APRIL
      5,
      2005
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Continued
      from
      page
      5
     
    

    
     
      UPEI
      Students
      for
      Life
      is
      a
      pro-
     
     
      life
      campus
      group
      that
      will
      head
      off
      its
     
     
      first
      year
      as
      a
      society
      in
      the
      upcoming
     
     
      2005-06
      school
      year.
      Unfortunately
      we
     
     
      have
      not
      been
      able
      to
      attack
      all
      the
     
     
      world’s
      injustices
      in
      the
      3
      weeks
      we’
      ve
     
     
      been
      a
      society.
      But,
      we
      do
      plan
      to
      work
     
     
      closely
      with
      organizations
      like
      PEI
      Right
     
     
      to
      Life
      to
      promote
      awareness
      and
     
     
      education
      on
      life
      issues
      such
      as
      abortion
     
     
      and
      euthanasia.
      We
      are
      interested
      in
     
     
      exploring
      and
      encouraging
      positive
     
     
      choices
      (ie.
      adoption).
      We
      are
      both
     
     
      politically
      and
      personally
      for
      life.
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Thanks
      for
      your
      concerns,
     
     
      If
      you
      wish
      to
      contact
      the
      society,
      you
     
     
      can
      do
      SO
      at
     
    
   
   
    
     
      upei_students_for_life@hotmail.com
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Sincerely,
     
     
      Maria
      Trainor
     
     
      Dear
      Mr.
      Editor,
     
    

    
     
      I
      am
      writing
      in
      regards
      to
      the
     
     
      letter
      published
      in
      the
      March
      30th
     
     
      edition
      of
      The
      Cadre,
      concerning
      the
     
     
      validity
      of
      the
      pro-life
      argument.
      Iam
     
     
      somewhat
      confused
      by
      many
      of
      the
     
     
      points
      that
      the
      writer
      made,
      especially
     
     
      in
      regards
      to:
      people’s
      unworthiness
      to
     
     
      define
      what
      is
      just
      and
      the
      contradiction
     
     
      between
      being
      personally
      pro-life,
      but
     
     
      politically
      pro-choice.
     
    

    
     
      The
      writer
      of
      last
      week’s
      letter
     
     
      questions
      how
      pro-lifers
      can
      define
      what
     
     
      is
      just.
      People
      have
      been
      defining
      what
     
     
      is
      just
      for
      endless
      ages.
      Justice
      is
      defined
     
     
      through
      sound
      arguments
      and
      dictated
     
     
      by
      reason,
      conscience,
      and
      a
      natural
     
     
      sense
      of
      what
      is
      fair
      to
      all.
      Itis
      supposed
     
     
      to
      be
      free
      from
      favoritism
      or
      self-interest
     
     
      or
      bias
      or
      deception;
      or
      conforming
     
     
      with
      established
      standards
      or
      rules.
     
     
      Think
      of
      female
      suffragettes:
      was
      it
     
     
      wrong
      for
      them
      to
      define
      justice
      as
     
     
      equal
      voting
      rights
      for
      men
      and
      women?
     
     
      People
      can
      and
      will
      define
      what
      is
      just,
     
     
      and
      those
      who
      consider
      abortion
      to
      be
     
     
      a
      serious
      act
      of
      injustice
      have
      the
      right
     
     
      to
      make
      the
      statement,
      based
      on
      sound
     
    
   
   
    
     
      arguments,
     
     
      Secondly,
      I
      am
      perplexed
      at
      how
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
      the
      writer
      could
      consider
      herself
     
     
      personally
      pro-life,
      but
      politically
      pro-
     
     
      choice.
      With
      such
      a
      moral
      issue
      at
      hand,
     
     
      how
      can
      there
      be
      a
      separation
      between
     
     
      the
      two?
      :
      If
      she
      personally
      feels
      that
     
     
      abortion
      is
      wrong,
      but
      politically
      feels
     
     
      that
      it
      is
      right,
      it
      is
      like
      saying
      that
      she
     
     
      would
      never
      abuse
      her
      own
      child,
      but
     
     
      she
      does
      not
      mind
      if
      other
      people
      abuse
     
     
      their
      children.
      The
      statement
      is
     
     
      contradictory.
     
