First Amendment torn down with posters (Campus Fascism Alert!)

The Iowa State Daily ^ | 7 Feb 03 | Dan Nguyen

[Mr. Silverback]

Dan Nguyen

I can't say for sure what caused Blair Polhamus, freshman in political science and women's studies, to go and tear down "Feminists for Life" flyers and then to proudly announce her actions in the Daily last week. Was it just another example of typical freshman stupidity? Is the political science department so strapped for funds that it skipped teaching the First Amendment? Or is there a massive case of amnesia in the women's studies department?

My own experience with Women's Studies 201 leads me to pick the last choice because of an incident when a student, for her class project on activism, made a shirt celebrating pro-life feminists. The class gawked at her the same way Bush gawks when Colin Powell defends affirmative action. Of course we were startled, because though we had spent plenty of class time learning about the feminist struggle for abortion rights, we had never once learned that the women, the ones who founded the American feminist movement and gave WS201 a reason for existing, were in fact, passionately pro-life.

It isn't hard, though, to realize why early feminists wanted to ban abortions. For one, the primitive medical technology made the procedure hazardous for women. Also, abortion was seen as a way for men to have power over a woman's body -- ironic from today's standpoint -- because he could force her to abort when he did not want to support the child.

But the overriding reason why pioneering feminists like Elizabeth Cady Stanton opposed abortion was that they saw it as an indignity for women. Stanton wrote in a letter, "When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."

If Stanton were alive today, she would be horrified to learn the extent that the unborn have become dehumanized, especially as demonstrated in the controversy surrounding the "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act," which President Bush signed this past summer.

Rep. Charles Canady, R-Fla., authored the bill in order to "prevent the killing of infants who are born alive accidentally or during an attempted abortion." Nurses were brought into to testify how these unwanted babies, whose heartbeats and breathing continued for up to eight hours, were left to die -- in one case, in a "soiled utility room."

The bill's purpose is so basic that it is redundant -- the Supreme Court implied in Roe vs. Wade that a baby which has left the womb is protected by the Constitution. Yet the National Abortion Rights and Reproductive Action League (NARAL) protested angrily, labeling the bill an "anti-choice assault" on "Roe's basic tenets." In other words, NARAL was fighting for a woman's right to be guaranteed a dead baby after an abortion.

The "right to choose" has become so important to NARAL that the group is willing to justify what is infanticide by every medical and legal definition. That is only one example of how twisted their side of the debate has become. This radicalism has made them turn a deaf ear on any suggestion that abortion is not always necessary or justified.

This is not to say that the pro-life movement is any less narrow-minded. I am pro-life, but I don't trust the limited end goals of the conservative pro-life movement any more than I do the pro-choice goals. I believe that instead of thinking on how to take care of unwanted babies, we have focused on attacking the women who want abortions to the point of turning their babies into scarlet letters. If tomorrow abortions were banned, I think we would actually be worse off, because we would be wholly unprepared to pay the price in money and love needed to support the influx of unwanted babies and their mothers. It is sad enough that a million babies are aborted every year, but it will be the greatest tragedy when a million unwanted babies are born and the people who fought so long to bring them to life can't or won't do what is needed for them to live.

This is why Susan B. Anthony, the legendary leader of women's suffrage, said, "Much as I deplore the horrible crime of child-murder, earnestly as I desire its suppression, I cannot believe that such a law would have the desired effect." She compared a ban on abortion to "mowing the top of the noxious weed, while the root remains," and pointed out that "we must reach the root of the evil, and destroy it."

I haven't spent any time arguing when human life begins or if abortion is murder; there is no space for it and I'm not qualified anyway. However, I think that any time we can bring ourselves to label the unborn as "unwanted" and then do away with it -- no matter how much of a burden it was -- we don't come any closer to our hope of being a more humane society.

I think the majority of people believe this, and more importantly, so do our lawmakers, and it will be a matter of time before they take action to limit abortion. The pro-choice movement, of course, should not let this pass by quietly. But there is no reason why feminists can't heed the wisdom of Stanton and Anthony and petition for the social programs and reform that would reduce and eventually eliminate the need for abortions. This is the kind of noble, compassionate and longsuffering goal that has made the women's movement so well-respected in our history.

And it can start with Ms. Polhamus heading to the nearest computer lab and printing out a "Feminists for Life" flyer for every one she tore down last week, carefully placing them on every wall that once had a flyer, and then staying put in the library for a day or however long it takes for her to learn the 200 years of feminist history that she apparently missed out on.

[Mr. Silverback]

It gets even better. Here's the text of the letter Mr. Nguyen was responding to:

Pro-life group ignores feminism

January 31, 2003

Lately, a hypocritical group deeming themselves "Feminists for Life" have been putting up their shock-factor propaganda. Myself, along with several other people who know what feminism really is, have been dutifully tearing this trash down.

However, it seems that this isn't enough. The complete foolishness of this group needs to be pointed out.

