The Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) voted unanimously, with five abstentions, to strike down a motion to amend their discrimination on campus policy Dec. 7.
Carleton Lifeline, a pro-life group that was denied club certification, said the policy was in violation of CUSA’s constitution.
The motion to amend CUSA’s policy was moved by biomedical and mechanical engineering student Kingsley Munu. According to Munu’s motion, Lifeline felt CUSA was discriminating upon the basis of political affiliation.
The decision has even been criticized by national media, including an editorial in the Montreal Gazette and a column in the National Post.
“[The CUSA anti-discrimination policy] discriminates against students who subscribe to the belief that life begins at conception,” Munu said in his reasoning for the motion.
The motion was initially reviewed by the constitution and policy committee, whose purpose is to oversee potential amendments to CUSA’s constitution.
CUSA’s decision to deny the recertification of Lifeline as a club was based on a policy written into the policies of CUSA document, according to Sam Heaton, vice-president (student services).
Prior to receiving funding, a club must provide a budget and constitution to the Financial Assistance Committee for Clubs and Societies, and be certified by the clubs commissioner.
“These must be in order with CUSA’s constitution and policies document,” Heaton said.
The discrimination on campus policy states that any actions that “seeks to limit or remove a woman’s right to choose her options in the case of pregnancy will not be supported.”
Lifeline claims the section of the policy violates CUSA’s constitution, which states that CUSA will maintain an “academic and social environment free from prejudice, exploitation, abuse or violence on the basis of, but not limited to, sex, race, language, religion, age, national or social status, political affiliation or belief, sexual orientation or marital status.”
In the constitution and policy meeting held Dec. 2, 56 members voted against the motion with two abstentions, Heaton said.
Lifeline said the decision not to certify them was about silencing dissent. “CUSA is an organization whose mandate is to represent all undergraduates,” Munu said during the Dec. 7 meeting.
While speaking to the discrimination on campus policy, he said that “[CUSA’s policy] discriminates against students on campus, even women.”
Drawing attention to the fact that Lifeline’s president, Ruth Lobo, was a woman, Munu addressed concerns that Lifeline wanted to control women’s bodies.
“[CUSA policy] is not to fund advocacy that removes a woman’s right to choose. It’s not that we won’t fund pro-life groups, rather we won’t fund groups who actively strive to remove a women’s right to choose,” Heaton said.
Following the question period, debate on the motion began. Justin Campbell, the computer science councillor, spoke to the religious motivation for pro-life, saying that many major religions practiced by members of CUSA prohibit abortion.
Ariel Norman, vice-president (administration) of the Rideau River Residence Association, said the motion was, “advocating for taking away choice.”
No councillors voted in favour, despite several voicing concern that CUSA was taking a political view that alienated some of their membership.