Pro Life Rhetorical Analysis

614 Words2 Pages

Pro-life rhetoric concludes, that the unborn child is not human, or alive. According to Francis Beckwith, in “Politically Correct Death” “ One begs the question whenever one assumes what one is trying to prove. To cite an example, abortion advocates who argue that abortion is justified because a woman should have the right to "control her own body" are assuming that there is only one body involved in the abortion act that of the woman.” This is the point they are trying to prove. Or, the popular assertion, "No one knows when life begins, so abortion should remain legal." But to argue that no one knows when life begins, and that abortion must remain legal through all nine months of pregnancy, assumes that life does not begin before birth the exact point the abortion advocate is trying to make. Then, there is the well known "back alley" argument that asserts American women will die by the millions if abortion is restricted in any way. But unless you begin with the assumption that the unborn child is not human, this argument is more or less to saying, "Because some people are killed attempting to murder others, the state should make it safe and legal for them to do so."
Another thing is abortion confuses …show more content…

"Is a person, One who can consciously perform personal acts? If so, people who are asleep are not people and we may kill them. One with a present capacity to perform personal acts? If so, that would include sleepers but not those in a coma. One with a history of performing personal acts? That would mean that a 17-year old who was born in a coma 17 years ago and is just now coming out of it is not a person. Also, by this definition, there can be no first personal act, no personal acts without a history of past personal acts. One with a future capacity for performing personal acts? That would mean that dying persons are not

Open Document