Pro-Life Argument Against Abortion Rights

While it may have a heartbeat, and is a potential human being, a fetus does not have any consciousness. Don Smith, who is pro abortion, goes into detail about this claim: “What makes a person inherently precious, I think, is (dormant or active) consciousness: thoughts, feelings, memories, hopes, and awareness. Since consciousness depends on the development of the nervous system, and since it takes many months for the nervous system to mature, we can conclude that consciousness emerges gradually. Consequently, the inherent preciousness emerges gradually too. Granted, a sleeping or comatose person has no consciousness either. But a sleeping or comatose person's consciousness is dormant: if they wake up, they have memories, etc. For a fertilized egg, there is no consciousness and also no history of consciousness (unless you believe in reincarnation). Even though all the DNA is there, the fact that there's no higher brain activity strongly suggests that there's no consciousness. Nor does the later presence of a heartbeat and of primitive neural activity imply consciousness or preciousness. What's needed is higher brain activity and the consequent self-awareness” (Smith). Smith has a valid point in saying that consciousness is the difference between a living, breathing human being and a fetus. A fetus can't recall memories – they don't have any feelings, hopes, aspirations or fears. So, if a

Pro-choice people are all about choices the more the merrier but in the end of the decision we want the choice to be made by the mother and no one else. Pro-life people talks all about life and only life but are they really for life when that also agree that rape, victim of incest and if a woman’s life was at risk abortion is doable. Not to mention not all pro-life feels the same way even when they’re on the same side. Yes pro-life do think more about the viable fetus rights other than the mothers but that does not mean pro-choice does not think about the viable fetus at all. Pro-choice wants the child to be welcomed into warm opened arms instead of a hard brutal world depending on the mother’s situation. Such as if the mother had no one to turn to and was out in the street and could barely provide for herself.

For many years, the topic of abortion has been very controversial. Many people who are Pro-Life believe that abortion is murder; that by committing this act an innocent human being is killed. However, individuals who are Pro-Choice argue the opposite. They believe that abortion is a “fundamental right” that is guaranteed to all citizens of the United States due to our U.S. Constitution. Not only do they believe that it is a right, but they also believe that allowing women to have a choice over when they want to have a child is very empowering.

When it comes to living ~~, many people think that “good” includes things that bring enjoyment and “bad” means things that are burdening. We should seek out the good in life and avoid or remove the bad. In cases of abortion, though, where a life is unwanted and burdensome, is it justified to get rid of it? Pro-life arguments that oppose abortion say that ~~. Pro-choice arguments which support abortion argue that a child’s life begins at birth, a woman has the right over her body, and promotes autonomy. After all, a life is ~~ than ~. For my claim, I will not refer to any religious arguments concerning abortion, as doing so would just introduce a wide range of other arguments to debate. Furthermore, I believe it is possible to sufficiently prove abortion is wrong without regarding religion. I will cover the most common arguments for pro-choice and try to refute these arguments along with a moral theory of my own. My primary claim will be that abortion ~~ primary gain is wrong because it is the same as murder.

A fetus is made of everything that it needs to survive and become a human being with a distinctly human conscious, yet a fetus doesn’t have this conscious (Pro-CAN). Science has proven that the fetus doesn’t have a conscious during the standard time of abortion because a fetus doesn’t develop a nervous system or brain until the last stage of pregnancy. This following quote supports this claim: “Since consciousness depends on the development of the nervous system, and since it takes many months for the nervous system to mature, we can conclude that consciousness emerges gradually.” (Smith). Without a nervous system or a brain a fetus can’t feel, think, have emotions, memories, or awareness (Pro-CAN, and Smith). Thus, a fetus is as alive as a plant, a plant that can’t survive by itself. Furthermore, it is important to define human life before determining if a fetus experiences human life. The fetus is a live, and it is human, but it doesn’t experience human life because of it’s lack of human conscious. An actual human being experiences human life, therefore a fetus only has the potential to have a human conscious and does not actually experience human life (Pro-CAN). All of these statements conclude that a fetus doesn’t experience human life at the time of standard abortion, so consequently abortion isn’t

Some critics believe that abortion is a woman’s choice; others believe that termination of a life even before it is born is still murder. I highly doubt that pro-choice advocates would support their stance if they too believed that abortion was murder, so how then can they justify their pro-choice affiliation? The true question to be asked is when does life actually begin? There would be no questions asked if someone could prove the point at which life begins. However there is a grey area, we do not know when “life” begins. Some believe at conception, others at heartbeat, and others at brain waves. No one can say for sure, I however prefer the stance of “better safe

