What about the Notre Dame 88?

Your name

Fri Jan 29 2010 14:12

A hand-held device that could monitor a woman's fertility would go a long way in keeping unwanted pregnancies to a minimum, respect the dignity of a woman's reproductive identity, foster love, and make abortion something of the past. Ignorance is what keeps it legal, and it is not a freedom issue. It is not being able to easily read body signs that keep women in a kind of bondage of ignorance.

Diane M. Spicer

Mon Jan 25 2010 13:54

Fr. John Jenkins,

I am requesting that the Saint Joseph's County District Attorney drop charges against the Notre Dame 88.

Eric

Sat Nov 21 2009 22:16

"The Notre Dame 10 were students. The Notre Dame 88 were not. That's the primary difference as to why people continue to mark the anniversary of the day that 10 students were expelled and no one will be discussing the day 88 people were arrested to protest on a campus that was not their own in 40 years - no matter how peaceful they were being.
The people standing on Angela Blvd. weren't arrested and they held much more incriminating pictures of things small children who inevitably drove by with their parents should never be exposed to. But they did not trespass onto a private campus. Those praying and singing hymns did. It's as simple as that. They were trespassing.

The Notre Dame 10 were not. They were students at the university. They had a right to be there. That is what made their story special. "

-Exactly, Donna. I'm glad some people have common sense like you do.

Tom

Sat Nov 21 2009 22:13

"Free speech is a Constitutional right. Please don't make it sound like they were given special privileges"

The protesters were clearly allowed to demonstrate their cause. I was making the point that people can't claim that the protesters were unfairly treated; considerering they were allowed to do everything but demonstrate on campus. I believe that the anti-abortion people had a right to protest, but the way they conducted themselves was dissapointing. Instead of having a sensible debate, they just shouted and showed disturbing pictures of aborted fetuses around South Bend. Is it really apporotiate to have trucks with pictures of bloody babies drive around town? It actually upset alot of children in South Bend who saw the pictures on the trucks. There was an article in the South Bend Tribune that dealt with this issue. I think that it was obscence and really took away credibility from the cause.

raycyrx

Thu Nov 19 2009 21:31

"The police wouldn't have known to arrest protesters amidst the crowds on campus if they weren't doing something disruptive enough to be noticed."

Sorry, but that's exactly what happened. Many simply marched onto campus praying the rosary and carrying a picture of Mary. One out of towner who had no idea of the injunction or arrests simply walked towards the ad building with the intention of returning his diploma. He was arrested.

Dave

Thu Nov 19 2009 20:31

Mr. Collins, you still haven't presented the slightest single bit of evidence to back up anything you've said. President Obama is by no means my "savior." I am, myself, relatively conservative, mostly libertarian. However, the Libertarian party cannot build the support to govern this country and the Republicans have COMPLETELY discredited themselves in the past eight years. Maybe, by 2012, they will have come up with a governing philosophy that can actually work, but they don't have one now. As for the notion that Obama is a socialist, that is simply ridiculous. True, he is to the left of center. He is further left than I would prefer. However, he doesn't even begin to believe that the government should have total control over the economy and the distribution of wealth. What he does seem to believe are two things: that our healthcare system desperately needs reform (it does) and that our reliance on oil from politically unstable areas costs us untold sums of money, far too many lives, and the moral high ground that should be ours as the world's largest free-market democracy.

Your name

Thu Nov 19 2009 20:14

Its disappointing to see the ND community and especially the leadership preach "tolerance and understanding" to pro-choice politicians, people whose speeches and votes cheapen innocent life, and then act so unforgiving to pro-life protesters.

its even sadder to know that the leadership refuses to excuse these people, if only out of generosity, but then says they are going to the March for Life and everyone should just start sending money.

Joseph K. Collins

Thu Nov 19 2009 16:02

George Bush was by no one's definition a "Conservative" president. True he he laid the foundation for many of the problems that the US is experiencing right now. He gave a lot of the store away year after year, but your Saviour, the current occupant of the White House has manged to compound them ten fold in just ten months!! While he's racking up frequent flier miles and cow-towing to every enermy of the US, conditions are worsening everywhere with the two wars overseas and his insatiable desire for an even bigger government. Welcome to NEW CUBA!!

Dave

Thu Nov 19 2009 15:36

Praying the rosary is not particularly disruptive. Wandering on-campus and doing something disruptive enough to warrant the attention of the police force is clearly more so. The police wouldn't have known to arrest protesters amidst the crowds on campus if they weren't doing something disruptive enough to be noticed. Otherwise, there's no way to differentiate between students and their families, and the protesters. It's not like the police can walk up and arrest someone praying on the campus of a Catholic college. They can, however, do so if said person is prominently displaying a gruesome sign of an aborted fetus in front of a 5 year old child.

Also, at this point religious conservatism has driven me insane to a degree where I am completely willing to write off the entire movement in a heartbeat. The only thing that keeps me from doing so is the fact that I am, myself, a more moderate pro-lifer. Unfortunately for my opinion of the rest of the movement, they're INEFFECTIVE in the extreme. I don't care how morally pure you are, if you can't get anything done. Legislating abortion out of existence can't be done, and loud, obnoxious protests do no better.

I believe that better maternal healthcare, maternity leave policies, and sex education can make abortion much more rare, when combined with laws that make abortion a crime when an alternative, like adoption, is practical and won't ruin the life of the mother. Women who have abortions because they can't afford to carry a baby to term should be supported. Those who have them because they don't want to should be punished.

God Himself, however, seems to have decreed that holding nuanced views and attempting to accomplish goals that cause gradual improvement are sins. Or at least that's how most of the pro-life movement seems to view it. I wish them good luck getting ANY improvement at all with the current tactics.

