In the two articles “I’m a Feminist and I’m Against Abortion,” by Ericka Bachiochi, and “The Price of Fetal Parts” by Charles Krauthammer they both argue how abortion is wrong and the reasons they believe so. They both do a good job of arguing their points to the audience, but Charles Krauthammer argues his point better by using pathos stronger to appeal to the audiences’ emotions of sadness and sympathy. Ericka Bachiochi argues how women should not be recognized for being able to end a pregnancy, but instead be recognized for having the ability to carry human life and be able to care for a child. But instead they are given the option to terminate an inconvenient pregnancy because it would affect their career, education, etc. Charles Krauthammer
Charles Krauthammer affectively appeals to pathos by with examples of how Planned Parent Hood speaks about the fetuses they abort and using their organs for sale or research. Krauthammer really grabs our emotions when he explains how a Planned Parenthood official discussed selling fetus organs over lunch in a “cold” and “jocular” way. Saying how her remarks “lacked compassion” (paragraph 2 Krauthammer). The official said she wanted to make enough money off the unborn child’s organs to buy a Lamborghini and laughed. Krauthammer also brings to attention how another Planned Parenthood official explained how to use “a less crunchy technique” to spare as many organs as possible
Charles Krauthammer is a physician and an active writer who write many articles on medical related topics. Krauthammer wants the audience to see him as a sympathetic person towards the fetuses and mothers who carry them and how abortion affects the people of the public. He states, “The effect on the public is a two-step change in sensibilities. First, when ultrasound reveals how human the living fetus appears. Next, when people learn, as in these inadvertent admissions, what killing the fetus involves” (Krathammer paragraph 9). This quote is to show that he cares about other people and that he is not dispersing this information for a thoughtless reason. Ericka Bachiochi also uses a fair amount of ethos throughout her argument. Bachiochi is an attorney, feminist, and once abortion supporter. These titles make her seem incredibly credible. She tried to get the audience to see her as someone who has a high title so she must be a trustworthy figure and must have credible information on the topic being argued, which in this case, is that abortion is not equality for women. Bachiochi states “As a one-time abortion rights supporter, I well know the temptation to see the right to abortion as a representation of women 's equality. After all, bearing an unexpected child would seem to interrupt a woman 's ability to design
This quote stood out to me because it offered a new perspective to the controversial issues on abortion. After reading this, I realized how abortion was always tied to the women, which not only isolates them in this problem but also unconsciously reduces them to their reproductive functions. The
Warren rejects emotional appeal in a very Vulcan like manner; devout to reason and logic and in doing so has created a well-written paper based solely on this rational mindset. Works Cited Warren, Mary Anne, and Mappes, D. DeGrazia. On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion. Biomedical Ethics 4th (1996): 434-440. Print.
In “Why Abortion is Immoral” by Don Marquis, Marquis attempts to undermine the belief that anti-abortion arguments and rhetoric are based on religious or dogmatic arguments, and posits that using only ethical arguments, the reader may draw the conclusion that abortion can be equated with murder, or “killing an innocent adult human being” (Marquis 183). Marquis makes it clear that he will not explore the issues of abortions performed after a rape, or when the life of the mother is in danger were she to give birth, and that he is only arguing that an “overwhelming majority of deliberate abortions” are immoral (184).
One of the most disputed subjects into day’s society is abortion. Children have been sacrificed by millions of women all across the world. There’s always a powerful urge to vindicate the suffering, emotional pain, and deprivation by the mother and her significant other. Therefore, in any debate, you will run up against an invisible brick wall. Which means even the greatest Knowledge will neglect to influence. When it comes to abortion the best way to tackle the subject is through facts. Some of the wondrous arguments stem from the law, science, and the rights women have to aid the pro-life case opposed to abortion.
I was interviewed last June by Eric Zorn, a columnist from the Chicago Tribune. Mr. Zorn's "thesis," as he explained it to me, was this: if any partial birth abortions were being performed for truly "elective" reasons, for reasons the public would consider nonserious, as the pro-life movement was claiming, the movement should produce the mothers involved. I explained at some length that it wasn't "the movement" claiming that the majority of these procedures were "elective", this fact was asserted by the partial-birth abortion providers themselves. I sent Zorn Dr. Haskell's statements as quoted in the American Medical News. I also sent the charts Dr. McMahon had provided to the Subcommittee on the Constitution in which he had detailed the rationales for abortions he had performed. These documents showed the elective nature of the majority of these procedures -- and in the words of the abortionists themselves. I asked Zorn to reconsider his own logic: aren't patient records confidential and in the possession of the abortion providers themselves, I asked? And if you were a woman who had your healthy child aborted would you be eager to go public? Nothing, however, could shake Mr. Zorn's tenacious grip on his thesis. He ended up writing- "That explanation won't do. If these once callous, cruel, selfish women who drive this national debate truly exist, let's hear from ." (June 6, 1996). In a follow-up column, he wrote: "Well, there are late-term abortions, there are "partial-birth" abortions and there are abortions performed for non-medical or elective reasons. We find very little overlap ... because later-term abortions are very rare and almost always performed for serious medical reasons. . .." (June 13, 1996).
