The student news site of Mercer University

Mercer Cluster

Abortion issue sparks debate among students

clewis

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Debate in an unexpected forum (chalk) has recently erupted among Mercer students. Pro-life and pro-choice slogans littered sidewalks around campus before last weekend’s rain washed them away.

Junior Kyle Shook chalked out his thoughts about abortion twice in the last two weeks — once on the sidewalk and once in a Willingham classroom.

The first time came two Thursdays ago after Shook and a group of friends noticed a flurry of pro-life messages etched in sidewalk chalk across campus, then responded hours later with a counter-chalking demonstration from a pro-choice viewpoint.

The second time came last Thursday when Shook and a group of 23 other Mercer students formally gathered together over bean dip and brownies to discuss their interest in forming a new pro-choice student organization on campus called the Mercer Alliance for Reproductive Freedom, or MARF.

The chalking and formation of MARF during the last two weeks reflect a growing point of controversy on Mercer’s campus regarding the issue of abortion and reproductive rights, with each side making its voice heard loudly.

THE CHALKING

Mercer Students for Life, a secular pro-life student organization, set in motion a chalking war over abortion on Thursday, March 18, when its members took to the sidewalks to draw 3,500 hearts representing the number of abortions it says take place each day across the nation.

Junior Megan Hamrick, president of Mercer Students for Life, said her organization was responsible for drawing the initial hearts along with messages such as “A person is a person no matter how small” and “Women need love not abortion.”

 “I encourage open dialogue and a diversity of opinions, and have no problem with the chalking in and of itself. But when things begin to become offensive and appear discriminatory as they did in this situation, that’s when we need to be careful.” -Carrie Ingoldsby, Office of Campus Life ”

But the chalking quickly devolved into more inflammatory messages from unaffiliated students on both sides of the debate, igniting a firestorm of controversy across campus.

In one instance, pro-choice students drew a picture of a crossed-out coat-hanger with a caption reading “Mercerians against wire hangers,” accompanied by a declaration that “College parties = unwanted babies.” Pro-life chalkers fired back at the sketch with comments such as “A human life is nothing to party with” and “Save a life. Save yourself for when you’re ready.”

Carrie Ingoldsby with the Office of Campus Life was alerted to the potentially offensive chalkings Thursday afternoon, then poured water on the markings after deciding that they violated Mercer’s community of respect.

Ingoldsby said the decision to wash away the offensive chalking was not intended as a form of censorship, but rather as way to ensure that offensive messages aren’t encouraged on campus.

“I encourage open dialogue and a diversity of opinions, and have no problem with the chalking in and of itself. But when things begin to become offensive and appear discriminatory as they did in this situation, that’s when we need to be careful,” Ingoldsby said.

Ingoldsby added that she does not believe Mercer Students for Life officially took part in the offensive chalkings after having looked into the incident.

Shook said he and his fellow pro-choice counter-chalkers also had nothing to do with the offensive comments, as they only wrote rational responses to what they felt were misleading pro-life arguments.

“I personally don’t regret counter-chalking, since I was merely responding to inaccurate information about abortion, feminism and Planned Parenthood that the other side had presented. It was already out there, so I felt like I had a duty to respond,” Shook said.

Shook called the wire hanger comment an “outdated slogan” for the pro-choice movement that should not be used.

Hamrick added that Mercer Students for Life will continue to chalk hearts for the next 24 days as part of the group’s 35-day campaign to raise awareness about pro-life options.

THE DEEPER ISSUES

Beyond the chalking incident lie deeper divisions between the two camps about whether contraceptives and abortions should be available to Mercer students, as well as the types of educational resources that should be offered by the university.

Suzanne Stroup, a sophomore journalism and theatre major who attended the MARF interest meeting last Thursday, said she got involved with the new group because she felt like women’s issues and the pro-choice viewpoint wasn’t being adequately represented on campus.

“I feel like, on our campus, the pro-choice voice is missing. The other side has spoken up loudly, but we haven’t gotten our voice out there,” Stroup said.

But Hamrick from the Mercer Students for Life said she thinks the problem is exactly the opposite, and that the pro-life argument has been misunderstood.

“I feel like most of campus is pro-choice, and that the ones who are pro-life are apathetic about the issue,” Hamrick said.

The major point of contention between the two groups concerns the availability of contraceptives, especially emergency ones such as “Plan B.”

Hamrick said Mercer Students for Life takes no official stance on contraceptives, but that she believes oral contraceptives can often act as a front for abortion.

“Anyone looking to be sexually active on campus should rely mainly on condoms and spermicide. If you’d just have safe sex, you’d be okay,” Hamrick said.

Senior Mary-Kathryn Wiley said she disagrees with the notion that safe sex alone can protect women from having unplanned pregnancies.

“It concerns me that we don’t have more resources for women’s health at Mercer and in Macon. It’s almost impossible to get emergency contraceptives in this town. It’s a basic health issue that’s being neglected,” Wiley said.

Wiley said she’s also concerned that Mercer’s student insurance policy doesn’t cover abortion.

“I know some students are morally opposed to abortion, but there should at least be some sort of opt-in policy for students to have abortion coverage under Mercer’s policies,” Wiley said.

Hamrick said she’s not necessarily opposed to an opt-in policy for abortion coverage, which would allow students who are interested in having abortion added to their default  plans to do so out-of-pocket while still retaining the school’s discounted group rate.

A spokeswoman for Pearce and Pearce, the third-party company that handles student insurance coverage, said the company could add abortion coverage to Mercer’s default plan if the university wanted it and that it could offer an opt-in policy beginning as soon next year.

