The Blog

A pro-life response to the horrible case of pregnancy of a minor

A horrifying story out of Argentina has many people discussion abortion, and abortion laws, specifically in the case of rape of a minor.

An 11-year-old girl being called Lucia, became pregnant from rape by her grandmother’s partner. She was in her grandmother’s custody to protect her from sexual assault that her siblings suffered at the hands of their mother’s partner, which tragically, did not protect her from the exact same thing.

The authorities in Argentina, where abortion is illegal with few exceptions, denied her an abortion, which some sources claim she wanted, as she is quoted having said, “I want you to remove what the old man put inside me.” However, conflicting sources claim she did not want an abortion, and that she was being used for political purposes by abortion-rights activists.

Lucia had a Caesarian section at 23-weeks gestation and the newborn child is alive at the time this article was written.

There is no doubt that the sexual assault of this child is one of the most despicable and heinous crimes imaginable. She has been abused and violated when she was supposed to have been protected. She will need a lot of support, therapy and protection to heal from the trauma she has endured, it is a long journey to recovery ahead.

We can’t know definitively what this young girl wanted the outcome of her pregnancy to be, but we can look at what she said a little more closely.

I want you to remove what the old man put inside me.”

What is she referring to?

We can certainly all agree about what should never have been inside this little girl, and that those around her neglected to protect her and keep her safe from harm. People are downplaying this aspect, or treating it as of secondary importance, instead treating that sentence as though it applies to the living human being conceived. But she did not say, “I want you to remove whom the old man put inside me.” Pre-born children are not objects, they’re living human beings. They’re not “what”s – they’re “whom”s.

Every embryology textbook asserts that fertilization – the union of sperm and egg, is the beginning of a new individual member of the species. It is when a new life begins their journey, when we no longer have human parts – sperm and egg – but an entirely whole human being, one who needs only time, safety, nutrition and their natural environment, to mature.

What, then, is the appropriate action to take, when we have a conflict such as this? When a little girl has been unfairly impregnated, but when we also know there is another human being involved, who is innocent as well?

Rebecca Kiessling is an American attorney and pro-life activist. She was conceived in rape that her mother endured at knife-point at the hands of a serial rapist.

She says,

“Like most people, I’d never considered that abortion applied to my life, but once I received this information, all of a sudden I realized that, not only does it apply to my life, but it has to do with my very existence. It was as if I could hear the echoes of all those people who, with the most sympathetic of tones, would say, ‘Well, except in cases of rape…,’ or who would rather fervently exclaim in disgust, ‘Especially in cases of rape!!!’

All these people are out there who don’t even know me, but are standing in judgement of my life, so quick to dismiss it just because of how I was conceived. I felt like I was now going to have to justify my own existence, that I would have to prove myself to the world that I shouldn’t have been aborted and that I was worthy of living. I also remember feeling like garbage because of people who would say that my life was like garbage – that I was disposable.

Please understand that whenever you identify yourself as being ‘pro-choice’, or whenever you make that exception for rape, what that really translates into is you being able to stand before me look me in the eye, and say to me, ‘I think your mother should have been able to abort you.’ That’s a pretty powerful statement. I would never say anything like that to someone. I would never say to someone, ‘If I had my way you’d be dead right now.'”

Both pro-choice and pro-life camps agree that rape is a horrible crime, that we are talking about a victim who did not do anything to deserve what happened to her, when we are talking about a woman – or a child, who has been raped.

Where we differ, is that pro-life people also recognize that a child conceived in rape is also a victim if he or she is aborted. We must never victimize an innocent human being – whether it be through rape, or abortion. Just as someone else’s body is nobody’s to violate, so too, is someone else’s life nobody’s to take. The circumstances in which someone is conceived have no bearing on their value as a human being. We are all created equal, no matter who our father is.

Would anybody justify going to the incubator where Lucia’s baby is fighting to stay alive, and unplugging it, or stabbing him, because of his father’s crime? If not, then why would it be okay to either suction him out, or dismember him in Lucia’s womb for the exact same reason?

We may agree that Lucia parenting him is not what’s best for either of them, but shouldn’t we place him in the care of a family that wants to love him, regardless of how he came to be? Does he not deserve the same protection from harm that Lucia should have received?

Angelina Steenstra is the director of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, an organization dedicated to allowing women who’ve had abortions to share their experiences, how abortion affected them and why they regret their abortions.

