Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould a woman have the right to choose abortion?
Results so far:
| Yes | 71% | 3963 votes | Total: 5605 votes | |
| No | 29% | 1642 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesShould women have the right to choose abortion? The answer is an emphatic yes they should, and I can see two reasons, broadly speaking, why this is so.
But before I get to these reasons, I want to stress that we're talking about human lives here. A foetus is not a tumor or an appendix or a fingernail. It is a potential human being (or an actual human being, depending on what criteria you use.) Terminating a foetus - no, let's be honest, killing a foetus is not an act that can be carried out lightly. It should not be some sort of routine or automatic procedure, like an inoculation. It should be a last resort, carried out when the alternative - carrying the child to term - is worse. It's like a safety net beneath a high-wire act at a circus. You'd never really want to use that option, if you could avoid it at all. But the safety net should be there.
The decision to abort, hard though it is, is made even harder by the fact that Nature tends to be analogue, not digital. There is no obvious cut-off point, just a continuum ranging from an egg and a sperm at one end, to a new-born baby at the other. Where should the line be drawn? At 20 weeks? 24 weeks? As is often the case in real life, there is no very clear answer - we just do our best with the information we have at the time. One thing is certain though - wherever we draw that line, someone will always say that we should have drawn it somewhere else, or not drawn it at all.
But yes, abortion should be there as an option. Firstly, if it is made illegal, women will still choose to do it. The difference will be that it won't take place in hygienic, safe surroundings. If abortion is against the law, desperate women will go to backstreet abortionists, and the really desperate will attempt it solo. Do we really want to find teenage girls dying in pools of blood in toilet cubicles? In the western world, in the 21st century? I don't think we do.
My second reason has to do with women and their bodies. I am surprised when some of the more vociferous opponents of abortion turn out to be men, and I suspect I know what I'd say to them, were I a woman. "You go through what women go through," I'd say. "You go through the inconvenience of menstruation, the challenges of pregnancy, the risks of childbirth. Then - and only then - will I pay much attention to your opinions."
In the West, the progress of women to attain the same rights as men has been a long, hard struggle over the years, but it is possible sometimes to lose sight of just how great that struggle has been - not so many generations ago, women were treated like chattels rather than citizens, even in the more enlightened parts of the globe. This has been more or less reversed in the developed world, and we only have to look at some other cultures, where women are hidden away behind burkhas or forced to undergo genital mutilation, to realise how far we have come. Nevertheless, it is never good to take these rights, these freedoms entirely for granted. In some quarters, the notion of a woman having control over her own body and the cells in it, is still a radical one.
Just as a thought experiment, imagine that we men, traditionally the dominant gender, also had wombs and were able to bear children. Would abortion be permitted? Somehow, you know, I suspect it would. I'd be willing to bet that if it were men having the children, sovereignty over our own bodies would take precedence over the right to life of a foetus. And we'd probably be able to justify this perfectly, somehow.
Back in the real world, there are a number of reasons why women end up with unplanned pregnancies, and these include accidents (for instance, a small percentage of condoms are damaged during use), ignorance, carelessness and coercion. I can think of two general solutions to the problems of ignorance and carelessness - more effective sex education and access to contraceptives. (The Dutch provide a good example here - the sex education in Dutch schools is exemplary, and they have much lower rates of teen pregnancy than in the UK, where sex education is generally far from excellent.)
Neverthel ess, as the saying goes, accidents will happen. Sex is an inherently risky activity, and there is still no sure way of eliminating human error completely. As well as genuine mistakes, there are also cases of coercion and rape - not every pregnant woman becomes that way voluntarily. By being forced to carry an unwanted baby to term, should a woman really have to suffer the consequences of a defective condom, let's say, or face additional punishment for being a date-rape victim? No, in a civilised society the safety net of abortion should be there when needed, as a last resort.
If it is made illegal, abortion goes underground, where it joins the shadow economy, becoming neither accountable nor clean nor safe. Making it against the law is a blow to the hard-won rights of women and a step back to the bad old days when women were property.