This group claims to be feminist, yet is anti-choice. These two characteristics contradict each other. One cannot be a feminist and yet be anti-choice. A key pillar of feminism is allowing people to control their bodies and to have choices about their lives. Denying a woman a choice about when and if she has children is strongly against this tenet of feminism.

I ask this group -- if not to reconsider their close-minded and damaging view of abortion -- to at least change the name of their group. Perhaps if they didn't have an oxymoron in their name, people would take them more seriously and their fliers would remain on the walls.

Blair Polhamus
Freshman
Political Science/Women's Studies

Christina Hoff Sommers once said that the main premise of women's studies on modern American campuses is "Men are from Hell, women are from Venus." With Polhamus, it's more like "Men are from Hell, women are from the Ministry of Thought." Kind of funny how she says "Feminists for Life" is an oxymoron, as if "Feminists for Death" would be OK with her...

[FormerLib]

Time to send Feminists for Life another contribution.

Just look at who their enemies are and you'll realize they deserve your support.

[Mr. Silverback]

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[Steve_Seattle]

I wonder if Blair Polhamus has been or will be disciplined by college officials for destroying property belonging to another campus organization.

[eastsider]

"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."

You've come a long way, baby!

[TontoKowalski]

I can't say for sure what caused Blair Polhamus, freshman in political science and women's studies, to go and tear down "Feminists for Life" flyers and then to proudly announce her actions in the Daily last week.

I assume she's being prosecuted for violation of the Civil Rights of the Feminists for Life. Yeah, right.

[Charlie OK]

I won't post her information, but if you want to look her up, it is very simple.

Search here

Maybe some people should remind her what the 1st amendment is all about.

[madprof98]

If you send this chick a note, no matter what its tone or content, she will . . . feel bad . . . and then charge that you have sexually harassed her . . . the very worst form of oppression . . . and so on.

[zeaal]

Wonder if the Dean of her College will read to her the First Amendment?

[Britton J Wingfield]

Yes, beating her up in email will allow her to feel like an abused victim, i.e. allow her to feel righteous in any action.

[Mr. Silverback]

I would advise very strongly against Freeping this girl, unless you plan to be extraordinarily polite. First, you could violate your ISP terms of service, second, it could lead to bad publicity for FR, third, it would give her and her ilk more "big bad pro-lifers" ammo.

If you do write her, remember that you are representing the ProLife movement and (for many of you) Jesus Christ. Also, it couldn't hurt to send a nice letter to Mr. Nguyen.

[niteowl77]

When the Iranian jackasses at ISU went about the campus spray painting "PROTEST THE SHAH'S AMERICAN VISIT" and other catchy slogans on the sidewalks, not one thing was done... including removal of the paint long after the Shah ceased to be. That was freedom of speech, I suppose. After the American embassy in Tehran was taken over, the Iranians on campus went all over the place taking down posters of Ayatollah Khomeini sodomizing a camel (IIRC, it was about as "tastefully" drawn as the subject would allow, but the camel did not look happy). Apparently, the 1st Amendment didn't extend quite that far.

[AbsoluteJustice]

" But there is no reason why feminists can't heed the wisdom of Stanton and Anthony and petition for the social programs and reform that would reduce and eventually eliminate the need for abortions. "

Ya this is what we need more socialist programs for the government to guide us by. Women cannot think for themselves they need government to become bigger by creating another worthless tax $$$$ burdened department to tell women one certain message. For those of you who are with your bodies that dont want babies. STOP SPREADING YOUR LEGS!!!!

[AbsoluteJustice]

" But there is no reason why feminists can't heed the wisdom of Stanton and Anthony and petition for the social programs and reform that would reduce and eventually eliminate the need for abortions. "

Ya this is what we need more socialist programs for the government to guide us by. Women cannot think for themselves they need government to become bigger by creating another worthless tax $$$$ burdened department to tell women one certain message. For those of you who are loose with your bodies that dont want babies. STOP SPREADING YOUR LEGS!!!!

[LilithUnfair]

"Child murderers practice their profession without let or hindrance, and open infant butcheries unquestioned...Is there no remedy for all this ante-natal child murder?...Perhaps there will come a time when...an unmarried mother will not be despised because of her motherhood...and when the right of the unborn to be born will not be denied or interfered with."

Sarah Norton from Woodhull's and Claffin's Weekly, November 19, 1870

[Mr. Silverback]

Ya this is what we need more socialist programs for the government to guide us by. Women cannot think for themselves they need government to become bigger by creating another worthless tax $$$$ burdened department to tell women one certain message.

True, but this is a good reason to write a check to your local crisis pregnancy center. Women who receive emotional support and information from CPCs seldom abort. Some are able to help the truly needy with rent and other emergency needs, and it makes a huge difference in the way the decision is handled.

[Mr. Silverback]

Love your scree name.

[LilithUnfair]

Ahhh... thanks :-)

[BenLurkin]

Place her on double secret probation?

[weegee]

So the Feminazis have "brown shirts" in their midst supressing dissent?