Angelina was raped as a teenager, became pregnant, and had an abortion. She says that she needed a lot of help and support, to recover and heal from the trauma of sexual assault, but she says that the abortion took even longer to recover from. She says abortion is a “death experience”, and that it took her a long time to recover from the guilt of “having participated in the death of a human person.”

Abortion is not a solution to the rape Lucia endured. It is not a magic remedy that will help her to recover.

There are some circumstances that are so grim, it is hard to see the silver lining. There are some crimes so despicable, we can’t imagine how to tackle the damage they create.

For Lucia, of course we all wish we could turn back the clock and protect her, but we can’t. All we can do is our best for her going forward, to make sure she has everything she needs to heal and be safe. If there is any silver lining in this situation, it’s that this little girl and her child survived, both the assault and the C-section, that his innocent life was spared and that she was spared the trauma of abortion.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Pro-Life Ryerson Student Files Discrimination Complaint with Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Ryerson student Talia Emanuel has filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) against Ryerson University, Ryerson Students’ Union (RSU), the Continuing Education Students’ Association of Ryerson (CESAR), and two individuals for discrimination in services on the basis of her pro-life belief or creed.

In her complaint, Emanuel claims that since 2016, she has been denied equal access to students’ union services, including Equity Service Centres, organizations created in order to combat discrimination. Emanuel is female, of a racial minority, and lives with a disability. In her complaint, she claims that she has been denied equal access to services for female, racialized students, and for students with disabilities. Emanuel, a survivor of rape, claims that she has also been denied equal access to students’ union services for victims of sexual violence.

Emanuel states, “I filed this Human Rights complaint because I don’t want any other students to be discriminated against because of their beliefs, treated unfairly by those in authority, or denied equal access to services—especially services as essential as support for survivors of sexual assault.”

The RSU and CESAR offer services to marginalized students through jointly operated Equity Service Centres. Emanuel claims that she has been denied equal access to these services because she shares her pro-life beliefs alongside others on public sidewalks at Ryerson University.

In her complaint, Emanuel stated, “It distressed me to find out that I could not access the five Equity Centres….I am not able to get the assistance I need, on the same basis as other students. This demoralizes me. I believe I should be treated with dignity, despite if others agree or disagree with my creed.” Emanuel claims she attempted to attend an Equity Service Centre event, and was asked to leave upon entering the room. She met with Equity Service Centre staff, whom she claims informed her, “even if there’s not going to be a discussion around that topic [abortion], that it’s still an unspoken conversation that’s really limiting people’s ability to express themselves.”

Before going to the Tribunal, Emanuel claims that she sought justice from Ryerson University, which she says failed to appropriately address discrimination and violence against pro-life students. Emanuel says that students who hold a pro-life belief are not treated evenly with those who hold a pro-choice view, in her complaint sharing that she experienced discrimination when she has hosted events on campus, and that she came up empty when she appealed to the University for equal treatment.

Pro-life students who exercise their right to freedom of expression at Ryerson have faced theft, property destruction, harassment, and assaults, often by students’ union employees. Violence against pro-life students at Ryerson University continues to escalate. Gabby Skwarko, at the time an employee of Ryerson University, is currently facing charges of assault and assault with a weapon for attacking two individuals during a pro-life demonstration near campus. Yet another Ryerson student is currently facing criminal charges for mischief and assault against a pro-life student at Ryerson as well.

The HRTO has accepted Emanuel’s complaint and has scheduled a hearing for May 15, 2019.

Emanuel states, “University campuses should be places where free speech is protected. I have not experienced that. I hope that my human rights complaint can help to change that so other students will be treated equally, no matter what they believe.”

Media Contact

Talia Emanuel
taliaemanuel+media@gmail.com

Talia Emanuel

The Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective: A History of Thefts, Assaults, and Harassment

Since November 2016, we’ve faced threats, assaults, thefts and other forms of pro-choice violence from the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective. We’ve followed up with Toronto Police and Ryerson University, and other legal action is ongoing.

After the attack by Gabby Skwarko on Monday, October 1, we are going public with the evidence we have of the pattern of aggression from this group.

Our team members have never been the subject of a police investigation for our activism. The RRJC has falsely alleged that we have assaulted them. This is categorically untrue, and we challenge the RRJC to produce any evidence whatsoever to substantiate the false allegations. Here’s our evidence of their consistent pattern of pro-choice violence.

The Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective has been trying to figure out how to censor us and prevent us from sharing the pro-life message for two years. They have no clue how to stop us. They have tried unsuccessfully to cover up the corpses and stifle the abortion debate on campus. Despite this opposition, we continue to change hearts and minds at Ryerson.

However, our team is consistently the target of pro-choice violence from the RRJC for our peaceful and civil outreach. The RRJC resorts to violence out of desperation because they are not content with civil discourse and they have been unsuccessful in trying to censor us or prevent us from sharing our message. This needs to stop. No one should be assaulted for having a civil conversation on a university campus. We are shining a light on the RRJC’s deplorable conduct to put an end to it.

Featuring…

  • Paige Galette, then Campaigns Coordinator for CESAR (Continuing Education Students Association of Ryerson) and Co-Founder of the RRJC (Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective) — a variety of incidents including theft, threats, disruption of University-sanctioned event. Cautioned by police, no charges laid. Student union employee, not subject to Ryerson University sanctions.
  • Cassandra Myers, then RSU (Ryerson Students Union) staff member as coordinator in an Equity Centre, then Ryerson Board of Governors 2016-2017 — assault by water throwing, theft and destruction of property. Cautioned by police, no charges laid. Ryerson University refused to investigate a complaint under the Student Code of Conduct after the police investigation.
  • Gabriela “Gabby” Skwarko, 2017-2018 Faculty of Arts Director for the RSU (Ryerson Students’ Union). Investigations underway from Toronto Police and Ryerson’s Student Conduct Office from Oct 1, 2018 attack.
  • Julia Pivetta and Alex Douglas — stole a sign with an image of a healthy embryo and attempted to put it into the trash. Cautioned by police, no charges laid. The Ryerson Student Conduct Office applied penalties, but refused to say what penalties were applied.
  • Liezl Yance, President (Interim) CESAR (Continuing Education Students; Association of Ryerson), seen blocking camera while incidents were in progress.
  • Hannah Levitt-Day, grabbing camera and using threatening language (“I want to rip you apart ’cause I hate you guys so much”, “I’m really gonna grab a can of spray paint and just spray you guys” minutes before Gabby Skwarko’s attack)

Some people question why we film our demonstrations. The video should make the answer to that question obvious — for our own safety and protection, we film during our demonstrations so that when we face pro-choice violence, we have evidence to report to the authorities.

Why do we continue in the face of violent opposition?

There is no doubt that any controversial issue brings with it a certain amount of opposition, and the abortion debate is no different. When we bring our message to the public, and especially when working with our campus teams at universities and colleges across Toronto, it is not uncommon for people to come out and try to block our photos or conversations. We are used to it. However, despite our consistent peaceful and civil approach, our team members have faced significant verbal assault, theft and damage to our property and sometimes, things have even gotten physical.

Why then, would we continue? It’s because of the amazing conversations that we have with people, the hearts and minds that we see change every day. Sometimes the effect we have is far greater than we could ever imagine.

The day of my own assault, I was approached by a young man at Ryerson. I asked him what he thought about abortion, and he told me that he used to be pro-choice. I asked him what changed his mind. He said, “I reflected on the images that you guys bring here. It really doesn’t look like just a clump of cells. And besides, you are just a clump of cells, I am just a clump of cells. But more than that, the images made me change my behaviour. Women think they need safe and legal abortion, but what they really need is for men not to treat them like objects. It is unfair for me to treat a woman like an object and expect her to just go get an abortion. So my contribution to lowering abortion is that I’ve changed my behaviour, I no longer treat women that way.

This young man’s life was changed because he passed by our signs on the street. And his changing his behaviour will have a positive impact on the women in his life as well. Just this one mind changed will have a positive ripple effect on many, all the way down to possibly even sparing a pre-born child from a violent fate.

Our photos simply show what abortion looks like. It is up to each person to take from it what they will. The conversations like this one, that I was lucky enough for this young man to share with me, are what keep me going, they’re what keep our team going, and until abortion is unthinkable, we will do just that. Lives depend on it.

Pro-Choice Violence at Ryerson: Gabriela (Gabby) Skwarko

On Monday, October 1, two Toronto Against Abortion team members were attacked while engaging in civil discussion about abortion with pro-choice counterprotesters at Ryerson.

Gabby Skwarko, a member of the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective and last year’s Faculty of Arts Director at the Ryerson Students Union, approached Blaise Alleyne and Katie Somers from behind and launched into an attack on them and their property. Another member of the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective attempted to block one of the cameras from filming the attack.

