Auguments About Abortion Essay, Research Paper
Auguments about Abortion
Abortion is one of the most controversial issues around, and is an issue that
will never be agreed upon. By bringing morals into the question of whether it
should be legal to have abortions, this issue has been elevated to a higher
level. By some people, it is no longer looked at as a question of choice but as
a question of morality, and these concepts have led to a full-blown debate over
something that really should not be questioned.
Every women in America has the right to decide what to do with their
bodies. No government or group of people should feel that they have the right
to dictate to a person what path their lives should take. People who say that
they are “pro-life” are in effect no more than “anti-choice”. These pro-lifers
want to put the life and future of a women into the hands of the government.
Abortion, and the choice a women may make, is a very private thing and should
not be open to debate. The question of morality should not even come into play
when considering abortion, because in this case the question is not of morality
but of choice and constitutionality.
The ninth amendment states “The enumeration in the Constitution, of
certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by
the people.” This in turn, is guaranteeing a women the right to have an
abortion. Pro-choice people say that abortion is the killing of a child, but
pro-choice people do not consider the fetus a child. A philosopher, Mary Anne
Warren, proposed that consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, and
self awareness are factors that determine ‘person-hood’.
But, a misconception that held is that people who are pro-choice are
actually pro-abortion. Many people that support the right of a women to decide
what to do with her own body may be personally against abortions. But, that
does not mean that they think the government should be able to pass laws
governing what females do with their bodies. Pro-choice people simply believe
that it is the right of a women to assess her situation and decide if a baby
would be either beneficial or deleterious to her present life.
People that are against abortions do not take many things into
consideration. One thing they do not consider is how the life of a teenager may
be ruined if they are not given the option of abortion. Another thing not
considered is the serious family strife that will result if a baby is forced to
be born. Pro-lifers are adamant about their beliefs and think that they have an
answer to every situation. Pregnant? Try adoption. Pregnant? They will help
you support the baby. What ever the women’s situation may be, pro-lifers will
not change their stand.
Many people that are pro-life suggest adoption as a viable alternative
to abortion. But, in reality, this is not a good answer. The fact is is that
the majority of people looking to adopt are middle class white couples. Another
fact is is that most of the babies given up for adoption (or that are aborted)
are of a mixed race. And, the truth is, is that most of the adopters do not
want these type of children. This is a sad fact, but is true. Why else would
adopting couples be placed on a waiting list for a few years when there are so
many other kinds of babies out there. Would these pro-lifers rather see these
children grow up as wards of the state, living a life of sorrow and misery?
Pro-lifers are fighting for laws that will make abortion illegal. Do
they really think that this will stop abortions? The only thing a law against
abortions will accomplish will be to drive pregnant women to seek help in dark
alleys and unsafe situations, resulting not only in the termination of the
pregnancy, but perhaps their own lives as well. In the 1940’s when abortion was
illegal, there were still many cases of women seeking help elsewhere. The only
difference though, is that these women usually ended up dead because of
hemorrhaging or infection. If a woman wants an abortion, illegal or legal,
nothing will stop her. Why would pro-lifers, who supposedly put so much value
in life, want to endanger the live of another person?
It is true that if a law is passed against abortion, it may serve to
prevent some abortions. A women may not have enough money for an alley-way
abortion and would then have to carry their pregnancy to term. The results of
this could be disastrous. First of all, the mother would be depressed, probably
would not get prenatal care, may drink, do drugs, or any other thing she could
do to perhaps harm the life of the baby. And, when the baby finally is born,
the mother may hate the baby, knowing that it has ruined her chance of ever
accomplishing her goals in life. If these ‘women forced into motherhood’ do
happen to keep their child, there is a good chance of child abuse and neglect.
These unwanted children, raised by the state or unloving parents, would then
give birth to another generation of unwanted children. Also, in some desperate
situations, new mothers may have the idea that since they could not have an
abortion they will kill their baby right after birth, perhaps with the idea that
they would get away with it and be able to start their life afresh. When all of
these situations are considered by an open-minded person, abortion seems the
better of them.
Radical pro-lifers fight for the lives of children and then go and
destroy the lives of abortion doctors. Does this mean that they place more
value on the live of a bundle of cells and tissues than they do on a human
being? Contradictions such as these lead many pro-choice people to believe that
pro-lifers are close-minded, immovable, radicals.
Pro-lifers may say to all of these arguments that any of these
situations would be preferable to abortion. The important thing, they believe,
is that these children will be living. They say that when a women goes to get
an abortion the fetus is given no choice. But, in effect, what they really are
saying is that the power of choice should be taken away from the mothers, giving
the unborn child an opportunity to be brought into a loveless, lonely, and