Dean of students Doug Pearson said he’s open to making changes to the university’s insurance policies regarding abortion coverage as long as doing so doesn’t unnecessarily complicate the plan or drive up costs for everyone.

“If students feel there’s something lacking from the policy, we’d certainly entertain it, but our overriding goal is to keep the price low for all students,” Pearson said.

But for both groups, the crux of the issue comes in providing better access to educational resources and promoting an open dialogue concerning reproductive options.

“We’re not out to compete against Mercer Students for Life,” Shook said. “We need to work together with them and hopefully even sponsor a forum to discuss the issue in a mature, intelligent manner instead of just in chalk.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Comment

No Responses to “Abortion issue sparks debate among students”

  1. Anonymous on March 31st, 2011 2:18 am

    the pro-choice people wrote the college parties=unwanted pregnancies, by the way.

    [Reply]

  2. Sean Kennedy on March 31st, 2011 8:10 pm

    This is really good, in-depth reporting. What a great staff this newspaper has! YEAHHHHHH

    [Reply]

  3. really? on April 1st, 2011 12:22 am

    It is not the school’s responsibility to cover abortions, that would be like covering gastric bypass surgery, or facial reconstruction, having a baby is a CHOICE and not a “health issue.” Mercer should not support or oppose abortion, it is not their place, give out condoms, give out spermicide lube, whatever they think will help, but within reason and fiscally responsible. Mercer has more pressing issues than to try and protect/censure a group of lunatic eccentric left/right wing extermist that have nothing better to do than write about abortions pros and cons on a sidewalk.

    And I am really tired of this paper writing about their “friends” and being totally bias towards whatever issues spark their clicks interest, pretend like this newspaper isn’t totally in shambles and go out and write about the black community at mercer, or international house’s interaction with the Macon community, get out of your bubble and do something real, for once.

    and honestly, maybe the pro-life and pro-choice chalkers should come downtown, to first friday, and see what college is really about, not writing on the street with chalk protesting/supporting whatever is cool that week.

    [Reply]

    anon Reply:

    I agree with you on the insurance policy bit- there are few insurance agencies that actually cover abortion, much less one connected with a college or university. There wasn’t even a gynecologist when I was a student, so why is it logical that the Mercer would ever offer insurance that covers anything associated with women’s reproductive health?

    What I do not agree with, however, is your opinion on the paper being biased. This article fairly represents the entire situation, as far as I can tell. There have been many, many articles written on MSFL and on campus religious organizations. Promise.

    The rest of your argument doesn’t make sense. Mercer’s paper placing with top marks and awards this year totally disproves it, really. If you don’t like it and want to write about “your friends” and issues that matter to you, be a staff writer. It’s that simple.

    [Reply]

    Sean Kennedy Reply:

    The students on this newspaper’s staff have participated in more service programs than most students in the entire nation. You are incredibly mislead if you believe the topic of abortion is not pertinent to fields such as politics and poverty.

    Also, good point on this paper being in shambles. Our staff won 7 awards in competition with papers from schools such as Georgia Tech and Georgia State. We took home a plaque for 2nd best newspaper in the state.

    [Reply]

  4. Anonymous2 on April 1st, 2011 12:57 am

    To be honest, I don’t want to walk around campus and have to see anyone’s opinions plastered on the sidewalk. If i wanted to gain knowledge about abortion, I would attend the pro-life/pro-choice meetings. The whole incident looked bad on Mercer. One day I was walking to the caf and saw a group of high school kids touring the school, all they could focus on was stopping to read the messages scribbled on the sidewalk and giggle. It made Mercer look immature.

    [Reply]

  5. Reader on April 13th, 2011 11:57 pm

    The only comment I have on this article was the quote:
    “It concerns me that we don’t have more resources for women’s health at Mercer and in Macon. It’s almost impossible to get emergency contraceptives in this town.”

    I personally don’t find this to be true. There are many resources, maybe not at Mercer exactly, but in Macon there happens to be many. Emergency contraceptives are readily available at any pharmacy, which also happens to provide a variety of brands, including effective off brands that are a lot cheaper. It is just a five minute trip to CVS away.

    Also, there are several pregnancy centers in Macon that offer FREE pregnancy testing and also offer counseling, and ultrasounds. Save a Life Ministry and Caring Solutions are just to name a couple.

    And I lied… I have one more thing to say about this quote:
    Hamrick said Mercer Students for Life takes no official stance on contraceptives, but that she believes oral contraceptives can often act as a front for abortion.
    “Anyone looking to be sexually active on campus should rely mainly on condoms and spermicide. If you’d just have safe sex, you’d be okay,” Hamrick said

    My question would be… and what if your condom breaks?… haha I mean really, sorry, but a condom can’t prevent pregnancy in all scenarios, which means sometimes it isn’t “okay”. So if a condom breaks, someone might want to go get an emergency contraceptive… which happens to be just a reallllly strong dose of what is in birth control, allowing your uterus to shed a lining preventing the egg from being fertilized. And isn’t spermicide killing sperm? Well thats what the contraceptive does, not kill a “baby.” Because if we were going to make a comment that it is a front for abortion, than couldn’t you go as far to say thats what birth control is? Which it isn’t. When someone makes the decision to use an emergency contraceptive they aren’t coming from the same place as deciding whether or not to abort a fetus. Sorry, but I didn’t get that point at all.

    [Reply]

    Reader Reply:

    I mean, either way, using a contraceptive or a condom/spermicide… you are killing or not allowing SPERM to fertilize your egg… its the same thing

    [Reply]

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.




Navigate Right
Navigate Left
The student news site of Mercer University
Abortion issue sparks debate among students