The University of Wyoming, in cooperation with Bridge UWYO, hosted an abortion debate in the student union on Wednesday, Oct. 23. Abortion is currently one of the most polarizing issues in the United States, with an estimated 1 in 5 voters taking the issue into account for the upcoming election. Both debaters performed admirably, with excellent points being exchanged on each side.
The debate consisted of Students for Life, represented by Lucie Holt and Calvin Fertig, going up against Students for Reproductive Rights, represented by Liz Youngman and Aidan McGuire. The debate opened with the pro-choice side, with Youngman making comments about certain healthcare professionals almost universally stating that abortion is healthcare, and that what is and isn’t healthcare shouldn’t be up to the average person. She also made the point that recent studies have suggested that maternal healthcare is also being put at risk from abortion bans across the country and that women are more reluctant to go to states where abortion bans have been passed. Holt countered with the argument that, regardless of the above points, all human life has value, and that 98% of biologists agree that each human life begins at conception, having their own separate DNA and all biological material needed to create a human from the very start. Holt also argued that the 14th Amendment, which initially gave credence to Roe V. Wade with its privacy clause, supports a pro-life perspective, stating, “no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process…”
The second round of debating, with Fertig and McGuire taking part, opened with the pro-choice team. McGuire started with an argument against the fact that Planned Parenthood was selling abortion. He stated that, currently, healthcare being for profit is a separate issue in the United States, and that is by no means unique to abortion. McGuire also argued that the side that was pro-life inherently could not be, due to their policies generally putting more women at risk in situations where an abortion is required to preserve the mother’s health. Fertig countered these points by pointing out other elective surgeries that weren’t necessary or covered by health insurance, such as eye surgery, and stated that it was indeed acceptable to perform an abortion on a woman whose life was in danger, but only after every other possible method to save her life was attempted.
The abortion debate hosted by the University of Wyoming and Bridge UWYO exemplified the value of open, respectful discourse on divisive issues in this time of extreme political polarization. While both sides presented deeply held beliefs and compelling arguments that supported their respective causes, this debate illuminated potential areas of understanding between both sides. Despite their differences, both groups voiced a commitment to preserving human life and protecting healthcare quality and access. Such events emphasize the importance of dialogue, where individuals can seek common ground, respect diverse viewpoints, and pursue solutions that transcend partisan divides.