In the case of Sarah Grosvenor and Amasa Sessions it is evident the roles that society and gender played in the decision of abortion. Sarah lost her life because in that era you could not openly discuss the issue of abortion, and Sessions was praised because he pushed for the abortion and would not bring a bastard child in the world. Abortion still remains today a very controversial topic, and one that many people are not accepted no matter what their view is on the subject. There still remains pressure from many people in society and today’s culture to persuade one’s opinion and decision on abortion. Although it is not talked about, other than people protesting against, or for their rights, it is a legal act, and ultimately the decision of the woman.
Once upon a time, I was a student ignorant of the issues plaguing our nation; issues such as abortion and a frightening scarcity of organ donors meant little to me, who was neither pregnant nor in need of replacement body parts. Today, I fortunately remain a simple witness to these scenarios rather than a participant, but I have certainly established a new perspective since reading Neal Shusterman’s Unwind several years ago.
There are many limitations valued when it comes to the right of abortion. The news media still outlines the pros and cons of anti-abortion rights in certain-states-to soon, the entire country. My perspectives on the issue of abortion have been entitled from it to never be banned among citizen’s rights. The reproduction of pregnancy has been emphasized heavily on a mother’s decision to abort their child, but the father of the child plays an active role since he considers to that particular title. Through this current issue, majority of the people against abortion do not seem to have an open mind to how much it primarily affects the decision of the mother amongst her own views of considering abortion.
Being a mother is a lifelong job that requires copious time, energy, and money. There are myriad different reasons in which a woman would consider getting an abortion. The decision is often tragic and painful for the mother. It is one of the biggest choices a woman will make. Many people have strong beliefs about abortion, and if a mother makes a decision that they do not agree with they sometimes turn against the mother, and enkindle egregious feelings about their decision for the rest of their life. Indeed a woman may not get an abortion for selfish reasons or out of convenience, but out of a desire to protect certain important values such as her own health or a decent standard of living for the other members of the family. Additional intentions for having abortion include rape, financial difficulties, obligation by family members, or danger to the baby’s health (Roleff
Abortion has become increasingly common in America, even though many people such as antiabortionists are against it. The contradicting views concerning abortion are disparate and continual. Republicans’ and Democrats go head-to-head in heated debates over the topic of abortion. Arguments regarding anti-abortion and pro-abortion are addressed in two different perspectives, which “generally boils down to the question of whether the individual wants to see abortion banned” (Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice. (n.d.). The topic of abortion can be very touchy and controversial for many people to talk about. The supporting and opposing arguments regarding abortion must be explained in order to determine if it is humane or inhumane. Abortion on the other hand
The permissibility of abortion has been a crucial topic for debates for many years. People have yet to agree upon a stance on whether abortion is morally just. This country is divided into two groups, believers in a woman’s choice to have an abortion and those who stand for the fetus’s right to live. More commonly these stances are labeled as pro-choice and pro-life. The traditional argument for each side is based upon whether a fetus has a right to life. Complications occur because the qualifications of what gives something a right to life is not agreed upon. The pro-choice argument asserts that only people, not fetuses, have a right to life. The pro-life argument claims that fetuses are human beings and therefore they have a right to life. Philosopher, Judith Jarvis Thomson, rejects this traditional reasoning because the right of the mother is not brought into consideration. Thomson prepares two theses to explain her reasoning for being pro-choice; “A right to life does not entail the right to use your body to stay alive” and “In the majority of cases it is not morally required that you carry a fetus to term.”
It is saddening to see humans of the female gender, who find themselves in a situation that requires introducing a new life into the world; to abort such a precious gift. Many may wonder how these poor, innocent, unborn children are then discarded after the abortion procedure. One cannot fathom the reason of these gruesome murders that happens within these medical facilities. Babies are disposed in the red waste bins of these facilities, and later incinerated. Some may either be flushed down garbage disposals or even be sold off for research purposes. The issue of abortion is not just a social one, but also a human rights issue among the unborn children. I believe if the human rights of these children has been violated, then all other rights of humans are certainly meaningless.
According to the consequentialist group that supports abortion, termination should be allowed because denial may lead to disastrous consequences. Their argument is based on population control and social welfare of the women. They argue that abortion is good as it controls population that would affect future social systems and sustainability of biological systems (Baird & Stuart, 34). In essence, they claim that unwanted pregnancies lead to distress and depression to the community, and therefore abortion should be the primary
One of the most controversial issues in this day and age is the stance people take on abortion. The two main positions that people take are either of pro-choice or pro-life; both sides, although polar opposites, tend to refer to both the issue of morality and logical rationale. The pro-life side of the debate believes that abortion is an utterly immoral practice that should be abolished. On the contrary, abortion should remain a legal procedure because it is a reproductive right; its eradication would not only take away the pregnant person’s autonomy, but would also put more children in financially unstable homes and the adoption system, and would cause an increase in potentially fatal, unsafe abortions.
Abortion is an extremely controversial issue and one that is continually on the forefront of debates. Those who oppose the idea (Pro-lifers), thinks it is an act of woman playing “God” who live from who dies. Yet, whether an unborn baby constitutes a normal person is questionable; a pregnant woman, on the other hand, has the undeniable right to choose whether she wants to have a child or not. Therefore, the decision to have an abortion is the personal choice and responsibility of the woman, because prohibiting abortion impedes freedom of choice and endangers the physical and mental health of women.