Princeton pro-life group kicks off advocacy week

The Princeton Pro-Life student group sponsored a panel discussion on abortion last night featuring four speakers, each representing a different pro-life argument. Few if any opposing viewpoints were heard from the audience of about 65 during the question-and-answer session held afterward.

Yesterday's panel on "Roe v. Wade at 30" in McCosh 50 marked the beginning the student group's first annual "Respect for Life" week, which runs until Friday. The event comes after the Jan. 22 March for Life rally held in Washington, D.C., that observed the 30th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion.

The first speaker was visiting politics professor Hadley Arkes. Arkes spoke on potential legal challenges to the present law, which, he said, created a right that "now seems firmly entrenched and almost impossible to divulge." But "the energy and enthusiasm" of the pro-life camp is up, he said, citing a bill signed into law by President Bush in August banning live-birth abortions as an effective starting point for future legal challenges.

Seana Sugrue, a part-time lecturer in the University's politics department, presented a woman-centered approach to the fight against abortion.

"I wasn't always pro-life," she said. "It took the experience of being pregnant for the first time and seeing an ultrasound . . . to realize my position was based on ideology and not the facts."

Sugrue suggested the pro-life movement should listen more to the opinions of the majority of Americans — who are in neither camp, but rather in the "mushy middle," she said.

She was followed by Dr. Pia Solenni, who furthered the feminine-perspective argument and mentioned a study showing a strong link between abortion and breast cancer.

The last speaker was William McGurn, a member of The Wall Street Journal's editorial board and the Council on Foreign Relations. McGurn spoke on the role of media and politics in the battle over abortion. Members of the pro-life movement, he said, have been "presented as extremists, regular[ly] portray[ed] as Christian zealots."

He said that portrayal and the unwillingness to compromise on the part of pro-choice advocates has contributed to "an orthodoxy whose sustenancy lies not in persuasion but in denial."

No protests or disturbances interrupted the panel discussion, which was observed by a public safety officer stationed at the back of the lecture hall.

Daniel Mark '03 said he enjoyed the discussion and the wide range of opinion among the four presenters, but expressed surprise at the low turnout for the panel.