    

    
     
      I
      do
      have
      another
      question,
      if
      I
     
     
      may.
      I
      am
      wondering
      ifa
      person
      does
     
     
      not
      become
      a
      person
      at
      conception,
     
     
      then
      when
      does
      personhood
      start?
      The
     
     
      question
      of
      when
      personhood
      begins
      is
     
     
      relevant
      because
      if
      a
      fetus
      is
      human,
      I
     
     
      think
      everyone
      will
      agree
      that
      it
      should
     
     
      not
      be
      killed
      -
      we
      do
      not
      kill
      a
      human
     
     
      alive
      for
      4
      years,
      how
      is
      it
      right
      to
      killa
     
     
      human
      alive
      for
      five-minutes?
      If
     
     
      personhood
      does
      not
      begin
      at
     
     
      conception,
      is
      it
      1
      minute
      after
     
     
      conception,
      6
      months
      after
      conception,
     
     
      4
      years
      after
      birth,
      25
      years
      after
      birth
     
     
      or
      60
      years
      after
      birth?
      If
      not
      at
     
     
      conception,
      is
      there
      a
      little
      light
      that
      goes
     
     
      off
      signaling
      personhood?
     
    

    
     
      These
      questions
      are
      just
      a
      few
     
     
      thoughts
      on
      my
      part.
      I
      am
      very
      happy
     
     
      that
      the
      writer
      of
      the
      article
      in
      question
     
     
      started
      off
      this
      discussion.
      Abortion
      is
     
     
      a
      serious
      question
      of
      justice
      that
      should
     
     
      concern
      every
      human
      being
      -
      male
      or
     
     
      female
      -
      and
      the
      topic
      needs
      to
      be
     
     
      discussed.
      With
      315
      abortions
     
     
      happening
      everyday
      in
      Canada
      alone,
     
     
      not
      to
      mention
      the
      150
      thousand
     
     
      mothers
      and
      fathers
      of
      high
      school
      and
     
     
      university
      age
      who
      have
      been
      seriously
     
     
      wounded
      physically,
      emotionally
      and
     
     
      spiritually
      by
      the
      unspeakable
      crime,
     
     
      abortion
      is
      a
      portion
      of
      the
      pro-life
     
     
      argument
      that
      should
      be
      discussed,
     
     
      especially
      on
      campus.
     
    

    
     
      I
      only
      wish
      that
      instead
      of
     
     
      threatening
      the
      pro-lifers
      as
      people
      and
     
     
      considering
      herself
      to
      be
      a
      constant
     
     
      thorn
      in
      their
      side,
      that
      the
      writer
      would
     
    
   
   
    
     
      step
      up
      to
      mature
      and
      serious
     
    
   
   
    
     
      discussion
      about
      abortion.
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Sincerely,
     
     
      Maureen
      O’Connor
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Dear
      Mr.
      Editor,
     
    

    
     
      There
      is
      a
      certain
      responsibility
     
     
      that
      comes
      with
      being
      a
      political
     
     
      representative
      figure.
      For
      the
      purpose
     
     
      of
      this
      article
      I
      have
      defined
      this
     
     
      responsibility
      as
      the
      constant
      balancing
     
     
      of
      practical
      political
      concerns,
      and
     
     
      ideal
      political
      concerns.
      Practical
     
     
      political
      concerns
      are
      those
      involving
     
     
      basic
      financial
      issues
      and
      deadlines,
     
     
      while
      ideal
      political
      concems,
      in
      the
      case
     
     
      of
      the
      SU,
      involve
      basic
      democratic
     
     
      principles
      (perhaps
      a
      respect
      for
      the
     
     
      equality
      of
      individuals,
      etc...).
      The
     
     
      current
      SU
      is
      feeling
      the
      pressure
      of
     
     
      balancing
      these
      concerns
      in
      the
      face
      of
     
     
      contentious
      election
      issues.
     
     
      Unfortunately,
      from
      what
      has
      been
     
     
      revealed
      so
      far,
      there
      is
      an
      imbalance
     
     
      of
      concerns,
      which
      seems
      to
      give
     
     
      pragmatism
      ultimate
      priority
      over
     
     
      political
      ideals.
      This
      is
      a
      situation
      of,
      or
     
     
      which
      will
      lead
      to,
      political
      mediocrity.
     
     
      In
      the
      following
      passage
      I
      will
      outline
     
     
      two
      examples
      relating
      to
      the
      recent
      SU
     
     
      elections
      in
      which
      a
      so-called
      practical
     
     
      approach
      has
      left
      discarded
      the
      political
     
     
      ideal:
     
    

    
     
      a)
      Over
      the
      course
      of
      the
     
     
      elections
      there
      were
      several
      complaints
     
     
      of
      technical
      difficulties.
      That
      is
      to
      say,
     
     
      certain
      individuals
      stated
      that
      they
      could
     
     
      not
      vote
      (at
      least
      on
      first
      try)
      for
      certain
     
     
      candidates,
      as
      the
      candidates’
      names
     
     
      would
      not
      appear
      on
      the
      online
      ballot.
     