Police and EMS were called. Katie Somers suffered injury, including bruising to her leg. A police investigation is open, but charges have not yet been laid.

Free speech is under serious threat in Ontario, and especially at Ryerson, where people are being assaulted for peacefully and civilly sharing their beliefs. While we are always peaceful and civil, we face violence and illegal activity often at Ryerson. This is one of many incidents our Ryerson Team has had to endure over the past two years from the student unions and the Reproductive Justice Collective.

We continue to reach more and more people in the Ryerson community with the pro-life message every week, despite attempts by the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective to censor and stop us through assaults and thefts. Hearts and minds are being changed on abortion at Ryerson every week, and our team is growing. We will not be intimidated by violence. Pro-choice violence is a desperate attempt to slow our momentum, and the pro-choice violence we face is nothing compared to the pro-choice violence that pre-born children face in abortion.

Blaise Alleyne and Katie Somers are both available for comment by email or phone:
blaise@torontoagainstabortion.org
katie@torontoagainstabortion.org
647-478-6309

Testimony of a Mind Changed by Truth

If a picture is worth a thousand words, it goes without saying that a video is worth far more. 

At the beginning of September, I was at York University with my colleagues, talking to students and other people in the community about abortion. As usual, we were displaying large images that show ultrasounds of healthy pre-born children, and images of the victims of abortion to contrast, and show evidence of how abortion violently ends their lives. This time, however, I also brought video evidence. 

I interrupted a conversation that my colleague Leire was having with a young man who was pro-choice. He was saying that abortion is sometimes justifiable, depending on the circumstances of an unexpected pregnancy. I asked him if he had ever seen what abortion actually looks like and offered to show him an animated depiction. He had never seen, and agreed to watch.

He quietly watched, as former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino described the most common procedure, aspiration (suction) abortion.

When Dr. Levatino showed the suction machine being turned on, the young man gasped in disbelief and horror, as he watched the 11-week fetus’ head torn off by the machine, and sucked through the cannula, then the arms, legs, and torso ripped apart and also sucked through. He shook his head in shock and disgust, as he watched the abortionist go back into the uterus to retrieve the parts left behind – an arm, some tissue, and scrape them out. 

When the short video ended, I asked him if what he had seen had changed his opinion about abortion. He said, “Yes, that is horrible, and no circumstance justifies doing that – ever.”

While Leire had built great common ground with him and had a sign in front of her with an abortion victim on it, for him, that picture didn’t tell the full story. When he saw with his own eyes what abortion actually does – decapitates and dismembers a living human being, he decided that was something he could no longer justify, no matter the circumstance. He became pro-life, because he saw the truth for himself. 

We often tell people that we don’t actually protest abortion, we simply bring the truth of what it is to the public, and abortion protests itself. For this young man, he went from holding pro-choice beliefs, to being completely against abortion, in under 4 minutes flat. The video may end up saving a life one day.

Orienting Incoming Students on Pre-Born Human Rights

While the mission of Toronto Against Abortion is to make abortion unthinkable throughout all of the GTA, we have a particular focus on university and college campuses. Our volunteer multi-campus activism team is mostly made up of pro-life students from Toronto universities and colleges, and the age demographic (early 20s) is most at risk for abortion. We have campus teams at all universities in the city, and some colleges. Orientation Week is a great opportunity to reach incoming students, and this week we were active sharing the pro-life message across the city.

At York University, TAA’s York Team ran “Choice” Chain during Orientation Day. Our York Team only began activism this past Winter, so this was the first Orientation Week we were present — and we were thrilled with countless conversations and great visibility! We brought a tablet with us, and after showing a video describing a 1st trimester abortion procedure, multiple people changed their minds on abortion became pro-life.

York Orientation Day

At Ryerson University, TAA’s Ryerson Team — denied recognition as an official student group by the student union simply on the basis of our pro-life beliefs — ran “Choice” Chain during campus groups day. While the student union may deny us equal access to table at campus events, we do not need their permission to share the pro-life message on the street. We continue to change hearts and minds on abortion, even leveraging attempted censorship to make the victims seen by more people.

Ryerson campus groups day

At the University of Toronto, where TAA works alongside U of T Students for Life (as well as UTMSFL and UTSCSFL), we made the victims of abortion visible during the Tri-Campus Orientation Week parade, reaching incoming students from U of T, UTM and UTSC. Thousands of people saw the photo evidence of the injustice. We’ll continue to follow up week by week at all three campuses alongside pro-life clubs to dialogue with students.

