Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Is it appropriate for a university to give out pro-life leaflets

577 replies

StealthPolarBear · 04/01/2018 15:50

I genuinely don't know. Was a bit disappointed

OP posts:
WriteAGoodOne · 07/01/2018 12:57

Those who believe that a woman is an important being in her own right and should have sovereignty over her own body full stop, and see an embryo / foetus as a potential life, but not one that outweighs the life of the woman, given that it is dependent on her body to survive, it is a part of her body

But what is the argument of these people to back up a case of aborting a fetus that can survive outside the woman's body?

Then what?

Also, I don't get the 'if you can't survive outside the body, you aren't a life yet. You're just a potential life". Just as silly as seeing a life as a life because it has a heartbeat.

I'm not anti abortion by the way, but I think more people need to be more blatant in thinking.

I agree with abortion. I also agree a fetus is a living thing. But I also think abortion is a lesser evil because I think an established life has more worth

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 14:20

"But I also think abortion is a lesser evil because I think an established life has more worth"

Ah this is where a lot of the difficulties stem from.

Many cultures and societies do not believe a woman has much worth.

Taking an approach that quantifies the "worth" of a person is a minefield, given that all societies explicitly or implicitly place different value on different types of people - sex, wealth, age, disability, race, education level, all sorts of things go into judging how "valuable" a person is.

How much value is a profoundly disabled women, compared to a non disabled foetus in her womb? For instance.

These are the sort of questions Richard Dawkins and his ilk enjoy pondering, and are grossly offensive, quite frankly.

LyraPotter · 08/01/2018 14:22

I think if it was the uni itself it's a bit off. Was it definitely the uni, or was it a member of a uni society? If the latter there isn't much you can do unless the leaflets themselves are breaking the law.

DrMarthaJones · 08/01/2018 14:34

They have as much right to lobby their beliefs as anyone who is pro choice

You think they have as much right to tell blatant lies to vulnerable people as other people do to tell the truth?
So if you were in a hospital having treatment for cancer, you'd be just fine with me giving you a leaflet that told you it was your own fault for being a sinner and if you prayed enough you could get better?
After all, I'd have as much right to lobby my beliefs as anyone else, right?

Notreallyarsed · 08/01/2018 15:45

They have as much right to lobby their beliefs as anyone who is pro choice

I despair that people abuse free speech to harangue, distress and bully people with graphic images of terminated foetuses, and horror stories. Nobody should have the right to do that.

grannytomine · 08/01/2018 17:05

These are the sort of questions Richard Dawkins and his ilk enjoy pondering, and are grossly offensive, quite frankly. That is so offensive but I've never liked him. He seems so pompous, I think he probably considers us all below him as he is so brilliant.

BertrandRussell · 08/01/2018 17:13

"These are the sort of questions Richard Dawkins and his ilk enjoy pondering, and are grossly offensive, quite frankly."

Eh?

MaisyPops · 08/01/2018 17:34

The assumption is that the leaflets are bullying and showing images of aborted foetuses etc.
If they are factually incorrect then the facts which are proven to be false

I don't agree with pro life groups, but they are entirely (and rightly) able to present their views within the law.

I personally think the BNP are a disgusting group of people, but as long as they are a political party abd abide by the law they have the right to present their views.

It's quite interesting how quickly people stop liking free speech if it means allowing a group they don't like have a platform (which seems to be happening lots at unis witj the push to 'no platform' people).

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 17:34

He's got form for putting forward "provocative" perspectives on subjects that he will never / would never have had to face himself, to "stimulate debate".

Amongst other things.

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 17:37

There's a time and a place though Maisy surely.

Like, the example above, it is perfectly fine to believe that prayer can cure cancer, it's not however appropriate to give people with those beliefs free reign to peddle their views on hosp wards.

Free speech doesn't mean that anything is OK at any time anywhere.

For this reason they are trying to / have agreed to put zones around clinics where abortions are carried out to stop pro-lifers harranguing women. I think this is a good thing.

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 17:38

some of richard dawkins tweets

MaisyPops · 08/01/2018 17:38

UpABitLate
Dawkins is just a bit of a smug twat to me.
It seems his entire persona is based on him being oh so enlightened and then telling other people why they should think like him so they can be enlightened too.

I repsect his scientific work, but his 'look at me aren't I a public philosopher poking fun at beliefs which are inferior to mine' is irritating.

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 17:41

Yes the pontificating about "rape rape" and abortion is just bleurgh shut up.

MaisyPops · 08/01/2018 17:45

Like, the example above, it is perfectly fine to believe that prayer can cure cancer, it's not however appropriate to give people with those beliefs free reign to peddle their views on hosp wards.
Free speech doesn't mean that anything is OK at any time anywhere.
I agree.
For this reason they are trying to / have agreed to put zones around clinics where abortions are carried out to stop pro-lifers harranguing women. I think this is a good thing.
I agree with this. I don't think they should be allowed there because it is threatening and intimidation.

