You can always rely on university students to be passionate advocates for free speech. Take Gilary Massa, a student leader at York University. Last year, after a different university slapped a ban on the phrase “Israeli apartheid,” she vigorously defended the right of student protest groups to use it. She argued the ban violated “a basic commitment to freedom of expression in the democratic context of the public university.”

Sadly, this ringing endorsement of free speech was rather selective. What it really meant was, “we believe in free speech, so long as we don't disagree with it.” A few months later, the very same Ms. Massa and the rest of the student government executives voted to ban pro-life groups from campus. But wasn't this an issue of free speech? “No, this is an issue of women's rights,” Ms. Massa told the National Post. “You have to recognize that a woman has a choice over her own body. We think that these pro-life, these anti-choice groups, they're sexist in nature.”

Pro-life groups are now about as welcome on campus as Holocaust deniers, with whom they are occasionally compared. They've been banned by student governments at Carleton, Guelph, Capilano College, Lakehead University and several others. The Canadian Federation of Students also voted to support these bans. So what happened to free speech? No, no, no, it's not about that at all! One student leader called it a “safety issue.” Another said anti-choice organizations would “take away people's rights,” and compared them to the Ku Klux Klan.

At the University of Calgary, the administration is threatening to fine, suspend or even expel a handful of activists who insist on posting disturbing graphics that compare abortion to genocide. (This makes the comparison of pro-life activists to Holocaust deniers somewhat illogical, but never mind.) Previous administrations had declared that their right to display the offensive material was protected under the Charter of Rights, but the current administration says it's not. The university will only say it is committed to “maintaining a safe and secure environment,” and has charged the students with trespassing.

Personally, I feel the same way toward people who wave “Israel Apartheid” signs as I do toward people who wave giant posters of dismembered fetuses. They're both obnoxious. And they both have the right to do it, so long as they behave themselves and don't get in my face. And if it's the revolting pictures that disturb you, then we'd better hurry up and ban images of dead Palestinian babies and flayed baby seals.

The anti-anti-choicers have picked themselves an easy target, of course. (The morally self-righteous always do.) Abortion rights are under zero threat in Canada. We're so liberal that – unlike Sweden, for example – we have no abortion law at all. This seems to suit us fine. The issue is so distracting that no federal party will ever dare raise it again.

Pro-life groups discredit themselves with their hysterical campaigns, just like protesters who accuse Israel of waging a Holocaust in Gaza. None of these absolutists are interested in a rational debate, which, at any rate, is almost impossible when the issues are as polarized as these. But why turn them into martyrs? The inconvenient thing about free speech is that obnoxious people are entitled to it, too.

“We are deeply disquieted over these developments,” said the Canadian Civil Liberties Association in a strongly worded letter last week. “At issue, in our view, is nothing less than the viability of free speech on the university campuses of this country.” But, honestly, what's changed? Students have been shouting down people they don't like for years. Human-rights commissions don't seem to put much stock in free speech, either, judging by the amount of time they spend ruminating over articles from popular magazines.

A lot of highly educated Canadians seem to think their right not to be offended is the highest right of all. If only they weren't so hypocritical about it.