We also ran “Choice” Chain nearby during the clubs fair.

UofT Clubs Fair

Finally, TAA was on hand to assist at Tyndale University in student-led effort to start a pro-life club on campus. We were thrilled by the number of pro-life students who signed up, and look forward to working with the Tyndale club this year!

Tyndale University

By transforming university campuses, TAA is working to end the killing in Canada by transforming its largest city. Orientation Week is just the start of the semester. We’ll continue to follow up week by week across Toronto campuses, making the victims of abortion visible, and changing hearts and minds one photo and one conversation at a time.

Adoption, Suffering and Love: Reflections of a Powerful Conversation on a Rainy Day

On dreary, rainy days, it can be hard to find the motivation to get out on the streets and engage people on the topic of abortion. When the weather is gloomy and gray, it feels like it casts a shadow on the day, and sets the mood for conversations about an already heavy topic, to also be heavy, and more difficult to “see the light”, as it were. The weather really can have an affect on our moods and motivation.

A few of us managed to brace the weather on one of these days, and I was doing “Choice” Chain in downtown Toronto, and kept seeing the same young man walking past. The third time, I asked him, “what do you think about abortion?” He had an arrogant demeanour, and said my signs were “disgusting, and ruining local business,” and that “people are trying to go to lunch.”

He then said he agreed with abortion, because fetuses lack consciousness and can’t respond to stimulus until birth, which he thinks is necessary to have the right to life.

We spoke about how fetuses do in fact respond to stimulus in the womb, and can feel pain about halfway through a pregnancy, but newborns don’t even have consciousness in the way he means, and he agreed newborns have the right to life. We discussed other scientific facts about prenatal development, and he admitted he wasn’t aware of anything I told him, or much about the topic at all.

He then said abortion is acceptable because if placed for adoption, the child may grow up in an unloving home. I pointed out to him that there are many approved couples who are waiting to adopt a baby in Canada, but the waitlist is very long. I asked if he knew anybody who has adopted. I wanted to point out that odds are, they adopted a baby from outside of Canada for this very reason. He thought I meant does he know anybody who is adopted. He said his mother was adopted and was really messed up by it, because she grew up in a home without love.

At this point the arrogance disappeared in an instant, and he started to cry, and was really shaken. I said, “I am sorry to hear that, and I know that adoption isn’t perfect, and is emotional for everyone involved… can I ask you something?” He wiped his face and shook his head yes.

“Do you love your mother?” I asked. “Yes,” he said. “And does she know it?” He paused for a moment. “Yes,” he said.

“Then she does have love in her life,” I said. “And maybe that was the purpose of her enduring a loveless home – to have you, and to finally have love in her life. And you love your mother, and have love in yours. Adoption isn’t perfect, but it means more options, and hope, are possible. With abortion, that’s it.”

He said he himself planned to adopt one day instead of having biological children. I said, “So you see the good in giving someone a chance at life.” He said yes, and that he had to go, with none of the arrogance and hostility that were present at the start of our conversation. I thanked him for talking to me and he walked away.

It is human nature to dwell on the negatives, and sometimes even forget about the positives, so I understand and empathize with this young man for initially seeing only his mother’s suffering as a result of being adopted. It was a powerful and emotional experience for both of us as he came to realize that he himself was the remedy to that suffering.

He may or may not have changed his opinion about abortion following our conversation, I’ll never know. But he definitely had a change of heart, and as my friend Maria says, “Once the heart is changed, the head is the easy part to flip, it is much harder the other way around.” Once a person realizes that even when a person has suffered greatly, that love makes it all worthwhile, they have changed their perspective, and that’s a great start. And that makes a gloomy, grey day, feel all the brighter.

The Streisand Effect and the Abortion Debate

Have you ever heard of the Streisand Effect? The Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective (RRJC) certainly hasn’t. Their attempt to censor the photos we bring to campus of abortion victims only attracts more attention to the injustice of abortion and the inadequacy of the pro-choice position.

The Streisand Effect is the phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of attracting even more attention to the information. In 2003, photographer Kenneth Adelman was taking photos of the California coastline, hoping to document coastal erosion. Barabara Streisand got upset that an aerial photograph of her Malibu mansion was published in the collection, so she sued. Before the lawsuit, only six people had downloaded the photo — two of whom were her attorneys. In the month after the lawsuit, the photo was downloaded almost half a million times. Oops.

