we call it a baby, if it’s not wanted, now you have a fetus, a product of conception, a glob of tissue (or) a clump of cells,” Cooley said.

Even though the group uses genocide to help explain their position, Cooley said their ultimate message is simple: “We’re saying in all cases it’s wrong to kill another human being for an arbitrary reason.”

Cooley herself had an abortion after a rape. She said she considered herself pro-choice before the incident but now could never imagine having another abortion.

“I know firsthand that abortion hurts women, and I was not educated about the truth before I had my abortion,” Cooley said. “If I had known the truth, I would not have had an abortion, and I would not have suffered in that aftermath,” Cooley said.

Cooley said she wants to change the way society views abortion to make people see abortion as not just illegal, but also unthinkable.

“I want people to think, ‘OK, I have other options other than killing my children,’ and … I want abortion to be at the bottom of the heap,” she said. “I want (people) to know the truth and (that) they can seek out crisis pregnancy centers (and) go talk to somebody first before they jump into a decision they can never take back.”

 Mason Brown contributed to this story.

12 Comments

  1. Official VCU policy states that “those involved in picketing and demonstrations may not engage in conduct that violates the rights of any member of the University community.”

    They weren’t just picketing. They had a microphone and they were making UNSOLICITED ADDRESSES to everyone who passed by on their way to the library, the English Department, the dining hall, and so forth. And, because they used a microphone, their NOISE penetrated the neighboring buildings. That is called a noise disturbance. That is called disturbing the peace. Their scientifically and morally reprehensible actions violated the ability of people to work in their offices, and of students to be taught free from disruption. Why does their freedom of speech, in trying to put women and all of society back into the 19th century, trump EVERYONE ELSE’S RIGHT–the rights of students who are paying tuition, the rights of faculty and staff who have to go to work–to FREEDOM FROM HARASSMENT, visually and aurally?

  2. N.B.: Contrary to the text of this article, no, the objection wasn’t just to the images,some of which were clearly from miscarriages anyway, and/or photoshopped.
    By the way, I feel very sorry for Nicole Cooley who “had an abortion after a rape. She said she considered herself pro-choice before the incident but now could never imagine having another abortion.” Ms. claimed to the crowd that her pastor “forced” her to have an abortion. She is clearly a sad person who (A) is locked into victim mentality and (B) has internalized her oppression as a woman, and as a woman who has had an abortion. On the other hand, there were many women there in the crowd who had had an abortion, for whatever reason, and had never regretted it or been ashamed of it. If Ms. Cooley has issues with herself, she should seek therapy. Because the simple fact is this: having an abortion, a safe and legal medical procedure for those of us who produce an egg each and every month, isn’t what she should be ashamed of. What she should be ashamed of is making entirely specious “analogies” between abortion and genocide and between abortion and slavery. What she should be ashamed of is trying to take choice away from other women just because she feels she made the wrong decision. If she made the wrong decision for herself, that is her problem.

  3. Official VCU policy states that “those involved in picketing and demonstrations may not engage in conduct that violates the rights of any member of the University community.”

    The “Genocide” Project people weren’t just picketing. They had a microphone and they were making UNSOLICITED ADDRESSES to everyone who passed by on their way to the library, the English Department, the dining hall, and so forth. And, because they used a microphone, their NOISE penetrated the neighboring buildings. That is called a noise disturbance. That is called disturbing the peace. Their scientifically and morally reprehensible actions violated the ability of people to work in their offices, and of students to be taught free from disruption. Why does their freedom of speech, in trying to put women and all of society back into the 19th century, trump EVERYONE ELSE’S RIGHT–the rights of students who are paying tuition, the rights of faculty and staff who have to go to work–to FREEDOM FROM HARASSMENT, visually and aurally?

  4. Official VCU policy states that “those involved in picketing and demonstrations may not engage in conduct that violates the rights of any member of the University community.”

    The “Genocide” Project people weren’t just picketing. They had a microphone and they were making UNSOLICITED ADDRESSES to everyone who passed by on their way to the library, the English Department, the dining hall, and so forth. And, because they used a microphone, their NOISE penetrated the neighboring buildings. That is called a noise disturbance. That is called disturbing the peace. Their scientifically and morally reprehensible actions violated the ability of people to work in their offices, and of students to be taught free from disruption. Why does their freedom of speech, in trying to put women and all of society back into the 19th century, trump EVERYONE ELSE’S RIGHT–the rights of students who are paying tuition, the rights of faculty and staff who have to go to work–to FREEDOM FROM HARASSMENT, visually and aurally?

    Meanwhile, I feel very sorry for the pitiful Nicole Cooley who “had an abortion after a rape. She said she considered herself pro-choice before the incident but now could never imagine having another abortion.” Ms. Colley claimed to the crowd that her pastor “forced” her to have an abortion. She is clearly a sad person who (A) is locked into victim mentality and (B) has internalized her oppression as a woman, and as a woman who has had an abortion. On the other hand, there were many women there in the crowd who had had an abortion, for whatever reason, and had never regretted it or been ashamed of it. If Ms. Cooley has issues with herself, she should seek therapy. Because the simple fact is this: having an abortion, a safe and legal medical procedure for those of us who produce an egg each and every month, isn’t what she should be ashamed of. What she should be ashamed of is making entirely specious “analogies” between abortion and genocide and between abortion and slavery. What she should be ashamed of is trying to take choice away from other women just because she feels she made the wrong decision. If she made the wrong decision for herself, that is her problem.

  5. Official VCU policy states that “those involved in picketing and demonstrations may not engage in conduct that violates the rights of any member of the University community.”

