Most interesting about the controversy surrounding Harvard Right to Life’s preborn poster campaign is what pro-abort students are saying about its “Elena” poster series. This educational effort has resulted in repeated vandalism….
From the Oh Harvard blog, February 16:
I think I have a right to not see that crap on my way to breakfast, lunch, and dinner….Ethically charged posters like that have no place in common spaces. Quite simply, if one is pro-choice, they make you uncomfortable and annoyed…. Some things aren’t suited to cute posters with girly fonts and doodles. Some things don’t serve a real purpose….
From an article entitled, “Pro-Life Posters Spark Debate: Students rip down controversial pro-life posters in protest,” in the Harvard Crimson, March 6:
“I personally find the image disgusting and don’t want to walk past it everyday,”” said Nichele M. McClendon ’06, who said she did not tear down any posters. “It doesn’t have to do with abortion as an issue or free speeh; it’s about being decent and not being disgusting.”
Jamie R. Smith ’08… said in a phone interview that she felt the combination of a shocking picture and controversial message made the posters disagreeable to students. However, she felt that groups have the freedom to poster about causes that are important to them.
From an editorial entitled, “The Right To Reason: Recent campus abortion posters are purposeless,” by Harvard Crimson staff writer Alexandra Atiya, March 10:
The “Elena posters” are the newest tactic of Harvard Right to Life. They feature a little fetus saying, “Oh, HI! I was just celebrating all my organs and me being 56 days alive!” I am not a fan….
They seek to cause anger, not excitement. In doing so, they reveal their antagonistic purpose, implicitly admitting that their primary function is to irritate pro-choice supporters on campus.
This kind of purposeless aggression is a hurtful and unproductive way of expressing opinions….
[I]t is simply a statement of anger to express your ideas in the way of the “Elena Posters”…. [I]t’s unnecessarily divisive…. [T]his deliberately flattens an intensely painful and complicated issue. It also happens to misrepresent the pro-choice members of this campus as bloodthirsty baby killers.
I’m reminded by this story of the recent flak created when a newspaper considered ultrasound photo ads “too graphic” to run.
The pro-life movement has apparently discovered something infuriating to pro-aborts: ultrasound photos of preborn humans.