Abortion Essay

Published 29 Aug 2016

Abortion – should or shouldn’t?

Abortion has never been a simple decision; however, the choice has been taken for many years owing to numerous plausible reasons. Outlawing abortions only serve to make it expensive, humiliating and dangerous. This happened in America Prior to 1973, before abortion was made legal. As a result, many women died.

Undergraduates Often Tell Us:

How much do I have to pay someone to make my essay in time?

Specialists suggest: Professionals Are Creating Successful College Custom Essays!
Cheap Writing Services Pay For Essay Reviews Best Essay Writing Service Best Essay Writing Service

Abortion remains a tricky choice for numerous plausible reasons. When society condones abortions, abortion cases are more than would have been the case if they were outlawed. The practice murders infants who would otherwise lead optimal lives. Such murder is humiliating and perilous to such infants. Owing to 1973s abortion legalization, approximately 1,500,000 infants are murdered through lawful abortions each year (Kramlin, 2004, 324).

Prior to the legalization of abortion, many women were disfigured as a result of illegal abortions. Thus, the society agitated for and succeeded women’s officially authorized liberty to undertake own choices regarding abortion. However, a closer scrutiny of the fact reveals that for each single lady that was killed or maimed as a result of illegal abortions, very many babies were killed (Posner, 1992, 19). This has led conscientious individuals to agitate for babies to be granted liberty of living.

It is a fact that some pregnancies result from incest or rape and thus the bearers are pregnant contrary to their will. It would thus be inhuman to force such women to sustain such pregnancies.

Nevertheless, a closer scrutiny reveals that only 1 percent of abortions are procured by women who have experienced incest or rape. Pro-life activists have influenced lawmakers and society to regard abortion as being generally horrible.

Prohibiting abortion odes do not help to minimize the practice. If women sense absolute necessity for abortion, they are bound to procure such. This will happen even secretly, in perilous conditions and with no health care. Prior to the legalization of abortion, approximately 1 million ladies procured unlawful abortions each year. Many were disfigured, while others died as they were compelled to act like criminals. Prohibiting abortion greatly minimizes the practice. Abortion is absolutely essential when either the woman’s or the infant’s health is threatened. Abortions related to infant’s health amount to three percent of all abortions, while those related to the woman’s health amount to three percent. Ladies do not regard abortion as absolutely essential; they instead feel inconsiderately bothered due to pregnancy. Such cruel killing remains criminal; it should thus be taken to be murder (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/world/12abortion.html?_r=1).

Pro-abortion crusaders argue that lawful abortion protects the lives of women. For many women having diseases like heart complications, kidney problems, acute hypertension, acute diabetes and sickle-cell disease, access to lawful abortion have averted severe health problems that may have emanated from delivery. Prior to lawful abortion, women’s options included either dangerous unlawful abortion or unsafe childbirth.

Safeguarding the lives of women and avoiding severe health problems is important, and ought to be legal. However, available figures indicate that a mere 1 percent of abortions are procured as a result of plausible health concerns. Therefore, malicious women procure abortions for no good reason.

It has been argued that fetuses constitute persons that are not distinguishable from other humans, and that they deserve rights similar to those accorded to women .such an argument has existed for a very long time and has received backing from the religious, scientific, medical and philosophical community. However, American society has acknowledged that every lady has to make abortion decisions on the basis of her conscience. Imposition of some law describing fetuses as legal persons, and granting such fetuses liberties similar to or greater than women’s, that is a feeling, thinking entity, is absurd and arrogant. It merely works to demean women (Tribe, 1992, 31).

Pro-life activists have argued that fetuses should not be compared to a mere tissue. Contemporary medicine and science have established without doubt that fetuses are persons. Practically, one hundred percent of the human genetic material is established at conception. Medicine and science describe the human qualities though genetics. Medicine and science hold that fetuses constitute separate organisms.

Religion, alternatively, remains not clearly defined compared to science and medicine, since religions bring in the soul concept. Nevertheless, no religious head can claim that fetuses do not have souls, and hence due to such, fetuses could be randomly aborted. Spiritual views are gradually starting to recognize medicine and science. All religious leaders with the strong realistic basis in technical knowledge acknowledge that all embryos have souls (Warburton, Fraser, 1994, 6). Nevertheless, in spite of whatever time persons acquire souls, religious views do not at all support abortion. Religion is essential, among the staunchest abortion opponents.

Philosophical viewpoints do illustrate a bit of variety in regard to the time at which babies become persons. Such variety results from the fact that majority of philosophy has ancient origins. In spite of whatever philosophy a philosopher subscribes to, they would never endorse impulsive abortions.

Thus, medicine, religion, and philosophy do not endorse whimsical abortions. As a matter of fact, some narrow science, religion, and philosophy and medicine conviction exists to the effect that human life is precious, plus should not be murdered if such killing can reasonably be avoided. Actually, the strongest believers regarding religion, philosophy, and medicine constitute some among the most vocal abortion opponents (Fergusson, Horwood, Ridder, 2005, 18).

