Therefore, abortion would not be a defiance against God. Another main point of the argument is over the woman's personal rights, versus the rights of the unborn child. Pro-choice activists maintain that regardless of the individual circumstances, women should have the right to chose whether or not to abort. The pregnancy and labor will affect only the woman's body, therefore it should be the woman's decision. Pro-life supporters, on the other hand, believe that the unborn child has the right to life, and that abortion unlawfully takes away that right.
In fact if we force this woman to have the surgery it could compromise the sanctity of a woman’s body. This would bring up the whole debate of abortion. Having the fetus’s rights just as important if not more than the mother’s, could say that if you have an abortion or miscarriage that you could be charged with a criminal offence. In the interest of fairness and justice, she should not be forced to have the
Sarah Judy Professor Margery Government 24 February 2010 Abortion What do you believe? Should women be able to make the decision to abort a baby if they do not desire to have it? I say that everyone should be entitled to their own opinion. Does it mean the mother does not want to have the child? Or are the circumstances and risks too high that she does not want to bring it into the world to live a bad life?
Despite Natural Law forbidding abortion, there is a doctrine of double effect that can be implemented. If the mother’s life is threatened as a result of the pregnancy, for instance during an ectopic pregnancy, then the destruction of the fallopian tube would be acceptable. Here, the primary aim is not the terminate the pregnancy but to save the mother’s life. The secondary effect is that the embryo is destroyed. Here, abortion would be permissible even by Natural law followers, who believe in the sanctity of life.
In the simplest terms, abortion can be boiled down to two opposing sides. But before one can explore the sides to the argument, it must first be established exactly what abortion is defined as. Marquis states that abortion is any “action intended to bring about the death of a fetus for the sake of the woman who carries it,” (LaFollette 137). Those who argue for Pro-life state that abortion is immoral on the basis that the fetus is considered a human being from the moment conception. Notable philosophers like Marquis identify as pro-life because of their views of the personhood of the fetus while Warren identifies as pro-choice.
In contrast, those on the Pro Choice side believe that abortion should be legal. They feel that individuals should have the right to choose what happens with their body. In addition, they argue that abortion is not murder due to the baby not being fully developed. I agree with Pro Life activists because they think that abortion should be considered murder. They consider a baby a human as soon as conception occurs.
Even though the pregnancy is terminated the process of abortion is still distress for the women to experience. Abortion is not something that should not be taken lightly and should never be the solution for being irresponsible and reckless. Even though women have the right to choose, they still seek medical advice to know the side effect of terminating a pregnancy. Women that have abortions are at a higher risk for reproductive tract infections which include HIV/AIDS and PID. It is a never ending battle between Pro-life activist and Pro-choice activist and they both have great points of view.
Abortion: Summary Digest Some believe the sanctity of life is naturally determined by an inherent moral code, while others believe the value of life should be determined by personal choice. Despite the differences, there is no bigger quarrel amongst these views than the issue of abortion. The “pro-choice” perspective believes that any attempt at prohibiting abortion infringes on their natural rights. “Pro-life” advocates claim that there is not a fine line between the act of killing and abortion. In fact, they believe it is simply premeditated murder.
Those people who are not in favor of abortion has the choice to not abort a baby and to those who has different religious and moral beliefs, like we all do, should have the right to stand what they think is right and moral and should not have to live on the belief system of other people. If a woman feels and knows that her pregnancy is harmful for her and for the baby’s physical and mental health, and if she knows that the child will grow up in poor environment, she should have the choice to do what she thinks is right, to do what she wants, and to decide for herself. Abortion is something that needs to be decided based on a person’s own beliefs and no one has the right to decide this for someone else. Do some people know what it is like to be a young, goal oriented woman, having an entire great future, and then she is suddenly facing difficult decision of choosing her great future or having an unwanted child? You
Same-sex couples can adopt children to raise as their own, and specify them as their heir to land, property and wealth. We live in a country where we pride ourselves on freedom and equality, and to live up to that pride, we must destroy the arbitrary lines drawn in our moral, ethical and legal views on same-sex marriages. If we give no thought to the marriage of the elderly, infertile, or child-less-by choice, why should procreation be a factor on the legalities of recognizing same-sex marriages? The simple answer is, it