When I first came to the University of Winnipeg, I was filled with both excitement and fear at the same time. Although in general I found that my primary focus was on the education factor of my experience (go figure), I found myself drawn into the issues addressed by the community at large. While a lot of information about such things could easily be gathered around the campus itself, I found a large portion of the information I had about the university coming from our school newspaper, the Uniter. It was in general a very biased newspaper, either dealing with political issues with a very leftward slant, or with simple non-issues at all, such as new things in sex toys, or where best to get laid in the city. But yet I continued to read, mainly because such views were interesting and insightful, even if many times they were biased, and as well a few times a good article would grace its pages (although not nearly as often as one should expect). I also felt obligated to read such things as this was one of the major outlets for information on the UWSA, a mandatory student union all students must buy into in order to attend this university. The UWSA had never inspired confidence in me on my part, but at the very least they had provided some programs for students in need of them, and I had no reason to think them as nothing more than an organization representing all students to the University faculty, and the world outside of it.
Such a view of the UWSA would not last, and soon my I would find an article in the Uniter that would show me a side of the UWSA I had never known to exist before, one which angered me so much that I began to wonder if I should even be any part of it at all.
It was the second last week of school, essays and exams were looming over my head, and in all I was quite busy in life. But as was common I picked up a copy of the Uniter. In it I found an article titled On the Limits of Pluralism[1]. “This week the UWSA Board of Directors again denied student group status and funding to a Pro-Life group. The group, whose proposal had previously been denied, requested an opportunity to present to the board. The Board denied the application once more, on the basis that the UWSA is a Pro-Choice Organization and that counseling services for potential mothers are already available as well as the support in the Womyn’s Centre”[2]
So the UWSA was a Pro-Choice organization. I had never heard such view, nor had I been asked about them when I had to pay my tuition fees over six months before that. Now I must first point out that I am neither Pro-Choice nor Pro-Life. To put it bluntly, I find both camps are filled with ignorant fools, too zealous and extreme to looks carefully at the other side. Nether group is looking for truth; rather both simply want victory over the other. Such purely rhetorical arguments I try to stay away from. Little did I realize that in fact I was supporting a Pro-Choice group while proclaiming my innocents of such involvement. A little hypocritical if you ask me.
My problem is not so much that the UWSA is a Pro-Choice group. Options are held, and I respect the Pro-Choice side of the argument. What I resent was the fact that I had no choice in making such a decision. In essence I must agree that in order to attend the university of Winnipeg, I must adhere to a certain moral code, that of the side of Pro-Choice for example, even if that code is contrary to my own. Not only that, but the group that was to make up the Pro-Life group was not one based upon outsiders, but was going to be run by student of the University itself, all of which paid tuition as well.
What about elections? The Board is made up of an elected group of persons, and as such was democratically elected by all of us. It is the decision of the student body to be pro-choice, must I not respect that? Beside the point that only 909 student, from a population of over 8000 elected the new board, my question is “Do we have to make a choice at all?” Why is it that the UWSA is pro-choice or pro-life, or any such political position? From what I understood, the University of Winnipeg Student Association was not at political organization, with doctrines, dogmas, etc. I believed it to be an objective group, merely providing services to the student body, and occasionally organizing lobbying action on issues concerning students, such as student tuition. I had always considered it to be a non-political organization.
So then what can one do? How does one resolve the issue at hand? I only see two options for those of us who hold contrary views, or simply do not want to be part of the issue such as myself. I propose a fracturing of the UWSA into two separate groups. First can be called the UWSA, whose purpose could be what I had originally believed it to be. Simply and ONLY to provide services to the student body, such as computer services, books stores, all purely academic clubs for funding, etc. No political views can be funded or addressed by this group. The other group could be known as the UWSL or the University of Winnipeg Student Lobby. This would be the political entity of the Student body, and this would be the group responsible for lobbying of the government, funding for non educational groups such as the LGBT, Womyn’s Centre, etc, and this would be the entity that would and could be Pro-Choice, Pro-Life etc. Why create these two groups? Funding for both could be mandatory for students as with the UWSA is currently now, but one can if one desires have a refund of the funding directed at the UWSL, so as to allow the student body to decide if one desires fund non-educational groups.
Such is a difficult task at hand, and many will ask which tasks go to which, organizational questions such as how are these groups run and elected. This is the only ethical way in which I believe one can organize such unions and services, otherwise we are imposing political beliefs on those that do not support them, and forcing them to fund such beliefs. The question comes down to this, does the UWSA which claims to be Pro-Choice, allow freedom of choice, even when the choice is against them?
Works Cited
Tan, Jonathan. (2004, March 25). On the Limits of Pluralism, Uniter, 5
[1] Jonathan Tan, (2004, 5)