Learn more about this author, Alex Cull.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
The main issue is whether or not abortion is murder. When does human life begin and at what point is it considered killing? The interesting thing is that most doctors and medical texts agree with Ashley Montagu who wrote:
"The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but at conception." The beginning of human life is not a religious, moral, or philosophical issue; it is a scientific and biological one. From the time those 23 chromosomes become 46 onward, the unborn is a living, developing individual with a unique genetic makeup." (qtd. Gargaro 2002)
Well that answers that question. So why do doctors continue to perform abortions if it is murder? A question only a doctor could answer and has done so. Neville Sender, M.D., Metropolitan Medical Service, who runs an abortion clinic, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin stated: "We know it is killing, but the states permit killing under certain circumstances." (qtd. Gargaro 2002) Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, also stated: "Women enter abortion clinics to kill their fetuses. It is a form of killing. You're ending a life." (qtd. Gargaro 2002) It is settled then doctors continue to perform abortions because the law allows them to. We have become a society that accepts things that are unjust. What happened to equal rights for all? Should not the equal rights that we expect for ourselves extend to the unborn?
Although Government has given states the option to regulate abortion: no state can contest the legality of abortion. It can only regulate when and how an abortion can be performed. Most states allow abortions only in the first trimester and have established mandatory waiting periods as well as parental consent and informed consent. But some states allow women to seek an abortion for any reason without regulations. Government has put the so called rights of the women to control her own body above those of the unborn. In effect they have given women a license to kill. The only rights that some states have extended to the unborn are when the mother has chosen to keep the unborn child. It allows for anyone who has killed the baby, mother, or both to be tried for the murder of each.
An interesting court decision that is very similar to the Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973 pertained to slavery before it was abolished in 1865. It is known as the Dred Scott decision, of 1857. The Supreme Court ruled that black people were not "persons" according to the constitution, and were the property of the owner. Therefore the owner could buy, sell, trade, or kill the slave at the owner's discretion. The same was ruled in Roe v. Wade, the unborn was not a legal "persons" and was the property of the owner/mother, and the mother could have the baby killed at her discretion because of health or social distress anytime before birth. Do we still consider black people not to be legal "persons"? Of course we don't. Everyone is equal under the law and it does not matter what your heritage is as long as you are a U.S. citizen. Therefore unborn children should be extended equal protection under the law as well.
The Government has put so much emphasis on the rights of women to choose that they have forgotten about the choice of others. It is not fair that a father must stand aside and watch a child he wants be killed because the mother chooses to do so. It is not fair that a parent sit by while they watch their child kill their grandchild because she chooses to do so. Apparently the rights of women are more important than the rights of those who would lovingly care for the precious life. The unfairness of the law is enough to make anyone angry. The law treats these tiny human lives like parasites to be killed and removed from the body at the discretion of the woman. They are correct in the sense that women should have the right to choose, but the choice should be in other forms. Such as, abstinence, contraceptives, and adoption: with so many other choices available to women abortion should cease to be an issue.
Currently abortion kills 1.5 million innocent lives per year, the numbers are astounding. Would we take newborn babies and kill them for the sake of social distress? No, we would not. There is no difference in women choosing to kill their unborn babies and women who throw there newborns in dumpsters leaving them to die. It is basically the same principle. Don't you think? Women should be tried for murdering unborn babies the same as women who are tried for murdering newborns. Abortion should only be an option if the mother and babies lives are at stake if the pregnancy continues or in cases of rape or incest.
Since it has been established that abortion is the killing of human life, we as Americans need to step up to the plate to help eradicate this practice. Even the Bible states in the ten commandments, "Thou Shalt Not Kill!" There is no question that it is murder in a less violent form but it is still murder, all the same. One quote to think about by Abraham Lincoln before slavery was abolished, "No one has the right to choose to do that which is wrong."
Learn more about this author, Stormy Gay.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Constitutional & Contract Law
- Is the Adam Walsh Act about sex-offender notification unconstitutional?
- Was the US Supreme Court decision on abortion in Roe vs. Wade (1973) just?
- Is the US Constitution a "living" document, which should change over time?
- Should city and town governments be allowed to display Christmas symbols?
- Should the Internet be monitored and taxed by the government?
- Violators of gun laws should be prosecuted to the fullest, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens
