This Wednesday, when I stepped out of my dorm in the Gold Coast cluster, I was shocked and dismayed. I was stunned by the "Cemetery of the Innocents" display 546 flags on the Gold Coast lawn set up by the student group Vita Clamantis. Although the organizers intended the demonstration to "ask for forgiveness" and not "condemn," the display was a direct attack on women who had exercised their constitutional right to have an abortion.
This expression of "free speech" attempts to shine light on the 54.6 million abortions that have taken place since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 ("Organization plants flags to protest abortion," April 19). I use the word "abortion" to describe what this flag display represents because "abortion" is an objective term used to characterize a strictly medical procedure. On the other hand, Vita Clamantis employs words that fall within the category of emotional language such as "death," "cemetery" and "innocent." In doing so, they attempt to manipulate the public's emotions rather than use logic to make solid arguments.
By labeling abortions as "deaths," Vita Clamantis voiced its view that life begins at the moment of conception, and that abortions meant the murder of "innocent" human beings. Thus, the implication in the display was that the women who have had abortions in the United States since 1973 were responsible for 54.6 million murders. The use of the American flags further denotes the idea that the abortions, and consequently the women who had them, were un-American. Such advertising therefore constitutes a direct attack against these women and individuals who supported them in their decision. For Dartmouth women who have had abortions and pro-choice individuals, Vita Clamantis' overtly incendiary message was very hurtful and alienating. Granted, while Vita Clamantis did have the right to express this point of view, I contend that the display was more than unnecessary: It was extremely ineffective in fostering what could have been a thoughtful conversation. It was a distraction from the real question that pro-choice and pro-life advocates both should aim to answer: How can we improve the lives of people so that abortion doesn't need to even be in the picture?
In his email to one of my peers, the president of Vita Clamantis Robert Smith '14 expressed that his organization's intention was not to offend but to stir up thoughtful dialogue about the pro-life perspective. But the use of American flags for a controversial cause like abortion is an offensive move that is anything but thoughtful. It disregards the historical meaning of the American flag as a symbol for the country's unity and strength. Furthermore, Vita Clamantis' flag display eerily matched that of veteran cemeteries used to commemorate soldiers who have sacrificed their lives for the ideals of this country. To associate the apparent "deaths" of unborn cells with the perceived honorable deaths of soldiers is wholly disrespectful.
Perhaps it would have been more productive if, more in advance of setting up the display, Vita Clamantis had notified the Dartmouth community about the forum they were holding so that more students would have been able to attend and prepare. Many of us became aware of what was happening upon seeing the flags in the morning and weren't able to participate in what might have been a valuable opportunity to discuss an issue that is so important to many of us. While there is much on which we may disagree, surely a conversation in which both sides participate and don't feel attacked is a more productive way of finding common objectives.
Other social movements on campus, such as Occupy Dartmouth, have demonstrators actually present at the site of protest. This allows the inquiring passerby to ask questions and to engage in constructive dialogue throughout the day. Since this flag display had been predictably upsetting to many, Vita Clamantis should have at least stood by the flags they had so cautiously put up when all of campus was asleep.
So Vita Clamantis, by all means, go ahead and let yourselves be heard. After all, it is free speech. And in the end, there should be many areas in which we can all find common ground. But next time, think again about how you issue your messages so that you don't alienate those who would be willing to listen.
