APRIL 5, 2005

Dear Mr. Editor,

Mr. Editor, I write to you in response to an article published in the March 30th, 2005 issue of The Cadre. The article I’d like to bring to your attention is found on page 4 of the newspaper and is entitled, “UPEI Student Wins Award at Model UN Conference,” written by Kimberley Johnston. After reading the article myself and speaking with other members of the UPEI Model UN conference delegation, we have come to the consensus that the article does not accurately reflect events that unfolded at the conference in Ottawa in early March. References to police visits and drug-use were exaggerated.

Although important, we did have one noise complaint (which I don’t think is too bad for 15 people), I feel that the article’s references to racism need to been addressed. All references - inthe article to racism were based on rumor and were completely false. The portrayal of events in the article seemed to be designed only to inflame the issue. I was completely surprised to hear about the stories that apparently occurred during our stay in Ottawa and the extent to which everything had been blown out of proportion. That said, it is unfortunate that the author of this article based her story from these rumors. Especially on the subject of racism. The author made it seem although she could not get a clear picture on the question of racism during the trip, implying that there is still a possibility that there is any truth to the allegation. Racism is an issue that is to be taken seriously and not used as a tool to get readers attention in Cadre articles. If these rumors were true it is important that the student body be informed but why use this topic to add some spice to a newspaper story especially based on false allegations. Such allegations can have a negative effect on the people involved with the conference as well. The students involved with the conference do not

need stories published in the student newspaper implying that their group may have been involved in racism; the integrity of all students must be respected.

Thanks, Zain Esseghaier

Dear Mr. Editor,

This letter is in response to Grace Kimpinski’s letter that was published in the March 30, 2005 edition of The Cadre. Ms. Kimpinski wrote a letter to the editor addressing her opinions towards a pro-life presentation she attended on March 15th, 2005. She felt the presentation gave shallow and one- sided arguments, needed to separate personal choices from the political ones, and ignored the “larger picture” ofabortion.

Talso attended this same pro-life presentation, but unlike Ms. Kimpinski I felt the presentation really got to the heart of the issue surrounding abortion, which is whether or not a human fetus has the same value as a human who is born.

I learned a lot of interesting facts at this presentation. For example; from conception I independently contained all the information that was needed for me to develop through all of the stages of a human life. This means I was a complete separate being from my mom as I grew in her womb, and for this reason I find it hard to understand why Ms. Kimpinski called abortion a personal decision. Is there not two people involved in the decision to have an abortion?

I realize that I am assuming the fetus is a person. I only assume this because I find it hard to rationalize how I could be a person in every stage of life except the first one. I can not help but feel sad that society considered me an okay thing to kill when I was ina

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

womb.

I thought Ms. Kimpinski brought up excellent issues of injustice that surround abortion which she called the “bigger picture.” These issues included, better social assistance, improved sexual education etc. Working towards improving Canada’s educational and social programs would help prevent unwanted pregnancies and hence a pro- life group should be concerned about them for the sake of the mother and her unborn child. However, we can not forget that social and educational programs would be irrelevant to whether or not abortion is acceptable. Ifa fetus is a person we would not judge whether it was okay to kill her depending on how good government policies around parenthood were. Should the problems that cause women to have unwanted pregnancies be solved at the expense of the life in her womb?

It is clear that the only debate surrounding the morality of abortion is whether or not a human fetus has the same value as human who is born. Iam sorry if this offends anyone but I wish our world could value all life in and of itself and not think that our worth and dignity can be measured at any stage ofourlives.

I hope everyone realizes that Canada no federal laws on abortion. The day before you born it was perfectly legal to have you aborted. Last year about 105,000 unborn humans were considered medical waste at abortion clinics in Canada alone. I urge everybody to just think about it.

Tasha MacEwen Dear Mr. Editor,

I am writing in response to a letter published in the March 30", 2005 issue regarding the ‘UPEI Students For Life’ meeting held March 15". | would like to say how lucky UPEI was to have the national director of National

THE CADRE @ 5

Campus Life Network come and offer a presentation to us. I felt it was extremely informative and successful in voicing the issue.

To the writer of the letter, I want to say thank you for being so involved in discussing this issue—no matter what “side” you are on, it is extremely important to raise awareness and get people thinking. I would, however, like to clarify a few things. First of all, I apologize that you felt the meeting was “cut-short”. If I remember correctly, you left before it was over, but even so, you did have the opportunity (which I felt you used) to voice your concerns. Secondly, this particular presentation was focused on the question of whether or not a fetus is a human life, not on social issues surrounding the raising of the child. Iam not at all saying that these are not of importance, I 100% agree that there should be stronger safety nets (I say stronger because although current programs may not be the best, they are present) for young mothers and unexpected births to ensure happy and safe lives— what I AM saying is that was not meant to be the focus of NCLN’s presentation.

I understand that you feel the other issues were neglected, but we can only tackle one thing at a time and would it not be problematic to focus solely on assistance programs? There won’t have to be such programs if life isn’t given a chance! “Pro-lifers” are not ignoring the larger issues, we are dealing with the core issue first. Social injustices after birth are everyone’s responsibility, regardless of whether you’re pro-choice or pro-life; our position is to also focus on life before birth. To say we focus too much on birth and not enough on life makes no sense. There is no life without birth. The whole purpose of such an organization is to promote respect for life— life that we feel begins at conception.

Continued on page 6