Abortion debate goes national: we round up the arguments on both sides

Here are some of the arguments for and against the debate and who weighed in…

It all started with this:

Not long after, plans for “disrupting” the event began to form…

And Christ Church students made statements for and against the event being held…

Bigger dogs began to weigh-in….

The New Statesman pointed out that the two men would be discussing a “medical procedure neither of them will ever need, which prevents a life-changing event that will never happen to them”

The event was cancelled:

Wadhamite Niamh Mcintyre argued in support of the cancellation, saying that her “uterus isn’t up for discussion”.

“The idea that in a free society absolutely everything should be open to debate has a detrimental effect on marginalised groups”

“It would make me feel threatened in my own university; as a woman, I objected to men telling me what I should be allowed to do with my own body”

But OSFL hit back…

 

The (inter)national press jumped on board…

The National Review got really wound up, calling the protesters “witless exhibitionists who run semi-literate magazines” and “ghastly little authoritarians”.

Tim Stanley declared free speech “under assault on campus” and Brendan O’Neill’s publication Spiked labelled the opponents of the debate a “censorious mob”.

Uh oh, here comes the Spectator…

Do you think the debate should have been cancelled? Comment below with your views…