Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| Agree | 49% | 420 votes | Total: 852 votes | |
| Disagree | 51% | 432 votes |
Should there be restrictions on the availability of abortion, except when the mother's life is at stake? Yes. In fact, one could go further and say there should even be restrictions on abortion for those mothers whose life is indeed at stake. This second set of restrictions would still be easier to fulfill, but do we ever really want to blithely decide that any abortion is okay? I think not, as that would basically be the straw that broke the moral camel's back.
So a woman gets pregnant. Perhaps the pregnancy is not planned for, but happens between two consenting and loving adults. Abortion is an option. So is adoption. Abortion, without equivocation, means killing the fetus. Killing the fetus of a human being. It is killing. And it is killing in order to absolve oneself of responsibility and to clean up an undesired mess. Do we really want to have this be a legal option? Some question whether the fetus is human yet. Are we serious here? In a dog, do we question whether the fetus in the dog's womb is a dog yet? Nope. We see that it is a dog. Humans are different because of their ability to choose and their cognizant abiliities. Babies even after they are born do not yet have these abilities, yet we consider them human. So the argument that makes the definition of human fuzzy holds no water. None. Nor does it hold amniotic fluid. That is a person in there. Abortion means killing. So killing the fetus to divorce oneself from the responsibility of childcare or adoption, is killing for convenience. This kind of abortion deserves enthusiastic banning.
Furthermore, there are even restricitions on cutting down trees and killing animals. Are we valuing flora fauna over babies by not restricting most abortions?
So a woman gets pregnant. However, perhaps this is a pregnancy that endangers the woman. Perhaps if the woman carries the fetus to term, her life and/or the baby's life will be in danger. The woman is faced with a choice. Does she carry on with the pregnancy, or does she end it, choosing the safer route for her and/or her family? This is an area in which the woman should be allowed to choose. Why? Because her right to life as a human being is endangered by one who cannot yet choose. One for whom she is responsible. This is her choice and should be allowed by law. Again, if the woman's life is in danger, the government has no business taking that decision from her. In fact, it infringes on her privacy and right to life if the government steps in. However, the government should never go so far as to mandate abortions in these cases.
Despite all of this, the fact is that most abortions are not in cases of the mother's life being in danger. Most of them are abortions of convenience, to absolve mother (and father many times) of responsibility for their actions. Abortion is not a contraceptive. It is the destroying of a human fetus.
Learn more about this author, Jared Garrett.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
Abortion should always be readily available, without restrictions. The restrictions that people want to impose on abortion are ridiculous when they are thought about for more than three seconds. Here, I will pick each apart, to show where each one fails.
1. The woman should be required to attain a parent's permission.
This is a horrible restriction. At first glance, it seems reasonable enough, but dig deeper. What if it was a parent that caused the pregnancy in the first place? We'd all like to believe that the world is nicer than that, but it isn't. Fathers have raped their daughters before, it isn't anything new. What is that daughter supposed to do? Ask her mother for permission to abort the baby her father gave her? It's ridiculous to ask that of an already traumatized teen.
Even if the pregnancy was not a result of something quite so convoluted and touchy, it would still be incredibly difficult for a woman to work up enough courage to ask for permission. If she is a rape victim, she may be petrified to confess to her parents that she was raped. If she got pregnant due to a mistake, she may be equally petrified to confess, for fear of punishment, scorn, shame, or disownment. Not every parent reacts with love and understanding- some would be horrified to learn their daughters were pregnant.
It is cruel to force a young woman to go through so much emotional anguish to receive an abortion when she has already suffered enough anguish and trauma already.
2. Abortion should be illegal unless the woman's life is at stake.
What if the woman was raped? She should be forced to carry the baby to term and give birth to it? Why? What if the woman is very young, still in 7th or 8th grade? She should be forced to be heavily pregnant while in school, forced to suffer the shame and embarassment of being taunted by her peers and looked down upon by her teachers? Carrying a baby to term can ruin a young girl's life, it can be psychologically traumatizing, it can interfere with her education and social life. It isn't right to force anyone to carry a baby they do not want.
3. All abortion should be illegal because it is murder.
Again, this is a false statement, one driven by religious belief and nothing else. The fact is, for the first few months, a 'baby' is anything but. It is a tiny ball of cells, that has no brain and no nerve endings. It is not a human. To claim that this ball of cells has a soul and the same rights as a human being is not science, it is not even common sense, it is just religious belief. Religious belief should never be forced onto the general public, that is why we have seperation of church and state. Abortion is NOT murder because the fetus is NOT a baby.
4. Ew! Abortion is disgusting!
We've all heard horror stories about abortion procedures. Hysterical descriptions of the 'baby' being brutally ripped apart, graphic descriptions of the blood and gore. Seems painful, doesn't it? Seems inhumane? But remember, the 'baby' is not a baby. It is not fully developed, or even partially developed. It has NO functioning brain, NO nerve endings- it cannot feel a single thing that's happening to it. To make abortion illegal simply because it's squeamish to watch is ridiculous. Might as well make surgery illegal, or circumcision.
5. There need to be restrictions because some women take advantage of abortion and use it for the wrong reasons.
Are there wrong reasons? Really? So what if a woman has an abortion because she got pregnant after not using a condom? She made a mistake, yes. But should she be punished for nine months straight and forced to carry a baby that she does not want? No. This is saying, "You didn't plan ahead, and because of that, you must give birth to a baby." That's a horrible thing to force a woman to do, and awfully vindictive and spiteful.
In closing, I will say this- every woman has the right to do as they wish with their bodies. Religion does not have the right to insinuate its opinions as fact and force women to give birth to unwanted babies, or force horrible restrictions on availability. Restrictions only create more psycholocical trauma and stress, turning an already difficult situation into a nightmarish one.
Learn more about this author, Rhea Wood.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.