PONDERING ON AN ACADEMIC COMMUNITY DIALOGUE ON ABORTION

The President of Providence College, https://www.providence.edu/, Rev. Kenneth R. Sicard, O.P., dared to identify a very difficult topic for the first session of his presidential series “With Mutual Respect: Discussions on Contemporary Challenges that debuted on Wednesday, September 28, 2022: ABORTION. Daring indeed given the recent Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision on June 24, 2022, https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization/ that upheld Mississippi’s abortion ban, overturning nearly 50 years of precedent (Roe v. Wade) recognizing the constitutional right to a pre-viability abortion. Roe v. Wade was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 conferring the right to have an abortion.

Roe v. Wade is the name of the lawsuit in Texas when Henry Wade was the district attorney of Dallas County, responsible for enforcing a state law prohibiting abortion except to save a woman’s life. The case ensued from the incident that involved McCorvey (pseudonym Roe), the plaintiff, whose lawyers sued Wade when she sought an abortion and alleged that Texas law was unconstitutionally vague and violated her constitutionally protected right to personal privacy. Although McCorvey made a living through speeches on abortion sharing conflicting perspectives for and against the subject, she consistently supported a woman’s right to abortion through the first trimester. In the 1973 ruling on Roe v. Wade, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-18 the Justices mostly opined, “The woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy before viability is the most central principle of Roe vs. Wade. It is a rule of law and a component of liberty we cannot renounce.″

Abortion is a contemporary and contentious subject indeed! How do we come to the TRUTH on such contemporary and divisive issues? PC’s President has demonstrated his commitment to the college mission grounded in a passionate pursuit of truth, often through the scholastic practice of disputation, wherein faculty and students consider many and divergent points of an argument in seeking the truth. It was thus inspiring to be among a respectful audience of the PC community listening to the intellectual positions based on reasoning by four exceptional Professors on the divisive subject of abortion.

Providence College Professors Abigail Brooks of sociology and anthropology and Vance Morgan of philosophy shared through the lens of Pro-Choice perspectives while Professors Sandra Keating of theology and Holly Coolman of theology shared through the lens of Pro-Life on the contentious subject of women’s right to abortion. Drawing on personal experiences, beliefs, values, and ethics these academics borrowed knowledge from their fields of expertise in discussing their positions and challenging the audience to reflect on their perspectives on the subject of abortion. Dr. Brooks leaned onto a feminist framework and argued for the right of women disenfranchised in decisions that concern them. She followed on with exploring bigger questions on health quality and argued that women’s right to quality health embodies their right to make decisions on abortion. Dr. Morgan rendered a philosophical viewpoint and began by questioning his right to participate in disputations on abortion, a subject directly connected to women. He referred to what is considered the viability of life, which itself is a contentious issue and argues for the right of women to make the decision on abortion. Dr. Keating began with a personal experience of child bearing through words that portrayed an image of life in the womb from conception defining viability and the right for the fetus to live. Dr. Coolman in the same line of argument in the perspectives of Pro-life engaged in an analogy challenging the audience to appreciate the essence of decisions to protect the life of disenfranchised individuals. Such powerful arguments presented by both sides on the subject of abortion left the audience wanting for more. There could not have been a better moderator to facilitate the dialogue: Professor Rick Battistoni, a political science faculty, in his gentle and submissive tone set the stage for an effective dialogue through amicable ground rules.

Laws on the issue of abortion continue to be constitutionally vague resulting in decisions based on personal beliefs and values. For example, when does viability of life begin? Some have argued that it begins as soon as the sperm fertilizes the egg. Others have referred to viability when the fetus is detached from the womb. Others have argued that a woman’s decision to have an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy be left to her and her doctor. Such contentious issues that challenge the nation call for in-depth reasoning and sharing of contemplations. Fr. Sicard continues to remind the college community of the “obligation to explore and discuss matters that are uncomfortable and, at times, divisive, and to do so in a thoughtful and respectful manner” given its Catholic and Dominican identity grounded in the liberal arts and committed to VERITAS. We cannot come to the TRUTH without respectfully listening to and engaging diverse perspectives that represent excellence in an academic community. Even if we do not agree on difficult subjects like abortion, it behooves the college to present opportunities for members of the community to engage in respectful dialogues in search of the truth through faith and reason.

Did personal positions on abortion change after the dialogue? The informed arguments and thoughtful responses to questions by both sides on the subject of abortion enhanced my knowledge and challenged my personal position on the subject. I continue to ponder about the motives for debates that can hardly result in a winning side. I applaud the conclusive statements by the professors on the essence of broader perspectives in discussing such contentious topics that are hard to perceive through a narrow lens. Kudos to PC for embarking on this presidential series on contemporary issues. I look forward to the next contentious issue for dialogue in the spring semester of 2023.