Case Western Student Newspaper Says Pro-Life Group “a danger to the student body”
“Who could care less if someone is pro-forced-birth, but when that someone takes action to enforce that opinion on others—that’s when it becomes dangerous.“
Campus groupthink and viewpoint intolerance in action: Either conform to the leftist pro-abortion stance or be condemned as “dangerous” and “unsafe.”
The editorial board of a Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) student newspaper slammed the student government and school administration for an early September decision to recognize the campus pro-life group, which the paper called “a danger to the student body.”
“CWRU does not care about its students. If they actually cared, they would have immediately considered concerns about the student body’s immediate safety and the broader school-community impacts, and they would have easily determined this organization to pose a danger,” The Observer editorial board wrote.
The pro-life group Case for Life seeks to “protect and promote respect for all life from conception to natural death” through education, outreach, and volunteering at local pregnancy centers. They have faced criticism and calls for denying their recognition since last year.
. . . . “It is not just that students have to worry about laws that impose on their bodily autonomy, but they also have to worry about being in an environment that is supposed to be safe but isn’t,” the students’ editorial reads. “Who could care less if someone is pro-forced-birth, but when that someone takes action to enforce that opinion on others—that’s when it becomes dangerous. “
The editorial continues to argue that CRWU’s approval of Case for Life is just another example of the attack on “reproductive rights,” referencing the new Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks.
“We already have to deal with anti-abortion laws dictated by governments that put our lives in danger, but now we have to face the reality of our tuition going to a club that makes the majority of the student body feel unsafe,” the editorial board wrote.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
By safe, they mean “not held accountable for our own actions.” It is amazing how hard someone will work to not grow up.
So the “kill the babies” crowd is calling the “let the babies live” side a danger?
Explain that logic.
“Your rights make me unsafe” is a base tactic created by America’s oldest snowflakes in the gun-control movement, and carefully honed there.
Now, all the rest of you… Welcome to the Nightmare.
It doesn’t make sense? It doesn’t have to make sense.
And just how, pray tell, are they unsafe? Will the pro-life club be going door-to-door looking for pregnant women, and carrying them off to an indoctrination center? Will students be forcibly taken to brain-washing sessions to convert them to another view? No proof of things like this is offered.
It sounds to me that the real danger from “someone takes action to enforce that opinion on others—that’s when it becomes dangerous” is the proabortion group forcibly suppressing the opposition.
Has there ever been another generation of Americans so narcissistic and arrogant, and yet so infantile and fragile, they actually believe dissent threatens their “safety?”
I admit that I was somewhat taken aback by the fact that a college newspaper editorial board does not know the correct usage is “Who couldn’t care less.” To me that exposes their sloppy thinking and gives a head up that logic has left the building.