Among the throngs expected to pour into the
nation's capital yesterday to mark the 32nd anniversary of Roe
v. Wade was an unlikely contingent - two dozen anti-abortion
students from the University of Pennsylvania. The robust
presence of "Penn for Life," both on campus and off, signals a
heightened debate - at Penn and elsewhere - about an issue once
thought all but settled in the more elite halls of the academic
world.
"At the national level, we've noticed a uniform increase in
on-campus pro-life activity," says Michael Sciscenti, president
of American Collegians for Life, whose pre-march conference saw
attendance grow from 70 students three years ago to 350
students, representing 70 universities, this year. Perhaps most
interesting has been the growth at some of the country's most
prestigious institutes. Princeton, MIT, Yale, and Stanford are
among the campuses that today have active groups that oppose
abortion rights.
For many years, Ivy League campuses were seen as unlikely
recruiting grounds for the anti-abortion movement. But as the
political and social views of college students in the United
States have grown more conservative, that has begun to change.
At the University of Pennsylvania, thanks to a booth at the
school's activities fair last fall, membership has grown from
six to 245. Members include non-Catholic Christians, Orthodox
Jews, and, the leadership hopes, some atheists. There are
undergrads, graduate students, faculty, and employees. Alumni
support, as well as business donations and unsolicited funds,
has swelled Penn for Life coffers, from $200 last summer to
nearly enough, now, to fund speakers from groups as diverse as
Feminists for Life and Pro-Life Gays and Lesbians.
The diminutive Nina Mirarchi, a junior from Philadelphia, who
heads the organization, is determined to use her considerable
intellect and her premium education to eventually outthink the
other guy. "I'm learning the arguments of the other side so I
can refute them," she explains.
Her membership is doing its homework as well, and brings a
comfort with history, philosophy, science, law and public debate
to a case which more often has been associated with theology.
Stereotypes placing them on the "lunatic fringe"
notwithstanding, members field the familiar arguments for
abortion rights by quoting poets and writers, orators and
medical research where others may have turned to Scripture. They
are confident that technological developments since the Roe
ruling tilt objective reason in their favor and will ultimately
support their belief that life begins at conception.
In the end, members say they see no choice. "Life is life and
it's wrong to destroy it," says Ms. Mirarchi.
Frank-Paul Sampino, vice president of the group and a
sophomore from Woodbury, Conn., weighs the worst-case scenarios:
"I don't mean to be insensitive, but if we are right and
abortion was made illegal, we would just have more children and
mothers would be more burdened." But if the other side is wrong
about abortion, he says, "that means we lost between 30 and 50
million human lives over the last 30 years, and that certainly
ranks up there with the greatest catastrophes in human history."
While his arguments may be secular, he refuses to distance
himself from the religious underpinnings of the anti-abortion
movement, placing his cause with antislavery, civil rights, and
other historical injustices where morality grounded in religion
sparked change.
Its massive halls fronted on one side by campus greens, on
the other by bustling city streets, the University of
Pennsylvania campus teems with life, its daily routine a
revolving door of laptops and lunch truck vendors, scholars, and
surgical scrubs.
It is a place that seems confident of what it knows. Vice
Provost Valarie Swain-Cade McCoullum says it is a place where
debate is encouraged. "Because we are so diverse, we try to make
a space or place for any student who has any opinion to be able
to state that opinion openly in a way that they feel supported,"
she says.
That the prevailing sentiment on campus still favors abortion
rights was evident at a recent Penn for Life bake sale. "It was
sort of funny," recalls Mr. Sampino. "A lot of people would come
up and want to buy a cookie or a brownie, and ask 'What is this
for?' and we'd tell them, and they'd return the brownie."
The Penn for Life students say they deal with their minority
status in different ways.
Emily Stetler, past president of the group and 2001 graduate,
simply dropped a religion course where she was identified as the
only student there opposed to a woman's right to choose
abortion. Natasha Mooney, a soft-spoken freshman whose roommate
is "very much pro-choice," says the two remain friends because
neither believes she will convert the other.
But Ms. Mooney does plan to speak up, if gently, should the
classroom conversation turn to abortion. "I feel this is the
truth, and I feel called to uphold truth in any way I can."
For her part, Mirarchi sometimes feels that her professors
tend to gloss over the case against abortion rights in class.
She was also bothered when one professor stated flatly that he
didn't understand "those pro-life people."
But for the most part, she says, she is content to simply
allow Penn for Life to offer a forum for kindred spirits at her
school, amassing knowledge that she eventually plans to use for
political, think-tank, or other policymaking work.
How is she so sure she's right on this issue? "I let the
facts speak for themselves," she says.