Societies frequently regard the term “good” as whatever is pleasurable or moral and “bad” as whatever causes unpleasant outcomes. Therefore it makes sense that we should seek out the good in life and avoid the bad. In cases of abortion, though, where a potential life is considered “bad”, is it justified to remove it? Life is viewed as the highest intrinsic good, thus any act of deliberately taking it away becomes a serious moral issue. Pro-life arguments, or arguments opposing abortion, claim that each human has a right to life, a person is a human at the moment of conception, and each human possesses the obligation to protect human lives. Pro-choice arguments, or arguments supporting abortion, argue that a child’s life begins at birth, a woman has the leading right over her body, and abortion promotes autonomy. I will attempt to refute the leading pro-choice arguments while holding my claim that abortion to end a life is always immoral because it is an act of murder.

While this statement is one hundred percent true, no one is entitled to choose when someone’s life should be effaced. But, according to science there is in fact no scientific consensus as to when human life begins. Therefore, personhood at conception is just a belief. You are not killing a human being, but rather just removing something that had the potential into becoming a human being. I believe that many take this fallacy into the fate of their own religious beliefs, which is incorrect since religious ideology should not be a foundation for law.

After reading the material, it made me very sad to see what women are doing out there to their unborn children. Some of them are not doing it because they are bad mothers but it is of a lack of education. My mother smoke with me in her stomach for the whole nine months because she did not know better and she did not know the Lord and she regrets every moment of it right now. About the pro-life versus pro-choice, I am personally totally against abortion. However; when it comes to medical issues, I believe it should be called a different name. It is a very hard decision and I do not even want to go to too many details because it is painful. Maybe we are all saying it is wrong or it is right because we are not in those people’s shoes. Maybe if

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live. The one-time choice of abortions robs someone else of a lifetime of choices and prevents him or her from ever exercising his or her rights . (Alcorn, Randy) There are seven characteristics that define life. Responsiveness to the environment, growth and change, the ability to reproduce, a regulated metabolism and oxygen flow, maintaining homeostasis (the ability to regulate internal bodily functions in response to external changes), composed of cells, and the capacity to pass traits onto offspring. Pre born babies possess all seven characteristics that define life. (Human Coalition) "The science is clear, human babies are conceived in the wombs of human mothers, and those pre-born human beings are alive at the moment of conception." -Dr.

In 1973 the Supreme Court made it legal to get abortions done by a well-trained professional in any state. Before this time many states had laws that made abortions legal if and only if it was to save the women’s life. As a result of this ruling in 1973 Pro-life supports began taking up arms against abortion. Within a short time most states had statewide organizations protesting against abortion.

On the opposite, pro-life supporters assume that fetuses are human, and they are subjected to a lot of pain in the process of an abortion. It is wrong to conclude that a fetus is not a human being since it does not talk, or is not a social entity. Pro-life supporters also argue that a fetus is a potential life and any threat to it is breaking a necessary right to life that is entrenched in almost all constitutions across the world. Pro-choice supporters propose that abortion is an act of purely discrimination to the unborn and that this acts deprives them to the access to a brighter

Many people claim that the mother should have a right to choose what happens to her own body, but this does not take into account that she is also choosing what happens to another person's body, even if it is not yet fully formed. On the other hand, the fetus is within her body and she produced it, she should have the right to terminate it as she does to remove any other part of her body.

I agree completely that the fetus, or the human embryo, is in fact a living being. Moreover, human embryo is the “same” as human beings except, the difference between these two is that the embryo is not a full human person because the fetus is not fully developed yet. Every new life, whether it be animal or human, begins at conception. With this being said, no matter what the circumstances of conception, no matter how far along in the pregnancy, abortion, in my opinion, always ends the life of an individual human being.

Does a women’s right to choose to have an abortion outweigh a baby’s right to be born? The controversy at hand is whether the rights of a women outweigh the rights of a baby, and whether a mother should be given the rights to pursue a procedure like an abortion. To clarify an abortion is a medical procedure that ends a pregnancy in which a doctor uses a vacuum and suction to suck out a fetus from the uterus. The issue is whether the fetus who has the potential to be a rational, productive human being has the unequivocal rights of any other human being and whether he or she should be protected from, in every sense of the word, murder. The argument made by abortionfacts.com a nonprofit Christian pro-life education organization, is that