For young pro-lifers, the challenge is not only to reach our audience, but to be received well enough to really promote the mission.

The pro-life truths and our core message will always be simple. Public reaction is the complication. Many groups get distressed trying to predict the outcome of their events, fearing adverse reactions. Others insist that any such considerations censor our truths. Both concerns are legitimate.

 But pro-lifers are being denied freedom of speech. YouTube videos of the recent conflict at McGill University, where Jose Ruba’s pro-life lecture was disrupted, remind us how real this problem is. Past events aside, catering to our environment is not a question of self-censorship, but strategy.

The truth sets us free. We must use that freedom wisely, choosing our words and actions to best spread that freedom/truth. Being an organized pro-life club means more than sharing the message. It means making room for life in a culture of death. For some clubs the focus is to support young mothers. For others political awareness and reform are central. Others still might focus on post-abortive healing. Each of these initiatives are necessary and quite compatible, all stemming from a life-driven mission. These efforts are all so diverse that most clubs cannot participate fully in each. To succeed, clubs must choose a specific mission with real goals and measure their initiatives accordingly.

Some pro-lifers will claim that intentionally abstaining from any given event keeps us from fully embracing our duty of Christian witness. Controversy is inevitable. However, it is not equally compatible with all pro-life agendas. And while protest events are crucial to promoting awareness, these may be avoided by clubs that focus on supporting pregnant women in need. The two activities do not conflict ideologically, but together may disturb the unity of a group’s mission. Protest controversies may hinder a club’s fundraising if they already face great hostility. A lot depends on the human and financial resources for any group.

Ruba, of the Canadian Centre for Bio-ethical Reform, advises clubs that even “silent protest” be performed in an “informative” and “constructive” fashion. Likewise, I say every club must have its own silences. Each omission should be chosen as a way of emphasizing and furthering that club’s focus.

The pro-life movement is diverse, taking many different forms. In solidarity with every campus club struggling for freedom of speech, we must take ownership of these challenges. We are only truly the church of today insofar as we let the church act and speak through us, in charity and justice.

(Kupferschmidt, 22, is a Philosophy student at King’s University College at the University of Western Ontario in London, Ont.)