    The “Genocide” Project people weren’t just picketing. They had a microphone and they were making UNSOLICITED ADDRESSES to everyone who passed by on their way to the library, the English Department, the dining hall, and so forth. And, because they used a microphone, their NOISE penetrated the neighboring buildings. That is called a noise disturbance. That is called disturbing the peace. Their scientifically and morally reprehensible actions violated the ability of people to work in their offices, and of students to be taught free from disruption. Why does their freedom of speech, in trying to put women and all of society back into the 19th century, trump EVERYONE ELSE’S RIGHT–the rights of students who are paying tuition, the rights of faculty and staff who have to go to work–to FREEDOM FROM HARASSMENT, visually and aurally?

    Meanwhile, I feel very sorry for the pitiful Nicole Cooley who “had an abortion after a rape. She said she considered herself pro-choice before the incident but now could never imagine having another abortion.” Ms. Colley claimed to the crowd that her pastor “forced” her to have an abortion. She is clearly a sad person who (A) is locked into victim mentality and (B) has internalized her oppression as a woman, and as a woman who has had an abortion. On the other hand, there were many women there in the crowd who had had an abortion, for whatever reason, and had never regretted it or been ashamed of it. If Ms. Cooley has issues with herself, she should seek therapy. Because the simple fact is this: having an abortion, a safe and legal medical procedure for those of us who produce an egg each and every month, isn’t what she should be ashamed of. What she should be ashamed of is trying to get women to go to making entirely specious “analogies” between abortion and genocide and between abortion and slavery. She claims she did not have enough information when she made her decision. Well, that is HER OWN fault. What she should be ashamed of, if she cares so much about accurate information (obviously she doesn’t, or she wouldn’t mis-use the term”genocide”), is trying to get women to go to crisis pregnancy centers that deliberately misinform women and tell them things that are SCIENTIFICALLY UNTRUE, such as the lie that abortion causes breast cancer. What she should be ASHAMED of is trying to take choice away from other women just because she feels she made the wrong decision. If she made the wrong decision for herself, that is her problem.

  6. Official VCU policy states that “those involved in picketing and demonstrations may not engage in conduct that violates the rights of any member of the University community.”

    They had a microphone and they were making UNSOLICITED ADDRESSES, with microphone. That is called disturbing the peace. They violated the ability of people to work in their adjacent offices, and of students to be taught free from disruption. Why does their freedom of speech, in trying to put women and all of society back into the 19th century, trump EVERYONE ELSE’S RIGHT–the rights of students who are paying tuition, the rights of faculty and staff who have to go to work–to FREEDOM FROM HARASSMENT, visually and aurally?

  7. What exactly was specious about the Genocide Awareness Project?
    (There are many differing definitions of genocide.)
    Abortion is anti-feminist because the “pro-abortion-choice” philosophy presumes that women are inferior to men, that they require access to a corrective surgery in order to be equal to men in society. However, it’s even worse than that, because this “safe, legal” corrective surgery destroys a woman’s offspring, a human person.
    (The university would have to investigate whether or not the policy of letting groups use a speaker system in that open area is disturbing to university functions or only to partisans who oppose the message. The speaker was only used one hour, between noon and 1:PM, and besides, anyone had access, not only the pro-lifers. If the U were to shut down use of speakers, it would also have to prohibit loud chanting, like that engaged in by the abortion-choice people.)

  8. Personally, I didn’t like the images either, but understand that you go to a UNIVERSITY! This should be be an arena for open thoughts. We as students should be more open minded in the first place. I don’t agree with what they did, but I don’t think we should go as far as banning them from demonstrating.

  9. Buying a slave was once a perfectly legal and popular choice in Virginia also.
    No, people who support beheading – in the year 2012! – don’t like to see their victims.
    People didn’t like the image of Emmett Till in Jet magazine either.

  10. If it is taken into consideration that of the 52 million or so abortions (since 1973 in America alone), a high percentage of those being female. Who then would be denying women their rights. It seems clear that denying millions of women the right to exist would be a far bigger injustice. Why? Because those making the choice had the right and were not denied their right to existance………. It is mind boggling that people think their rights should trump anothers right to exist. It is all about how we form our ideals, who we choose to learn from, and learning from mistakes others have made in the past, when they believed their rights outweighed others rights… Thats what the boards say, if you open up and listen…..Freedom for all. A society that terminates their offspring is not civilized.

  11. Addressing the complaints of the poster before,
    CBR only used a microphone during the university-approved time of 12-1. This time was used to engage in dialogue with the student body and respond to their questions. Other groups have used microphones and PA systems before.

  12. In response to NO SHAME, I do stand by my statement that I regret my abortion after rape. The fact that other women currently do not, or the fact that I did not regret my abortion for the first four years afterwards is irrelevant to the fact that abortion kills a human being. If abortion didn’t kill a human being, I would support any woman’s free “choice” to do whatever she wants with her body as long as it did not infringe on the human rights of other human beings. (She can drink as long as she doesn’t drive….she can swing her fist as long as it doesn’t impact another person’s face, etc.) What I realized years after my abortion was the inescapable truth that abortion kills a human being. In my case, abortion killed an innocent human being who didn’t deserve to be punished for his father’s crimes.

    As a point of clarification, I did not say my pastor “forced” me to abort – she strongly encouraged me to do so in order to get on with my life. She was wrong. I have since forgiven her and everyone else associated with the traumas related to the rape and abortion. It is only because of the tremendous healing I have received that I am able to speak publicly about this deeply painful chapter in my life at all.

Leave a Reply