CSB+SJU should accept all views on abortion

Frustration and exhaustion seem to both be trending through my recent life, both internally and externally. Internally throughout our campus culture, life and administrative decisions, and externally within our society and nation. From my perspective as a young woman studying political science here at CSB+SJU, I can’t hide my disappointment regarding CSB+SJU administrative decisions on the consistent rejection of the “pro-choice club” being allowed on campus.

Whether I am walking through Gorecki fireside or attending club rush events, I always seem to be approached by one club specifically. The “Students for Life Club” has been a prominent and outspoken club on campus, and noticeably one that continues to preach towards those who have no interest being involved with them. I also can’t say that this problem arises for me solely, as I hear the experiences of my friends and peers who dislike the tactics of Students for Life practically chasing them down with flyers as they walk to the dining hall or the Link.

I could continue to express my dissatisfaction with how this club operates, but my discontentment lies within the decisions of CSLE and the administrative club approval practices. I am specifically referring to the consistent rejection of a pro-choice club presence on campus. As college students, we stem from a variety of different backgrounds, religions and beliefs, and valid expression of these opinions shouldn’t be restricted. I also do recognize that I am not the only one who has brought this concern up within The Record, considering this conversation dates back to 1992 at least within our archives.

I understand that CSB+SJU is labeled under Catholic ideology, but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a variety of students here who don’t align with Catholicism. This also relates to specific personal thoughts or ideas of why a pro-choice club has continued to be silenced. Knowing that our campus has a mixture of contradicting morals and beliefs, it would only be reasonable that our alumni community is also characterized by their strong set opinions, specifically our donors. As a historically Catholic institution, pro-life values have been undoubtedly embedded into the community of CSB+SJU, likely relating to a dominant percentage of our alumni to be pro-life.

The theory of CSB+SJU continuing to reject this club due to their fear of losing donors and support, doesn’t seem too bizarre or far-fetched. Their donations and community outreach is undoubtedly everything to the prosperity of this institution and, it is something they couldn’t afford to lose. Knowing CSB+SJU is a private institution, they have more leverage in limiting student community and expression considering our constitutional rights apply specifically to government intervention. They are not legally obligated to uphold First-Amendment protections, which plays a massive role in their ability to reject this club without specific reasoning.

While I may not align with the ideals of Students for Life, I wouldn’t want their club to be restricted as well. The overall pursuit of this submission is to address the idea that both clubs deserve to hold a respected presence within our campus culture, neither one should face limitations, and they equally deserve the ability to organize. Putting aside individual beliefs and opinions on the subject is necessary in this conversation, considering my aim is focused on allowing both clubs to have a distinctive and active place on campus. I cannot say I understand the viewpoint of Students for Life, nor do I support their mission, but I wouldn’t restrict them for this sole reason. This ideology should also be applied to existence of a pro-choice club, even if you disagree with the beliefs embedded into these morals.

This topic and conversation is understandably heavy and seemingly despairing, considering this has been an issue before we were even alive. Perhaps, we may never see the equal representation of both ideologies among our campus, but this doesn’t mean we should abandon the fight or hold a pessimistic attitude towards the repeated failure to validate the group. Differing valid opinions shouldn’t be restricted among campus, but any progress forward is moving us in the right direction.