P.S. Free speech is a constitutional right. Trespassing is not. There is a clear difference between expressing your views in public and invading private property to harass people about them.

susie

Thu Nov 19 2009 15:30

I think you should add this to your sentence: "These brave people prayed the rosary, sang religious hymns and partook in other peaceful means of protest" including marching across campus with baby strollers holding dolls covered in fake blood.

raycyrx

Thu Nov 19 2009 15:22

"The anti-Obama protesters were given the freedom to protest outside of the campus next to the main enterance, have a plane showing an aborted fetus fly high above the campus, drive around South Bend with billboard trucks showing aborted babies."

Free speech is a Constitutional right. Please don't make it sound like they were given special privileges.

raycyrx

Thu Nov 19 2009 15:19

" I don't know about you, but I don't want my graduation turned into a political circus regardless of the provocation. "

Please explain how praying the rosary was disruptive to the graduation.

"As far as I'm concerned, the entire protest that took place outside and on our campus lost all credibility when I saw those pictures displayed in the fashion they were. "

So, you are willing to throw the baby out with the bath water? Not all protesters were displaying the images. Many who were arrested (for praying the rosary on campus) outright refused to push the bloody dolls in strollers... hence the peaceful praying of the rosary.

Tom

Thu Nov 19 2009 14:52

The protesters were warned by Notre Dame and South Bend police to stay off campus, or else they would be arrested for trespassing. The anti-Obama protesters were given the freedom to protest outside of the campus next to the main enterance, have a plane showing an aborted fetus fly high above the campus, drive around South Bend with billboard trucks showing aborted babies. The protesters wanted to get arrested in order to get media attention, which is what Randall Terry craved. The people at Angela Bld. were not affiliated with ND, which was shown when the protesters tried to ruin the senior's graduation day by heckling the President. These people should not be compared to the ND 10, because they were students.

Dave

Thu Nov 19 2009 14:23

Um... I'm not quite sure how to respond to that level of stridency. You present no evidence of anything you say and then go on to accuse us all of inaction while our nation falls apart. So, for starters, what makes you think that our President is destroying our country? And secondly, what makes you think none of us are doing anything to help, serve, or protect America? You've never met any of us. That we disagree with you politically is not sufficient reason for you to accuse us of laziness or apathy. Also, given what the past eight years of "conservative" government got us, I think a change of government is at least necessary and at most beneficial. Let the Republicans howl in the political wilderness until they come up with something resembling a plan to restore our prestige in the world, our economy, our infrastructure, our educational establishment, and our ability to combat radical Islam. So unless you've got a better plan than Obama, and are prepared to discuss it constructively, sit down and be quiet.

Joseph. K. Collins

Thu Nov 19 2009 14:14

Shame on all of you for allowing this imposter, this Communist, this outrageous excuse for a president to defame, to debase and degrade Our Lady's University with his presence. Wake up you fools, the termites of left-wing politics and radicalism are eating the foundations of your school, your community and your nation right out from under you! Nero fiddled while Rome burned. What are all of you involved in other than Obama worship, while your Rome burns???

Your name

Thu Nov 19 2009 13:37

The definition of trespassing tends to require that the person who is invading NOT be invited, permitted to engage in their current activity, or have paid you for the right to be there. I'm quite positive that the 88 people arrested on campus meet none of the above qualifications. Therefore they were trespassing. As to their arrest, I don't know about you, but I don't want my graduation turned into a political circus regardless of the provocation. If graduating seniors chose to boycott the ceremony, that's one thing. But very, very few of them wanted to see random protesters coming onto campus and ruining an experience they should be able to share with their family. Our own students purposely chose a method of protest that would not harm the experiences their friends and classmates were enjoying. These 88 people were not so courteous, and I find it entirely reasonable that the university removed them from campus, whether or not they agreed with them on a personal level.

As for the other points, I didn't see any pro-choice protests on-campus, and I was here all week. Something leads me to believe that those protesters, if any, had some basic courtesy for the graduating students. And no child should be exposed to what was being displayed outside our campus. Ever. Teaching children the truth is one thing, and I agree that sometimes graphic explanations are required to reach adults. However, we don't expose our children to the full horrors of war at age 10 or younger, nor to sex education classes, nor to the violence that occurs even in our own society. These are all a form of truth... but because something is true doesn't mean that it is appropriate. As far as I'm concerned, the entire protest that took place outside and on our campus lost all credibility when I saw those pictures displayed in the fashion they were.

raycyrx

Thu Nov 19 2009 12:45

They were trespassing. So were pro-choice protesters, and so do tens of thousands of people every football weekend. The people that were arrested were "trespassing" to protest from a point of view that the University proclaims to agree with.

Oh... and why should the truth be hidden from children?

Tom

Thu Nov 19 2009 12:34

Sure, they were trespassing. The point has been made on both sides....time to move on. But if you are Fr. Jenkins, how much of a price are you willing to pay to prove this? How many Sorin Society members have been lost over this whole incident? If losing millions is that important to Jenkins, then continue on with your game. Everyone loses....

Donna

Thu Nov 19 2009 09:45

The Notre Dame 10 were students. The Notre Dame 88 were not. That's the primary difference as to why people continue to mark the anniversary of the day that 10 students were expelled and no one will be discussing the day 88 people were arrested to protest on a campus that was not their own in 40 years - no matter how peaceful they were being.

The people standing on Angela Blvd. weren't arrested and they held much more incriminating pictures of things small children who inevitably drove by with their parents should never be exposed to. But they did not trespass onto a private campus. Those praying and singing hymns did. It's as simple as that. They were trespassing.

The Notre Dame 10 were not. They were students at the university. They had a right to be there. That is what made their story special.