Carleton students' union bans abortion ban advocates

The Carleton University Students' Association (CUSA) has spawned a world of controversy by voting to exclude anti-choice student clubs from being recognized or funded by the students' union. The motion, as originally introduced on behalf of the Womyn's Centre, read as follows:

"Whereas anti-choice groups or organization compromise the personal safety and threaten the self-esteem of women who may contemplate abortion or have chosen to have an abortion, and
"Whereas CUSA prohibits harassment and discrimination on the basis of sex, gender, or gender identity, and
"Whereas every member of CUSA has the right to study, work, and live in an environment free of discrimination or harassment on the basis of sex, gender, or gender identity, and
"Whereas anti-choice groups aim to remove choice by making abortion illegal, and
"Whereas it would be impossible to make abortion illegal without violating the Canadian Constitution, by removing a woman’s right to life, liberty and security of the person;
"Be it further resolved that the Discrimination on Campus Policy be amended to include

"5. CUSA and CUSA Inc. respect and affirm a woman’s right to choose.
"6. No CUSA resources, space, recognition or funding be allocated for anti-choice purposes."

(Source: Facebook)

The current Discrimination on Campus Policy [PDF] can be found on the CUSA website. IMPORTANT NOTE: The Charlatan reports that this motion was amended during the course of the Council meeting. I do not yet know the exact wording of the motion as amended.

The minutes of the December 5 meeting are not yet online, but one can read the November 2006 minutes of CUSA Council [DOC], in which a brief debate is recorded (pages 8 - 10) between Nicholas McLeod (Carleton Lifeline) and Katy McIntyre (CUSA VP Services and mover of the motion).

A great deal of opinion has been expressed on this subject, both within the student media and beyond. The Charlatan has covered this issue extensively, including:

• "CUSA council passes controversial motion," which covers the Council debate itself
• "Is CUSA a political organisation?" - in which CUSA President Shawn Menard declares that CUSA is not a student government
  
• "Referendum required" - Charlatan editorial, supporting a referendum on making CUSA fees opt-out, on the grounds that CUSA "cannot call itself a political organization and expect access to funding from students who do not agree with the stances it takes"
• "Abortion: the right to life or the right to choose" - a general discussion of the issues
• "Why can't we all just get along?" - the text is as smarmy as the headline
• "Don't stifle discussion"
• "Questions you may have forgot to ask"
• "LETTERS: A diversity of opinions" - 8 letters, including a long letter from Sarah Fletcher, President of Carleton Lifeline

Now that the policy has been adopted, mainstream newspapers have also covered this issue, including CBC, the National Post, and the Ottawa Citizen.

CUSA put out a press release entitled "CUSA seeks to Clarify Anti-Choice amendment." In this press release, President Shawn Menard makes a number of points "in response to a disinformation campaign" waged against the students' union:

• Although explicitly anti-choice student groups would be recognized or funded by CUSA, pro-life student groups that did not seek to criminalize abortion would not be affected.
• Anti-choice student groups could continue to exist on campus, albeit without recognition from CUSA, and would be able to use University facilities that are not owned by CUSA.
• CUSA is not seeking to silence debate; after all, the CUSA motion itself inspired a tremendous amount of debate, none of which CUSA sought to censor.
  

CUSA also noted that three other Canadian students' unions had adopted similar policies: the University of Victoria Students' Society, the Memorial University of Newfoundland & Labrador Students' Union, and the Guelph Central Students' Association. (In fact, although the UVSS did at one point ban an anti-choice group, said group's status was eventually restored.) In contrast, executives at the Wilfred Laurier University Student Union (JD Muir) and the University Students' Council of the University of Western Ontario (Fab Dolan) stated that they would not support such a similar motion being adopted by their students' unions.

The Carleton University Debating Society has also published a statement, entitled "CUSA and Free Speech," opposing CUSA's decision. Carleton University published a press release entitled "Carleton University Encourages Diversity of Opinion," stating that all student groups, including groups not recognized by CUSA, would be able to book space on campus - essentially making CUSA's decision largely symbolic in its practical effect.

The blogosphere has been awash with debate and commentary. Some of the most interesting blog entries:

• A Carleton student, Doug Nesbitt, has written a very good, very comprehensive blog entry on the entire subject. Mr. Nesbitt supports CUSA's decision, and criticizes both LifeLine and the Carleton University Debating Society.
  
• The Prairie Wrangler takes up the pro-life mantle.
• Clear Grit notes that the general "CUSA-must-respect-all-viewpoints" perspective necessarily requires recognizing much more extremist groups, such as NAMBLA, etc.
• The Crusty Curmudgeon rebuts a wide variety of arguments made by CUSA, starting with the argument that "CUSA isn't a student government."
• The Volokh Conspiracy, a famous American legal blog, has a chain of blog entries on the subject.

The legal arguments surrounding this issue are truly fascinating. For example, the National Post quotes University of Ottawa professor Martha Jackman as saying:

"Essentially, a claim that a Charter right has been breached can only be brought against an entity that is part of the government, for the purposes of the Charter: The government, the state, the government or its delegates. Clearly the Carleton student association is not government. They are a private student organization, but the question can still be raised is Carleton University the government or a government delegate?"

This argument might apply to CUSA, but I doubt that it would apply to the SFSS, who's Bylaws state: "The Society shall not discriminate against any person on any ground enumerated in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the British Columbia Human Rights Code" (Bylaw 20).

Students' unions play a dual role: they are both political advocacy organisations and student service organisations. In the former capacity, students' unions take positions on a wide variety of subjects: post-secondary education issues primarily, of course, but many students' unions also take positions on a variety of other issues as well, including freedom of choice with regards to abortion. In the latter capacity, students' unions provide services to benefit their membership, including funding and support for student clubs and societies. In the former capacity, students' unions seek to represent the majority student opinion; in the latter capacity, students' unions normally seek to serve all students, regardless of their political opinion.

In my opinion, students' unions should have the right to distribute their resources as they see fit. No student group can legitimately demand that their students' union give them money, no matter how extreme. LifeLine will still be able to exist, and they will still be able to hold meetings, engage in advocacy work on campus, etc. However, a students' union ought to tread carefully before exercising this right. When I look at the official list of CUSA clubs and societies, I see a great number of clubs whose causes might potentially contravene CUSA policy (the Israel Awareness Committee, Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, and the Young Liberals, in particular). Whenever a students' union bans a club (see: Concordia Students' Union v. Hillel), controversy always ensues unless the club is near-universally despised. Time will tell whether Carleton students consider LifeLine so offensive that they want their students' union to not even recognize it as a student club.