Editor in Chief- Grace LaTourelle
On Tuesday, Students for Life tabled in the campus center, bringing awareness to the prolife movement. Students for Life tabled once previously in the fall semester, which has sparked campus debate and deliberation around the topic of reproductive healthcare and abortion.
“The goal of tabling is to kind of put ourselves on the map…to let people know it’s something that we’re doing on campus. Try to get some traction. And it’s also just a good way to raise awareness— a lot of foot traffic around the Caf,” Vice President of Students for Life and Sophomore Matthew Berge said.
According to Berge, their table included a poster board with information about the organization, flyers and pamphlets, as well as a “silicone model of an unborn baby at different stages of development.”
Students for Life is a relatively new organization on campus that does not currently have weekly meetings, though that will be the plan going forward into next year. Berge explained that the goal of the organization is to raise awareness around the issue of abortion.
“The goal is to…hopefully offer some alternatives to abortion for people who might need it. And just try to change the culture around it a little bit,” Berge explained.
Berge explained that students have made comments in the past that the issue of Students for Life tabling is controversial.
“I would say it’s interesting that it’s controversial that we’re allowed to table. I’ve seen that a bit, you know, ‘Why are these people allowed to table?’” Berge said. “Planned Parenthood always has a table at involvement fairs…so I think there should be open dialogue around it. I think everybody should have a chance to share their opinion…I think everybody should be allowed to table and raise awareness for a cause they want regardless of whether others agree with it or not.”
Many students who disagreed with the organization and what their objective was, acknowledged the organization’s right to free speech.
“There is a value to have some sort of avenue for everyone to express their beliefs. If we don’t allow the other side to speak that wouldn’t fall in line with democratic principles and the marketplace of ideas. It’s also good to know what the other side thinks so we can engage in thoughtful discussion and better be able to fight for reproductive justice,” Women’s Action Coalition Co-President and Senior Linnea Beckstrom said. “I wanted to add too, that if the anti abortion folks have a right to free speech, then so do others in reaction.”
Senior Continuing Assistant Physics Professor Dr. Darsa Donelan explained that in the past, Gustavus has seen similar messaging “that causes harm while being defended as free speech.”
“In those cases, as with this one, lively debate was spurred, but also a sense of anxiety and dread amongst those having their lives debated. Gustavus prides itself on being a welcoming, safe campus, and I am concerned about the kind of campus climate we are creating if campus community members have to navigate spaces where their lived experiences are framed as violent or immoral,” Doneland said.
Tabling once in the fall as well, the Students for Life organization has received comments and criticism before, in person as well as online through the anonymous social media platform, YikYak.
“I think that it promotes shame to people who have obtained an abortion when they are just trying to get lunch. I think tabling specifically makes no sense for what they are trying to accomplish which is to change people’s minds on abortion by personifying a clump of cells, putting that clump of cells potential existence over one’s self, and shaming people out of their personal choices informed by their own personal experiences,” Beckstrom said.
While some criticism centered around the content and expressing prolife views, other comments extended to the tabling itself in manner and time.
“Personally, it made me really upset because it felt a little targeted given the day that they chose to do it, Trans Visibility day. Also, they chose to be there in the middle of Holy Week, which offends me, because it turned the focus of ‘Christian’ beliefs from arguably the most important time in the Christian year to abortion,” Public Health and Political Science double-major and Sophomore Liv White said.
Many people expressed concern or distress from seeing the tabling in the campus center or called into question the implications of prolife tabling on campus.
“It makes me immediately think about the people on our campus who have experienced miscarriage or complicated pregnancies, people who were put in exceedingly difficult, emotional situations. Messaging like this does not exist in a vacuum. It lands on real people with real histories. It feels dismissive of those experiences and of reproductive healthcare as legitimate healthcare,” Donelan said.
Beliefs informing and regarding reproductive healthcare and abortion are varied amongst Gustavus students. Berge explained that his Christian faith, but also an understanding of DNA as being present at conception as being the initial belief behind his prolife stance. Others illustrated their experiences.
“What mainly informs my beliefs on abortion is my past lived experience and the lives of the women around me. Having the history and perspective has caused me to feel passionate about supporting the women around me,” Students for Life member and Sophomore Lily Trelstad said. “I think reproductive healthcare is so important but the way we need to approach it should be changing to allow greater autonomy and choice, something that I have realized women are not currently feeling. Because of my faith, I also have very strong beliefs that people at every stage of life have the right to live and continue living,” Trelstad said.