     
      Of
      course,
      finding
      any
      evidence
      of
      these
     
     
      technical
      errors
      is
      difficult
      as
      it
      lies
     
     
      obscured
      by
      the
      vast
      indeterminacy
      of
     
     
      the
      technological
      realm.
      In
      attempt
      to
     
     
      investigate
      the
      matter
      election
      CRO
      Pat
     
     
      Curley,
      as
      he
      stated
      in
      the
      past
      issue
      of
     
     
      the
      Cadre,
      “checked
      into
      the
      matter
      and
     
     
      signed
      into
      voting
      about
      30
      times
      and
     
     
      each
      time
      the
      candidate’s
      name
      came
     
     
      up.”
      However,
      this
      method
      is
      inadequate
     
     
      and
      incomplete
      by
      the
      very
      fact
      that
      it
     
     
      relies
      on
      the
      experience
      of
      a
      single
     
     
      individual.
      It
      seems
      obvious
      that
      the
      fact
     
    
   
   
    
     
      of
      4
      individuals
      stating
      that
      they
      have
     
    
   
   
    
     
      experienced
      a
      problem
      is
      speculative,
     
     
      but
      far
      more
      concrete
      than
      one
     
     
      individual
      stating,
      also
      from
      personal
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
      THE
      CADRE
      @
      6
     
    
   
   
    
     
      experience,
      that
      there
      is
      no
      such
     
     
      problem
      (no
      matter
      how
      repetitive
      and
     
     
      frenetic
      that
      experience
      was).
      Yet,
      at
      a
     
     
      recent
      SU
      meeting,
      Curley’s
      experience
     
     
      seems
      to
      have
      held
      more
      merit
      than
      the
     
     
      experience
      of
      the
      five
      other
      candidates,
     
     
      and
      a
      petition,
      raising
      awareness
      of
      the
     
     
      possible
      technical
      difficulties
      and
     
     
      demanding
      a
      re-vote,
      signed
      by
      106
     
     
      individuals,
      including
      some
      current
     
     
      council
      members.
     
    

    
     
      When
      I
      bring
      this
      forward,
      I
      do
     
     
      not
      necessarily
      mean
      that
      the
      stated
     
     
      experience
      of
      4
      individuals
      should
     
     
      necessitate
      a
      re-vote
      (although
      a
     
     
      thorough
      investigation/evaluation
      of
     
     
      these
      allegations
      may
      prove
      this
     
     
      necessary),
      but
      rather
      that
      the
      electoral
     
     
      process,
      as
      well
      as
      the
      allegations
     
     
      themselves,
      should
      be
      carefully
     
     
      scrutinized
      and
      corrected
      accordingly.
     
     
      Interestingly,
      the
      SU
      discarded
      the
     
     
      notion
      of
      a
      re-vote
      altogether
      before
     
     
      having
      a
      full
      and
      thorough
      investigation
     
     
      of
      the
      matter,
      providing
      a
      plan
      for
      what
     
     
      seems
      to
      be
      a
      “mediocrity
      now,
     
     
      democracy
      later”
      approach.
      Pat
      Curley
     
     
      stated
      in
      a
      written
      correspondence
      to
     
     
      me
      that,
      “it
      was
      decided
      at
      the
      last
     
     
      Student
      Council
      meeting
      that
      in
      the
     
     
      future
      there
      will
      be
      a
      committee
      struck
     
     
      to
      look
      at
      the
      online
      voting
      pracess.and
     
     
      consult
      with
      computer
      services
      to
      try
     
     
      and
      improve
      the
      system.”
      I
      agree
      that
     
     
      this
      is
      a
      good
      preventative
      measure
      for
     
     
      the
      future,
      but
      it
      neither
      dispels
      nor
     
     
      addresses
      any
      of
      the
      current
     
     
      controversy
      in
      relation
      to
      the
      recent
     
     
      2005
      SU
      election.
     
    

    
     
      Although
      there
      was
      a
      general
     
     
      agreement
      among
      the
      SU
      (meeting,
     
     
      Tuesday
      March
      29")
      that
      there
      very
     
     
      well
      could
      have
      been
      a
      technical
     
     
      problem
      with
      the
      ballots,
      they
     
     
      discarded
      the
      possibility
      of
      a
      re-vote
     
     
      based
      on
      practical
      issues
      such
      as
      (1)
     
     
      the
      fact
      that,
      ifa
      re-vote
      were
      to/could
     
     
      occur
      now
      it
      would
      extend
     
     
      inconveniently
      into
      the
      exam
      period,
      and
     
     
      (2)
      that,
      more
      realistically,
      if
      it
      would
     
     
      occur
      in
      the
      fall,
      a
      whole
      summer
      of
     
    
   
   
    
     
      work
      for
      the
      SU
      would
      be
      wasted.
     
     
      Continued
      on
      page
      7