Possibly Offensive Displays at UNM

It’s always interesting when the subject of what is and isn’t acceptable propaganda for a college campus comes up – we’d like to think that most college students are mature adults that can handle adult subject matters, yet last October, when anti-abortion organization Justice for All put up a display in front of Zimmerman, many a student feather was ruffled. Why? Well, it might be due to the fact that the display, consisting of fifteen panels measuring eight feet wide by two stories tall, presented large, graphic and disturbing pictures of aborted fetuses for all to see. Or perhaps it was comparison of abortion to the Holocaust.

To be fair, those images and that comparison are extremely offensive, but it’s controversial tactics like those that grab your attention; in the Daily Lobo, spokeswoman Rebeccah Pedrick was quoted as saying, “The main reason we use this is because this causes people to stop and talk." Viewing the display on that day, it was hard to ignore the huge response received and the moth-to-flame like draw it had upon the students. If nothing else, Justice for All was getting their message heard.

But is that reason enough to display heartbreaking images that are so large it’s hard to miss while walking from class to class? Judging from the abundant outraged letters to the editor at the Daily Lobo, most students (and quite a few faculty members) did not think so and Tanya, a student writing to the Lobo, went so far as to say she felt “assaulted”. In fact, someone put use to the infamous UNM chalk messages and directed students to a “non-offensive” path. This brings up another issue: is it the responsibility of UNM to regulate these displays?

It’s hard to say and it’s definitely not a black and white issue. Banning displays because we find their images offensive sounds dangerously close to censorship, but you also have to look at the issue in the context of whether or not the pictures are proper for a learning environment. When faced with the criticism surrounding the abortion display, the dean of students commented that, “As long as an activity does not materially disrupt the teaching, learning, research or business activities of UNM, (the activity) would be approved.” This is actually a good point – the display wasn’t in classrooms and students weren’t required to stand and gawk at it like many did. I suppose a case could be made for “emotional distress” but, to be perfectly honest, that doesn’t seem like a good enough reason for banning.

If the university is to be faulted anywhere in this ordeal, the fault would lie in the fact that there were no proper warnings given out during class or before you entered the plaza. I, myself, had absolutely no idea that I could be accosted with such images as I walked to English class and, furthermore, if a student needed to get to the Humanities building, Zimmerman library or walk across campus, there was simply no way to avoid the display. However, on a campus with thousands of students, getting the message out to every single one of them would be near impossible.

Don’t get me wrong the display and its tactics were abhorrent, especially when you consider the erroneous and outdated misinformation that some of the panels contained. A better question might be whether the university has a responsibility to regulate displays that purport faulty facts to be true, but the overwhelming issue taken up here dealt with the heartbreaking photos. Even if it weren’t, it’s up to the student to cross-check facts – I’m sure the university has better things to do than research abortion.

Though their tactics were despicable and their “facts” deplorable, there’s one undeniable fact – the function of the pictures is flawless. Regardless of whether or not students were talking about the display in outrage, Justice for All accomplished its goal to create a dialogue, but does that dialogue have a place on campus? As an institute of learning, I think it does, though I may not agree with the execution.