The Debate of Abortion
After more than a quarter-century of frenzied debate and denunciation (which began well before Roe v. Wade), one might think not. But there is at least one viewpoint that polls indicate is widely held but that is hardly ever heard amid the screams of ''Murderer!'' and ''Keep your rosaries off my ovaries!'' It deserves a full and reasoned exposition, however; it might even shed some light on the controversies about the confirmation of Dr. Henry Foster as Surgeon General and about harassment of abortion clinics. It is that abortion is justifiable only in extreme cases -- but that nevertheless the state must respect the right to receive and perform abortions. In other words, it is possible to be pro-life and pro-choice -- and as a matter of moral principle rather than political expediency.
As many people of both sexes instinctively recognize, abortion has to be looked at as a question not of law but of morality. Begin then with the position, common to most religions and many naturalistic systems of morality, of respect for life -- all life, but especially human. It seems impossible to deny that the developing fetus is a potential human being. Yes, from the moment of conception: in the early stages it may be a clump of cells, but that cannot be equated with the clump of cells that might be removed in an appendectomy. The fetus from the very beginning is endowed with all the genetic information that will enable -- in fact make inevitable, absent so...
As to any argument, there are two opposing sides when it comes to the matter of abortions. These two opposers usually refer to themselves as “pro-life” and “pro choice”. Pro-life supporters maintain that abortion is wrong and pro-choice believe that it is a woman’s freedom to choose her pregnancy decisions. When it comes to the topic of abortions, most of us will readily agree that it’s a woman’s choice to decide what her reproductive decisions are, i.e. pro-choice. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is in the question of whether or not abortion is a fundamental right granted to women by the Constitution. Whereas some are convinced that a fetus is considered alive at conception, usually citing the word of God, others maintain that
In her essay, “A Defense of Abortion,” Judith Jarvis Thompson outlines the most common arguments that people defend, and explains her views regarding each of these. She shares numerous examples and situations that she believes will support her views. One of her most prominent arguments is that of whether or not a fetus has moral standing as a “person.” She highlights the so called “battle” between an innocent life, the fetus, and the bodily rights of the mother. Within this argument, Judith outlines for us several situations which can provide people with a different outlook regarding abortion. Throughout Judith’s essay, she does not truly give a clear stance, but rather allows her readers to choose for themselves.
Thou shalt not kill; one-tenth of what may arguably be the most famous guidelines of morality in the western culture, and also the main driving force for pro-life advocates. The argument supporting their beliefs typically starts with the premises that a fetus is a person, and to destroy or to kill a person is unethical. Therefore abortion, the premeditated destruction of a human being, is murder, and consequently unethical. I deny the fact that the fetus, what I will refer to as an embryo up to 22 weeks old, has the right to live. The opposing argument is invalid because a fetus, although perhaps a part of human species, is not formally a person. This leaves it simply to be a part of the woman?s body, whose fate lies solely in the hands of the pregnant woman alone, no different from a tumor she might have. By proving this, the abortion debate then becomes an issue of women?s rights, something that is most controversial indeed. Furthermore, it is fair to question the credibility of many people against abortion because of obvious contradictions in the logic of their belief systems. The fact that this debate is relevant in modern society is ludicrous since there is a simple and plausible solution to this problem that could potentially end the debate for good, leaving both sides satisfied.
The debate of abortion continues to be a controversial problem in society and has been around for many decades. According to Jone Lewis, “In the United States, abortion laws began to appear in the 1820’s, forbidding abortion after the fourth month of pregnancy” (1). This indicates that the abortion controversy has been debated far back into American history. Beginning in the 1900’s, legalized abortion became a major controversy. In 1965, all fifty states in the United States banned abortion; however, that was only the beginning of the controversy that still rages today (Lewis 1). After abortion was officially banned in the United States, groups such as the National Abortion Rights Action League worked hard on a plan to once again legalize abortion in the United States (Lewis 1). It wasn’t until 1970 when the case of Roe (for abortion) v. Wade (against abortion) was brought...
Anger and heated debate have long fueled the controversy over abortion. Whether pro-life or pro-choice, both sides of the argument are convinced of the righteousness of their beliefs. There is, however, some confusion surrounding the term “pro-choice” – it does not directly pertain to the spread and use of abortion, but rather, “pro-choicers” advocate the continued legalization of abortion in order to make the choice available and to ensure that women’s fundamental rights are not subjugated. The stance that abortion should be available has its roots in economic concerns, psychological evidence, moral dilemmas, and the Constitution.
