We are writing in response to the publication recently door-dropped by the Harvard-Radcliffe Alliance for Life. While we take exception to this publication, we firmly support any organization's right to freedom of speech and would like to present our own reaction to the publication. Setting aside the issues of factual inaccuracy and content, we object to the publication's tone.
We consider the tone of this publication inimical to what campus debate should be. The representation on the cover is a case in point. It graphically depicts a fetus in the womb. This image appears designed to provoke an immediate emotional reaction rather than rational debate about the complex politics of this issue.
Moreover, the use of language such as "Q: What is the governing force behind the abortion industry? A: Money" (p. 10) and "abortion mills" (p. 11) contributes to the animosity and ignorance that plagues that abortion debate. The reference to the pro-choice public as "promoting abortion for their own social engineering goals" (p.10) further encourages intolerance.
Additionally, we believe that the chart on page 10, which compares the number of United States' war casualties throughout history to the number of aborted fetuses, mocks the patriotism and service of Americans who gave their lives for a country founded on the principles of freedom and choice. Altogether, the tone of the publication is fundamentally inflammatory.
We stand for a woman's right to choose. Even discounting our unsurprising disagreement with the positions taken in the publication, we feel that the language used contributes to a climate of hatred. In light of the escalating violence at women's health clinics, it is especially important to foster a degree of tolerance in the abortion debate. We consider the language of the publication particularly inappropriate to a college atmosphere that should be geared to the rational exchange of ideas and beliefs. --Jennifer R. Davis '97, Julia A. Karp '98, Tracey B. Wollenberg '97-'98, Co-Chairs of Harvard-Radcliffe Students for Choice
Read more in Opinion
Complexities Surround Gay Identities