We see the Streisand Effect all the time in our activism at Ryerson. From Day One, the vocal counterprotests from what has become the RRJC have helped to generate campus media attention and make abortion impossible to ignore at Ryerson. I used to keep track of all media coverage of our activism. After we began activism at Ryerson, it quickly became impossible to keep up. Abortion has gone from a settled issue at Ryerson to one of the most hotly debated topics on campus. This is because we have been running weekly anti-abortion activism, but also thanks to the failed attempts of the RRJC to shut us down and cover up the injustice.

(We’ve seen this at U of T as well, with UTSU’s failed attempt to shut the pro-life message out of the street festival, or with counterprotests at George Brown College.)

The RRJC‘s one move is to try to cover the photos of abortion victims, even ultrasound photos of healthy children. How do you think this looks to passers-by? We hear from Ryerson students all the time, regardless of their views on abortion, who are bothered by the attempts to censor our message and the inability of the RRJC to defend their own position. How could they? The photos are unanswerable. Who will defend doing this to another human being?

Just last week, I heard fellow TAA activist, Brendan, explain to a group of Ryerson students that we were displaying the photos in order to show that decapitating, dismembering and disembowelling a human being is a human rights violation. An RRJC representative nearby, employed by the Ryerson Students’ Union, defended their attempts to cover up our photos. One of the students asked the RRJC representative why they were trying to censor us and block our message instead of responding to us with a message of their own. Another student said that the RRJC does have an implicit message, that people should control their own bodies. I jumped in and agreed, but pointed out that it’s very difficult for the RRJC to make their stance explicit when their stance is that it’s okay to decapitate, dismember and disembowel another human being’s body.

All they can do is cover up the evidence of the bodies being torn apart by abortion. Even ultrasound photos become intolerable.

My Body My Choice vs body of abortion victim

The phrase “my body, my choice” rings hollow next to a photo of another human body brutalized by abortion. Even worse, their sign that says “policing somebody else’s body is violence” looks nothing short of ridiculous next to photographic evidence of the violence that abortion does to the bodies of pre-born children 300 times per day in Canada. From our conversations week by week, it’s clear that many Ryerson students recognize this.

When confronted with the victims of an injustice, it’s been said that we have a choice to be perpetrators, bystanders, or rescuers. Apparently, there’s another choice: we can try to cover it up. That’s not a good look.

Would we rather the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective not try to censor our message? Of course. But their attempt to cover up photos of abortion victims massively backfires against our strategy. Their censorship presents a tactical speed bump. We can leverage their attempted cover up into a win-win situation: if they don’t block us, we reach tons of Ryerson students with the pro-life message; if they do block us, they attract way more attention to the abortion debate than we could ever do alone. Call it the Ryesand Effect? We just keep following up, week by week, reaching more students, making abortion impossible to ignore and changing hearts and minds, one conversation and one photo at a time.

Respecting the Bodily Autonomy of Every Human Being

The Canadian Federation of Students has a pamphlet that members of the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective have started handing out at Ryerson.

CONSENT IS MANDATORY

CONSENT IS RESPECTING BODILY AUTONOMY

RESPECTING BODILY AUTONOMY IS SUPPORTING REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE

The inside says that reproductive justice includes the ability to “terminate a pregnancy.”

Consent is mandatory? Consent is respecting bodily autonomy? No objection here.

Respecting bodily autonomy is supporting reproductive justice? Reproductive justice includes the ability to terminate a pregnancy? What about the bodily autonomy of the child?

This is why we show photo evidence of the violence that abortion does to the bodies of pre-born children. Abortion is an act of violence that destroys the body of an innocent human being.

And this is why the Ryerson Reproductive Justice Collective attempts to cover up the injustice. Once you see the second body that has been destroyed by an abortion, the view that respecting bodily autonomy includes the ability to terminate a pregnancy is obviously false.

Yes, we have a right to control our own bodies. Does that include a right to assault somebody else? Our right to control our own body ends at someone else’s body. A right to bodily autonomy does not include a right to assault somebody else.

We see related slogans at Ryerson and George Brown College, like “Mind your own *^$%ing body” and “Policing someone else’s body is violence,” which also ring hollow next to the photos they’re trying to cover up of children’s bodies destroyed by abortion. Isn’t decapitating, dismembering and disembowelling someone else’s body violence?

No wonder they don’t want anyone to see the photos.