Abortion is a controversial topic in today’s society as many opinions from different social groups on whether it should be legal or not create the big question: should the government be able to take away a woman’s reproductive right if it is to protect a fetus? In the United States particularly, much of the debate since the 1970s has focused on the Supreme Court case Roe v Wade, in which the court proclaimed women's’ rights to abortion but declared that the states could limit and regulate the procedure. That means that currently, the state of California allows abortions, but many groups against abortion, mostly called “pro-lifers,” still try to fight against it and want it banned. Women have a right to their own body and should
Abortion may be one of the most controversial topics in America today. Abortion is defined as “the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus” (cite dictionary). There are really only two sides on people’s opinion on abortion; pro-life which means abortion should be outlawed and pro-choice which means a woman should be able to decide whether she wants to keep her baby. Thousands of protests and riots have begun due to the fact pro-life activists believe abortion should become illegal. Both sides bring valid points to support their decision that could sway any person’s thoughts. The Roe v. Wade law has allowed abortion to be legal in the U.S since 1973 (Chittom & Newton, 2015). The law “gives women total control over first trimester abortions and grants state legislative control over second and third trimester abortions” (Chittom & Newton, 2015). Ever since the law was put in place, millions of people have tried to overturn it and still
Choice, what is choice? Choice is the right, power, or opportunity to choose. Everybody in society has a choice and these choices have many outcomes. A woman’s right to choose to have an abortion or not, is her fundamental right. If society outlaws abortion, society is interfering with the woman’s right to make decisions related to her own body. Many theorists believe that sexuality is what divides women from men and makes women less valuable than men; keeping this concept in mind it can be said that gender plays an immense role in social inequality. In one of Thomas Jefferson’s speeches, he explains how we should never put at risk our rights because our freedom can be next. (lp. org 2007) Roe.V .Wade is believed to have been the United States Supreme Court’s decision that resulted in the dawn of the abortion controversy between pro-choice and pro-life advocates, and whether what the woman is carrying is simply just a fetus or a life, the debate is endless. The social-conflict theory reflects the inequality women face regarding abortion in society which brings about a negative change. If a woman’s right to choose would be taken from her then this would cause social inequity. Taking a women’s right to choose would mean taking her freedom and taking freedom away from any human being would imply inequality.
Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum. The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1989. Print.
With the ongoing debate and the advancement of technology in determining the viability of a fetus, abortion, the ending of a pregnancy by removing a fertilized egg, has become increasingly controversial. The morality of abortion has caused many to separate into opposite sides of the spectrum, pro-life and pro-choice. The arguments over abortion has stirred a continuous debate between a pro-choice stance such as that presented by the analogical reasoning of Thomson or Glover’s examination of social context and a pro-life position argued by a moral view of personhood by Noonan. The ethical arguments presented by the conflicting views in the abortion debate has caused others to taken into consideration a sociological account visible in Luker’s examinations of world views in order to discover underlying motivations.
Over the duration of the last century, abortion in the Western hemisphere has become a largely controversial topic that affects every human being. In the United States, at current rates, one in three women will have had an abortion by the time they reach the age of 45. The questions surrounding the laws are of moral, social, and medical dilemmas that rely upon the most fundamental principles of ethics and philosophy. At the center of the argument is the not so clear cut lines dictating what life is, or is not, and where a fetus finds itself amongst its meaning. In an effort to answer the question, lawmakers are establishing public policies dictating what a woman may or may not do with consideration to her reproductive rights. The drawback, however, is that there is no agreement upon when life begins and at which point one crosses the line from unalienable rights to murder.
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.”
Since the early 1970’s abortion has been an important issue to the United States (Tietze 1). The problem begins with whether it is the woman’s choice to keep or terminate her pregnancy or the government’s choice. When this problem happens, a woman loses her right as a person. Most women argue about this issue, but if you look at it, it is the woman’s body, and she should do with it as she pleases. I believe that if a woman, under the right circumstances, should be able to make her own choices in life and not be influenced by family or the government.
Abortion is one of the most highly debated issues in our country today, and this debate between those who support abortion and those against it has been going on since the 1973 court case, Roe v. Wade. To have an abortion or not to is solely the woman’s choice and her right. Keeping abortion legal is a wiser decision than outlawing it for multiple reasons.
It is almost unanimously agreed upon that the right to life is the most important and sacred right possessed by human beings. With this being said, it comes as no surprise that there are few issues that are more contentious than abortion. Some consider the process of abortion as immoral and consisting of the deprivation of one’s right to life. Others, on the opposite end of the spectrum, see abortion as a liberty and a simple exercise of the right to the freedom of choice.