In 1970, Roe v. Wade became a U.S. Supreme Court case after “Jane Roe” filed a class action lawsuit against the Dallas attorney general. The court ruled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment gave a fundamental right to privacy and protected a woman’s choice to abortion. In 2022, the Dobbs decision overruled Roe, which gave the decision of the legality of abortion back to the states.
“As a Public Health major there are many statistics lacking in the tabling. Those tabling seem to have left out the consequences of unsafe abortions. Globally we are already seeing unsafe abortions leading to maternal mortality and that’s without data from the United States after the Dobbs decision came down in 2022,” Liv White explained.
Scholars in GWSS, political science, and history also highlight the racist origins of anti-abortion rhetoric.
“I’m a GWSS major, and recently having finished Sex, Power, and Politics, I can say that there is so much more happening under the hands of pro-life groups than what the public knows. They put pregnancy crisis centers, specifically in neighborhoods with black women to convince them to have a child if they’re pregnant and then don’t provide any financial assistance (if they do it’s only for a short postpartum recovery period). Much of pro-life rhetoric was stolen from the Civil Rights movement to bring back the white nuclear family by any means possible,” Religion and GWSS major and Junior Soph White asserted. “In nature, it’s not only a gender project, it’s a racial project as well. It’s intended to re-emphasize the purity of the white fetus as the ultimate form of innocence, which makes the nuclear family essential to its image.”
Other organizations on campus, along with Students for Life, are engaging in discussions surrounding abortion. Beckstrom explained that the issue is important to the Women’s Action Coalition as well.
“[WAC] look[s] to provide a safe space for all women and talk about our shared lived experiences. Although not only women have the ability to obtain an abortion and or get pregnant, it disproportionately affects women and the right we have to control our own bodies,” Beckstrom commented.
Last week, on Thursday, the Gustavus Political Science club had a public debate on abortion. Co-Founder and current Development Chair of the Political Science club and Junior Laura Sunnarborg explained that the mission of the bi-partisan organization is to open dialogue related to “domestic and international politics,” which includes abortion.
“The value of having a debate about abortion on campus is to give people a space to share their opinions on an issue that is important to them, foster political and social dialogue, and expose people to new perspectives. Abortion specifically is an important political issue right now that is often avoided being talked about because it is so personal, and can even be polarizing or inflammatory, so we wanted to challenge ourselves and challenge students to actually talk about it in a peaceful manner,” Sunnarborg said.
Debate Chair Josie Raiche ran the event with prepared questions such as “When does life begin?” “What say should men have in abortion and abortion legislation?” and “What should the penalty for abortion be, for pregnant people or doctors that perform abortions?” According to Sunnarborg, the 15-20 attendees were able to engage in the discussion with equal opportunity to voice opinions.
“I think with issues like abortion it is important to continue to engage in conversation about it and to continue to shape your own beliefs and values,” Risk Manager for the Political Science club and Junior Maren Masters said. “In my personal opinion, the pro-life tabling sounds like a great space to learn more about a certain viewpoint and even strike conversation with someone who agrees/disagrees with you. Those skills will help you in your life to come and it’s always fun to talk about things that are important to you! I hope people stop by.”
Overall, students largely agreed that the tabling by the Students for Life sparked increased discussion on campus around topics of abortion.
“I thought it was really cool to see them tabling. I’m not really sure where I stand on the pro-life/pro-choice fence. I’m not a fan of abortion but I want to allow for as much freedom as possible,” an anonymous student said. “With the amount of support I have seen for Planned Parenthood on campus, I think it’s also important that people that are supporters of the pro-life movement also have a space to share their beliefs and foster healthy dialogue.”
Students across all sides have expressed an openness to questions as well as an invitation to new perspectives.
“I would encourage [Students for Life] to talk to individuals who have had an abortion, think of the implications of patriarchy and bodily autonomy, and truly engage with the history of the anti abortion movement. I think that abortion shouldn’t be controversial as one in four women will have an abortion in their lifetimes,” Beckstrom said.
Gusties are encouraged by many organizations and individuals to continue to engage in dialogue and discussion surrounding matters important to them as well as reproductive healthcare and abortion.
“I really want people to, if they disagree with us and feel the need to post something online about it, then come talk to us in person. We won’t bite, we’re not going to talk down on you, we’re not going to insult you…” Berge said. “We just want to have genuine conversations about it. We want to understand everybody’s perspective. And obviously we’re trying to change minds, but that’s not the primary goal. We just want to share our perspective and hope that other people will be respectful and also share theirs.”