Shawnee State University professors Chip Poirot and Nick Meriwether debated the merits of Issue 1, a proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution that would codify reproductive rights if passed in the November general election, at an event held Oct. 16 in Massie Hall. Fellow SSU professor Tim Hamilton served as the event’s moderator.

Mail-in and early in-person voting is already underway for the election, which is scheduled for Nov. 7. The deadline to register to vote in this year’s general election has passed, but if you are already registered to vote, you can learn more about how and where to vote on your county’s board of elections site. Scioto County’s site can be found at this link.

Poirot and Meriwether debated the nature of Issue 1, both looking at the language of the text and interpreting it in their own ways. 

Poirot argued in support of the amendment, noting that it had been misrepresented by others. Meriwether opposed the amendment on the grounds that it puts innocent lives at risk.

“The opposition to issue 1 has misrepresented the meaning of the language and tried to change the subject of the text,” Poirot said during the debate. “Those who oppose it allege it removes parents’ rights, allows all abortion, enables abuses to hormone (therapies) and enshrines sex-change surgeries.”

Poirot refuted that interpretation, noting that the amendment solely addresses reproductive choice. He added that the bill is not vague, and that exceptions are clearly stated. 

The bill reads, in part: “However, abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability. But in no case may such an abortion be prohibited if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.”

Poirot argued that the decision to abort should be made between a woman and her doctor, which he said the language of the bill supports.

Meriwether countered that abortion is taking an innocent person’s life without consent. He said he opposes late-term and partial-birth abortions, which he stated the vague language of the bill would permit. He also condemned terminating a fetus due to issues of gender or disability.

“Anyone under the age of 50 here could have been aborted by their mother,” he said during the debate. “Are you glad she didn’t?” 

Meriwether stated that Issue 1 will allow abortion on demand up to the point of delivery for any biological female regardless of age, including minors. Furthermore, he said, it will prevent any requirement that parents give their consent or receive notification of their minor child’s attempt to obtain an abortion. 

He said that the amendment’s language is vague on purpose so that it can include more abortions and fewer exceptions. He also stated that the “life or health” of the mother can mean physical or emotional health, stating that if the writers wanted to include exceptions, they would have included them in the bill, as he said the Heartbeat bill (which made abortion after cardiac activity can be detected in an embryo illegal in Ohio when it was signed into law in 2019) did.