In December of 2025, prior to making my escape home for the holidays, I found myself on the bus one day after a final exam. Typically, the advertisements on public transit are easy to dismiss and I can go about my day without paying them any attention. However, one in particular caught my eye. Looming above my head was a picture of a woman’s pregnant belly, and the outline of a child’s foot can be seen pressing outwards. The description of the picture verified that it was a “digitally altered image.” The bold text on the advertisement read:
“The unborn are not “potential human beings,” they are human beings with great potential.”
Somehow, this advertisement had crawled its way up from a billboard in the Bible Belt of the USA, out of the Handmaid’s Tale, or off your weird aunt’s Facebook page to a bus in Kelowna.
On the bottom of this advertisement from the Kelowna Right to Life Society, it states: “this is a paid advertisement. The views expressed are not necessarily the view of BC Transit or the City of Kelowna.” It seems that the BC Transit association and the City of Kelowna are attempting to remain impartial to the anti-choice sentiments represented in the advertisement, but the choice to allow it on bus routes reflect they are not committed to their mission of serving the public.
In the BC Transit code of conduct, they state that “[they] are committed to fostering equality and a culture that is free from discrimination.” However, in a dispute that occurred in December 2025, anti-abortion billboards in Kelowna were under harsh legal scrutiny for potentially violating discrimination clauses in the B.C. Human Rights Code.
In 2025, UBC Okanagan student and pro-choice advocate Sophie Harms raised funds to have a pro-choice billboard put up by the same billboard company that was presenting the anti-choice messaging. However, Harms’ request was rejected. This refusal was based on supposed policy against controversial topics such as abortion, despite the company’s history with displaying anti-abortion rhetoric.
Soon after, Harms connected with legal counsel through the B.C. Humanist Association; letters were then penned to the billboard companies to challenge their decision. The lawyers involved cited protections which prohibits discrimination based on sex — which includes pregnancy related health care — from the B.C. Human Rights Code.
Response to this from the billboard companies was a decision to change their policy related to rhetoric on abortion entirely, and they stated they would remove all anti-abortion billboards at the end of their respective contracts. Although this meant Harms’ messaging focusing on pro-choice could not be presented, the change was still accepted as a win.
Marlon Bartram, director of the Kelowna Right to Life Society, was not entirely surprised by this result and indicated that the group would “try other means, social media, radio, television, public demonstrations” to get their message through. Returning to the advertisements on the buses, the Kelowna Right to Life Society’s next target is university and college students in Kelowna.
In a newsletter published by the Kelowna Right to Life Society from October 2025, they state their advertisement “is in thirty buses that run seven days per week in the Kelowna area, including the busy routes to UBCO and Okanagan College.” They also later compare these advertisements on the Kelowna buses to their billboards, which have been a major point of contention in conversations surrounding abortion within the Kelowna area.
Rates of abortion are typically highest in 18-25 year olds, and the Kelowna Right to Life Society is placing their harmful messaging in a place where they will do the most damage. This messaging will scare viewers away from their own bodily autonomy, right to choose, and their own potential as human beings. Students face enough stressors with academic pressures, financial issues, and various other forces that implicate their lives. Spreading ideas that support stripping people of their rights over their own body is something that a society such as Canada should be far beyond.
Advocating for the restriction of an individual’s medical autonomy invades both privacy and freedom, and is certainly not something that a tasteless advertisement on public transit should be preaching. Instead of degrading people for putting their potential first, we should be supporting the choices of individuals that are made in their own best interest.
_To%20Live%20...%20Fingers%20-%20Palesa%20Kgathola.jpg)
.png){kind=small}
