What are the arguments of the other side?
Sounds like an opinion that requires additional explanation to me. That was her intent. Remember the context: IOP had invited students to volunteer “whiteboard” statements about why they vote in order to kick-start a conversation on the topic. Many others who volunteered statements hoped to do the same as Duffy. I haven’t really seen any instance where Duffy has been shy of discussing issues - even uncomfortable ones. That is in keeping with the robust spirit of inquiry at UChicago. That many others in the student body prefer insults or attacks is not in keeping with that spirit.
Hmm. I’ve seen this tactic used by both sides over the years with plenty of real-life examples. And if you actually read the Duffy article and the Atlantic article she cites, you will see that humanizing the debate over abortion is a well-regarded method of argument! Not sure you’ve proved your point there, @MWolf.
The “UChicago” response to any point of argument - no matter how uncomfortable, controversial or even outrageous - is to bring up a well-reasoned counter point. It’s not to shut down the argument because you happen to disagree with it. That’s just being lazy. If someone wishes to make it clear that Evita Duffy has nothing more in her arsenal than clever phrasing and emotional appeal, then the best way to do so would be to debate her on the points.