This week, contributing writers responded to last week’s anti-abortion article in The Amherst Student. The response article entitled, “The Fundamental Right to Choice,” refutes many claims made in “Stand Up and Defend Life,” asserting first that fetuses -unlike newborn infants and college students -do not have “bodily autonomy and independence.” Therefore, the writers argue, abortion cannot be likened to murder, as was claimed in the anti-abortion article. Their primary assertion was that drawing parallels between the termination of a pregnancy and acts of murder, such as the Holocaust, undermines both the rights and pain of sentient human beings.
The writers also acknowledged that “Stand Up and Defend Life” at least brought a feminist issue to the forefront of Amherst College’s consciousness. The article celebrated the responses to the original article for engaging the campus in an open debate, yet the suggested that perhaps respect for the anti-abortion choice was not necessary:
“…You don’t need to be polite in the face of an argument for your rights to be taken away. You don’t need to respect an opinion if it continues the systemic oppression of every person capable of being pregnant.”
What do you think? How restrained (or n0t) should debates of this nature be?