[vc_row type=”in_container” full_screen_row_position=”middle” column_margin=”default” column_direction=”default” column_direction_tablet=”default” column_direction_phone=”default” scene_position=”center” text_color=”dark” text_align=”left” row_border_radius=”none” row_border_radius_applies=”bg” overflow=”visible” overlay_strength=”0.3″ gradient_direction=”left_to_right” shape_divider_position=”bottom” bg_image_animation=”none”][vc_column column_padding=”no-extra-padding” column_padding_tablet=”inherit” column_padding_phone=”inherit” column_padding_position=”all” column_element_direction_desktop=”default” column_element_spacing=”default” desktop_text_alignment=”default” tablet_text_alignment=”default” phone_text_alignment=”default” background_color_opacity=”1″ background_hover_color_opacity=”1″ column_backdrop_filter=”none” column_shadow=”none” column_border_radius=”none” column_link_target=”_self” column_position=”default” gradient_direction=”left_to_right” overlay_strength=”0.3″ width=”1/1″ tablet_width_inherit=”default” animation_type=”default” bg_image_animation=”none” border_type=”simple” column_border_width=”none” column_border_style=”solid”][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]Dear respected leaders,
Thank you for your commitment to this college and longing to serve Christ faithfully by ministering to the Westmont community. Students like myself would be in quite a mess without the hours of time you devote to improving our education.
One of the many things I have been grateful for in the leadership at Westmont College is your willingness and desire to thoroughly address the issues that arise within the fabric of the community. It is a mark of authenticity that Westmont doesn’t only address global issues, but also those that are immediately present on our campus. It is for these reasons, that Westmont, among other liberal arts schools, is known as a market place of ideas.
Having said that, I want to address an issue that I believe has continually and intentionally been ignored. If and when the college has addressed it, it has been done very poorly, in such a way that insults the issue and those passionately opposing it. I am speaking of abortion.
After my display of abortion imagery outside the dining commons last semester, it was emphatically clear that the leadership at Westmont College was strongly opposed to my tactics. My two-hour conversation with Stu Cleek and Tim Wilson confirmed that. I am not writing this letter to say that the leadership is wrong for opposing my tactics, but rather to call attention to their failure to address the issue of the use of graphic imagery in the pro-life movement, particularly at Westmont.
I would like to draw your attention to an occurrence a couple years ago. Westmont received a letter from the LGBT alumni community, regarding their disappointment with how Westmont had handled the issue of homosexuality in the past. In response, the college planned a whole focus week in the spring of 2011 to focus on LGBT issues through the lens of scripture. This week involved chapel speakers, lectures, prayer, and discussions. In other words, Westmont had an expansive and quick response to this community crisis.
In relation to the issue of abortion and the use of graphic imagery, it was obvious that many students and faculty were disturbed by my display, and discussion regarding my tactics exploded. Westmont’s only response to this particular crisis was to have a forum where people could come and share their thoughts. At the end of this forum, no consensus was established, yet ambiguity was intensified. The diction and rhetoric of the night scarily resembled relativism.
In light of the debate over the use of graphic imagery in the pro-life movement and at Westmont College, I proposed a debate, where a pro-life activist who affirmed the use of graphic imagery would debate someone from the Westmont community who disagreed with my tactics. I emailed three individuals on the leadership team who I knew disagreed with me, inviting them to participate in this debate and all three rejected. I then made sure that an all-faculty email was sent out, inviting anyone who disagreed with the use of graphic imagery in the pro-life movement to debate a pro-life activist. The only response I received was from a man who wouldn’t be willing to debate until the next school year. In the same way that Westmont recognized the importance of quickly addressing the issue of homosexuality in the spring of 2011, given the current nature of the debate, I knew that this debate had to happen soon, while the discussion was still ripe.
I believe it is a sad thing that I had to even initiate a debate, which would pierce to the heart of the matter (the use of graphic imagery) after my display. Why didn’t Westmont respond to the community crisis over graphic imagery last semester in the same way and to the same extent that they did in the spring of 2011? Why did Westmont deem the important issue of homosexuality as worthy of their time, when it is taking very few lives a year, yet almost completely ignore the issue of abortion, which is taking 1.2 million babies’ lives a year in the United States? Why, after I proposed a debate that would allow the community to talk about and hear both sides of the very thing they disagreed about (graphic imagery) didn’t the leadership make an effort to select an individual to debate a pro-life activist?
I am deeply troubled by Westmont’s apparent selectivity in the issues they address for the community. What does a Christian college look like to the world when it refuses to take controversial issues like abortion head on? How will Westmont’s moral neutrality on the issue of abortion (evidenced by their refusal to take a pro-life stance) affect their witness for Christ? I am referring to my proposal for Westmont to take a stance against the injustice of abortion and their response that they won’t. Will such detrimental moral neutrality seep into any other issues at Westmont?
I cannot seem to reconcile this portion of our community life statement with the current predicament I have just laid out:
Learning depends on truth-centered attitudes. It thrives in an atmosphere of discriminating openness to ideas, a condition that is characterized by a measure of modesty toward one’s own views, the desire to affirm the true, and the courage to examine the unfamiliar. As convictions are expressed, one enters into the “great conversation” of collegiate life, a task best approached with a willingness to confront and be confronted with sound thinking.
This portion of our community life statement appears to be in direct contradiction to the actions of the leadership at Westmont as of late. As a brother in the Lord Jesus, I implore you, in fact I beg of you to take action on behalf of the unborn children. The sewers of Santa Barbara are running red with the blood of our children, and the Christian community up on the hill is doing nothing. Westmont is potentially the largest gathering of Christians in all of Santa Barbara, and yet, we are ignoring the weightier issues of the law (Matthew 23:23).
