It seems like no topic or news item is safe from polarization. From health care laws to hurricanes, there is someone, somewhere making it a die-hard partisan issue.
Fortunately, Georgetown University Right to Life, the Washington, D.C. university's pro-life club, made an honest effort to cut through the division and tried to find common ground with the other side. GURTL sent an email to H*yas for Choice (the club isn't recognized by the Catholic university and as such can't use the word "Hoyas" in their name) seeking to hold an event to raise awareness of issues the two groups can agree on, such as sex trafficking and the death penalty.
Their noble and friendly gesture was met with a nonsensical and accusatory response from HFC.
It seems the only reason for them to bring up these listed topics, which were completely unprompted by GURTL, is to demonize the pro-life group by suggesting they are, or are somehow related to, Dreamer-hating, transphobic, white supremacists simply because they are pro-life.
Further down in the letter, HFC performs impressive logical gymnastics to assert, "Just as classism and white supremacy guide power structures to target historically antagonized populations, culminating in the disproportionate use of capital punishment against these bodies, it is these same systems that deny vulnerable communities their right to comprehensive reproductive healthcare, including safe, legal, and affordable abortion."
Firstly, if pro-choicers want to talk about capital punishment, they can start with the death sentences unjustly handed down to innocent fetuses every day. If they want to bring race into the conversation, maybe it's time they realize that fetuses of color are disproportionally aborted. Secondly, wanting to save pre-born humans is not the same thing as white supremacy, nor do they come from the same "power structures."
It wouldn't be a far-Left rant without accusing the other side of dehumanizing them, but of course, it was there. HFC arrogantly and dramatically wrote, "We implore you to consider the ways in which Right to Life’s mission and values disrespect the lives and humanity of our members, members of the Georgetown community, and all those whose right to agency is continually and systematically challenged and disregarded. For these reasons, we decline your request to collaborate and ask that you reflect on the ways in which your organization's annual campaigns and actions provoke pain and stigma for various communities on campus."
This egregious statement is a completely unjust demonization of Georgetown's pro-life community and pro-lifers as a whole. All it contains is an overreaction of feelings and jargon that makes me wonder if they're just making it up in an attempt to silence their opposition. They are making no attempt to actually engage with the issues at hand in a reasonable way. They're right on one thing, though: pro-life people do in fact challenge a woman's "agency" to murder a living human in her womb, for the same reasons we challenge anyone's "agency" to randomly kill someone walking down the street.
All of this is simply another iteration far-Left, pro-abortion tactics: disagreement is never legitimate no matter how well you argue your point. If you disagree with the Left, it's not because you have different ideas, it's because you're evil.
For the Left, disagreeing with them is a personal attack.
Georgetown Right to Life quickly sent a reply of their own (the link to this statement and their original email seeking common ground can be found here).
In their counter-response, author and GURTL Events Chair Flo Martinez Addiego points out that some of the opinions they hold are actually not that controversial, like sexual assault is bad, and murder is wrong. They specifically emphasized that their care for human life is indiscriminate: "This fundamental right, the right to your own life, is extended to everyone — regardless of religion, race, gender, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, etc., and we believe it a gross, and frankly untrue, simplification to claim otherwise."
Later, Addiego excellently explains how abortion is a symptom of societal problems, not a solution to them: "The most cited reasons for abortion are a fear of personal or financial ruin. Abortion is not liberation, it is submission to a system that does not care nor provide for the most vulnerable in society. Certainly you would agree that no woman should fear that her own child could be an unbearable burden, and that it is a fundamental moral failing of any society that permits it."
In closing, Addiego counters HFC's victimhood delusion by asking for a basic level of respect and fairness that the pro-choice group failed to provide: "We implore you to consider that we, too, are thoughtful and caring members of the Georgetown community deserving of respect and genuine engagement... We ask that you seriously take into account the ethical concerns that arise with regards to abortion and empathize with why we might sincerely oppose it. And we wish that you would reflect on the inherent suffering of abortion and the solutions we propose to heal a fractured society."
So thank you, Georgetown University Right to Life, for extending an olive branch to the other side and trying to find peace with each other in common causes. We fully support your kind, virtuous efforts.
As for H*yas for Choice, thanks for the laughs, but seriously, it's time to start living in reality.