Leaflets at a university however? I don't think that's an issue.

I took a massive issue with a group who came into school a few years back to do y7 sex and relationships education when half way through it became 'do anything, you will have sex, you will get pregnant, you will try drugs and your life will be over' (but never explicitly). A few of us did some digging because we were furious and it turned out they were some fluffy face wing of a pro life, abstinance only fundamentalist group. Lots of staff complained and they were never had back.

But if with Ks4, thry came in and discussed their views on abstinence and theirpro life view I would be happy with that because it is up front, clear agenda and can be critiqued and discussed.

Some people on here seem to be of the view that sharing pro life views anywhere a woman might see them is awful. It's not

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 17:54

"But if with Ks4, thry came in and discussed their views on abstinence and theirpro life view I would be happy with that because it is up front, clear agenda and can be critiqued and discussed."

Ah but this is the thing, they are not clear and upfront. They put out fluffy leaflets and if you go see them you get the hard sell. And of course the women who go to see them are potentially vulnerable, especially at university age which is still pretty young.

Debate with the sides clearly stated is one thing, or going to a talk where the agenda is open, that sort of thing.

This group though have strong form for lying and misleading as to what they are offering.
And if it's a general "info" leaflets table in a uni I would expect only NHS type stuff there TBH, same as I wouldn't expect to see friendly leaflets about "Just been diagnosed with Cancer? We can support you" going to the "heal with prayer" people rather than macmillan or someone, or the kindly "help with debt advice" leaflets going to Mr Loanshark's office rather than a formal vetted geuine debt advice service.

That's how I feel about it.

BertrandRussell · 08/01/2018 17:55

Oh Dawkins is a notorious arse on many subjects, I agree. Just don't see his relevance here.

UpABitLate · 08/01/2018 17:57

The poster who suggested that whether abortion should be allowed at any point should be down to the perceived value of the people involved.

This is an area dawkins has form in.

I think using a "value" scale around this is an appalling idea as much of the world sees women as very low value indeed.

MaisyPops · 08/01/2018 18:06

UpABitLate
I do see where you're coming from.

Have we had clarification on how/where these leaflets were and who they were from?
I would feel differently if they were part of a medical advice display than if thry were on a leaflet table in tje students union if that makes sense.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/01/2018 05:35

They were on a table in a main part of the university building near reception

OP posts:
DrMarthaJones · 09/01/2018 08:20

He's got form for putting forward "provocative" perspectives on subjects that he will never / would never have had to face himself, to "stimulate debate

And? Why should he not? In the abstract, as a philosophical exercise, thats what we should all be doing.
Dawkins never stood on a street corner harrassing women with fake images like SPUCers, so how is it relevant here?

BertrandRussell · 09/01/2018 08:49
UpABitLate · 09/01/2018 13:39

Erm it was a throwaway comment!

Obviously a few Dawkins fans here Grin

He has said that babies with Down's Syndrome should be aborted, no question about it, based on the kind of judgements around value that the PP suggested would be a good basis for deciding whether abortion can happen.

These comments of his were very famous and the comments of the PP reminded me of him, is all. Interesting that it's this out of all the things that have been posted here that is causing a kerfuffle Grin

BTW of course he can say what he likes but I think his "I'm a professional philosopher simply raising some interesting hypotheticals" stuff is a bit thin when he comes out and starts making the sort of comments he has about women, drinking and rape, when clearly it's not so much about presenting interesting questions to stimulate debate and more about revealing what his personal views are on matters where he has no "skin in the game". That oversteps a mark. And anyway, the idea that drunk women get what's coming to them is hardly a controversial position is it, it's what the majority of people in most countries around the world believe after all.

UpABitLate · 09/01/2018 13:43

Bit off topic Smile

Short version:

PP said whether women should have abortions could be decided based on the relative value of the woman and the foetus,

And that made me think of RD and his comments about abortion.

Nothing more to read into anything than that.

grannytomine · 10/01/2018 12:21

Dawkins never stood on a street corner harrassing women with fake images like SPUCers, so how is it relevant here? I'm sure he hasn't but pro choice campaigners stood on my high street harassing me, and probably others, to sign a petition demanding easier access to abortion. I had a toddler and a new born baby and I was upset at them saying, "You will obviously support this." It felt like they were saying I must have wanted an abortion, probably hormones but they weren't bothered and continued to harass me.

BertrandRussell · 10/01/2018 12:26

“I'm sure he hasn't but pro choice campaigners stood on my high street harassing me, and probably others, to sign a petition demanding easier access to abortion”

Did they try to force you into having an abortion and tell you that you would be spiritually, psychologically and physically damaged for life if you didn’t have one?