I am grateful that the Lord has laid this issue on my heart, but I grow weary and wait with anticipation for the day that the leadership at Westmont will take the lead and rise up to the occasion; to “speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves” (Proverbs 31:8). Whether you approved or disapproved of my display last semester, we can no longer say that we do not know what is happening to the precious unborn human persons. God is watching and waiting for His people to protect His children; a nation yet unborn (Psalm 22:31).
“Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say, ‘But we knew nothing about this,’ does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?” -Proverbs 24:11-12
Seth David Gruber
Right to Life Club President
Class of 2014[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Well said. I hope you get the response demanded here. Diana Gruber [email protected] As for me and my household, we will choose the Lord.
Hi Seth, perhaps the LGBT alumni got a swift response because they tend to agitate for what they want. If they thought 100 people would show up on campus over your issue they might respond to you too. Yes,
The burning question is why are they silent? We just attended a pro life meeting at the Arlington. It looked like 100,000$ was raised for the local pro life clinic, Network Medical. Another question is what pro life methods get the greatest response. Those most active in the movement seem to believe based on their experience that more money saves more lives. I’m glad too that God has called you to this issue. I hope you see a turnaround in Westmont’s attitude before you graduate.
Sue Davies
I’ve just been thinking about how many people owe you an apology. You received so much criticism for holding up the posters, because they were “offensive and too graphic,” but when you made a way for them to speak publicly and defend their stance, (offering a debate of the pros and cons of using graphic imagery), they refused. The hypocrisy of the whole debacle is stinging. The school newspaper? have they stayed silent on this double standard? It all reeks. I know that you are not looking for an apology – however it is due.
I used to consider myself a fairly staunch pro-life advocate, but many of your recent tactics (including this article) have made me seriously reconsider my position.
People like you, who twist Christ’s message of love so they can use it as a weapon of hate, make me sick.
Could you clarify what is meant by “twist Christ’s message of love”? And what do you mean by when you use the phrase “Christ’s love?”
Hi Seth,
I’m a little confused by two things in your letter. Are you upset about how Westmont has responded to your position on abortion, or the tactics you used to advertise your position? I think these are separate conversations being melded into one.
You also note that you’re disappointed Westmont’s only response was holding a forum. I’m trying to understand why this response wasn’t good enough? A forum seems like a great way to allow people to discuss this topic.
Hey Lesley. I’m saddened by Westmont’s lack of any position on abortion. They are completely morally neutral on the issue of abortion. They were opposed to my tactics, which is fine, but when I proposed a debate over the very thing they disagreed with me about (graphic imagery), they would not offer someone to debate.
The forum that was held was a train wreck. Nothing was established. It was more of a “come and share your thoughts” night. Everyone got to complain or express their thoughts and then it was over. No discussion about my tactics or trying to establish the best, clear way foward.
Are there other issues that Westmont has taken a formal position on? (I didn’t realize they take formal positions on anything.) Are you wanting to see something in the the college’s Statement of Faith and/or Community Life Statement? To me, and I think to most Christians, the bible is very clear about abortion. Because Westmont is very clear they are “committed to Jesus Christ and belonging to the worldwide evangelical Protestant tradition” I’m trying to understand why the college needs to take a formal stand on this issue?
I apologize if I’m sounding critical…I don’t mean to be. I’m very much pro-life and was quite active in several pro adoption minisitries at Westmont when I was there. I guess I’m just trying to better understand where you’re coming from.
Thanks for your questions Lesley. I would agree with you; it seems that Westmont would naturally be prolife. The problem is that Westmont has many pro-abortion faculty/staff, and students. It’s not an agreed upon issue on campus. It is for this reason that I have suggested and asked that we take a formal position and also follow up on that position by addressing the issue in a completely pro-life manner and treating it on par with the other social injustice issues we address.
I would imagine you mean there are some faculty and students who are pro-choice (rather than pro-abortion)?
I think it’s great you have asked Westmont to address this issue. I also think it’s very fair of them to choose not to take a formal stand. There could be a wide variety of reasons they haven’t done so and I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt because, in my experience, there are many, many wise and Christ loving faculty and staff on campus.
An article I read this week that maybe you’d enjoy, or perhaps it might just be food for thought on where Westmont is coming from? (I am only hypothesizing here.) https://storylineblog.com/2013/04/22/talking-points-for-the-pro-life-movement/
Thanks for your passion and love for the unborn.
No. I do mean pro-abortion. Pro-choice is a deceitful lie that turns the abortion issue into a subjective, preference claim. We have to ask, “What is being chosen.” What’s being chosen is the tearing apart of an unborn baby’s arms, legs, head, etc… That should not be a choice that is legal and protected. I’m pro-choice in the sense that I believe women should have the right to choose who they want to marry, where they want to work, where to go to school, etc.. But I’m not for the choice of butchering unborn children. So pro-choice is really pro-abortion.
There truly are many wonderful, Christ-loving people at Westmont, but like us, they are not perfect and this is an issue that is being ignored on our campus. I believe you understand how horrific the practice of abortion is. How could it be fair for them to remain morally neutral? It’s certainly not fair to the 25 unborn children who are losing their lives in Santa Barbara each week through legalized abortion. It’s certainly not fair to the women at Westmont who are contemplating abortion or have had abortions and need forgiveness and healing. Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”