In regard to choices, certain little groups organize movements to persuade society that ladies reserve the right to make choices regarding their infants. Such a notion sounds absurd since the real choice happens when such ladies chose to engage in the risky sexual behavior. When persons undertake choices, such persons ought to accept the consequences arising from such choices. At times, persons opposed to accepting the consequences resulting from their decisions; they thus attempt to devise immoral modes of avoiding being responsible regarding their activities (Posner, 352).

In relation to rights, the argument is not the fetuses be granted rights comparable to greater than women’s, since such would amount to the mere absurdity. Pro-life crusaders simply advocate that fetuses ought to be accorded the liberty to live. This is totally different from the allegation that pro-life crusaders agitate for babies to have rights greater than those of other humans.

Pro-abortionists hold that motherhood is just but one of the options women may take. However, it should be noted that numerous aggressive battles for economic and political equity for womenfolk, have been encountered. Such achievements will amount to nothing when reproductive choices are denied. The ability to select a legal, safe abortion renders numerous other choices probable. Otherwise, rape or accidents may conclude a lady’s personal and economic freedom (Roy, 2003, 216).

However, The willingness by women to murder own babies implies that such women only consider their desires and needs, totally disregarding the desires and needs of other persons. Each probable rationale for abortion, with the exception of serious medical problems for the baby or the mother, remains a self-centered one. The parenting task is the most crucial and motherhood is the most crucial purpose for women. Fatherhood is as well the most vital purpose for men. Fathering and mothering implies getting children plus taking care of them. This usually involves sacrificing own desires with a view to offering the children’s wants and needs. Such is the real description of a parent. Love becomes meaningless devoid of sacrifice. Pertaining to choices, ladies in First World nations are accorded numerous choices. With regard to equality, women and men economic and political equality amounts to nothing if both women and men fail to partake of the parenting responsibilities (Stetson, 2001, 221).

Forbidding abortion discriminates in the sense that anti-abortion regulations are biased against low-revenue ladies, who are forced into unsafe self-induced abortions. This is the much such women can pay for. However, the wealthy can journey to whatever destination to procure secure abortions. However, low-revenue ladies are accorded numerous options and a lot of support. Usually, the lady’s family assists her. Numerous government projects as well assist low-revenue ladies throughout pregnancy and child nurturing stages. Ultimately, adoption remains a proper option for such low-income ladies.

Lawful abortion is biased to infants. Any regulation permitting cruel, callous murder ought to be regarded as being biased. Even the cruel murder of animals is legally outlawed. In addition lawful abortion is biased to fathers. Mandatory pregnancy regulations are in consistent with a liberal society. Directing the women bear unwanted pregnancies amounts to excessive incursion into privacy. What limits are present if the state can force women to sustain a pregnancy (Henshaw, Kost, 1996, 143). Such an idea is ethically repugnant because it infringes conventional American notions of personal freedom and rights.

Lawful abortion remains inconsistent with a liberal society. Ladies who seek abortion were not forced to get pregnant. With the exception of being compelled to have unprotected sex, such women have numerous opportunities for avoiding pregnancy.

The argument that outlawing abortion will result in an increased number of children getting pregnant has been advanced. The punishment for the absence of understanding or for some momentary carelessness should not be unsafe unlawful abortion or compelled pregnancy plus childbearing. Teenagers should not be consigned to an existence of hopelessness, dependency, and joblessness. However, the alleged penalty must be compelled pregnancy sustenance for any pregnancy that does not pose grave medical dangers to the child or mother (Tribe, 1992, 63)

In case ladies are compelled to sustain pregnancies that are not wanted, unwanted offspring are born. Such children constitute one of the society’s acutely tragic phenomenons; usually being unloved, uncared-for, abandoned and brutalized. Upon maturity, such kids are usually severely disadvantaged; they at times become brutal to other persons. Such a phenomenon is harmful to families, children and the nation at large. Children require love plus families that want plus look after them.

Works cited

  1. Kremlin, Maureen. The abortion debate thirty years later: From choice to coercion. Fordham Urban Law Journal, vol. 31, 2004. 323-335
  2. Posner, Richard, A. Sex and Reason. Harvard University Press, 1992, London: Routledge.
  3. Roy, Lisa Shaw. Roe and the Frontier. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, vol. 27, 2003: 216-228
  4. Stetson, Dorothy Mcbride. Abortion Politics, Women’s Movements, and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2001.
  5. Tatalovich, Raymond. The Politics of Abortion in the United States and Canada: A Comparative Study. M. E. Sharpe. 1997.
  6. Tribe, Laurence H. Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes. New York: W. W. Norton, 1992.
  7. Warburton Dorothy & Fraser Clarke. Spontaneous Abortion Risks in Man: Data from Reproductive Histories Collected in a Medical Genetics Unit. Human Genetics, Vol.16, No.1, 1964, pp.1-23
  8. Henshaw Stanley & Kost Kathryn. Abortion Patients in 1994-1995: Characteristics and Contraceptive Use. Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 28, No.4, August 1996, pp.140-158
  9. Fergusson David, Horwood John & Ridder Elizabeth. Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health, 2005, pp.16-22
  10. Rosenthal, Elisabeth. “Legal or Not, Abortion Rates Compare.”The New York Times12 10 2007 Web.21 Jun 2009. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/world/12abortion.html?_r=1
Did it help you?