Reflection Paper On Abortion

When touching the subject of abortion, one must consider that there are two sides battling for control. That is right, abortion has literally turned into a war zone where even the unlikely of individuals do the unthinkable. Each side has their motives and methods for contradicting the other. For instance, there are cases and events that support both sides of this issue.

     Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy before birth. An abortion results in the death of the embryo or fetus and may be either spontaneous or induced. For years, abortion has been an extremely controversial subject. The history of abortion reaches back not just decades, but centuries, and even milleniums. Today, policies regarding legal abortion in the U.S. is being debated everywhere. Many myths and misconceptions confuse this issue. A better understanding of the history of abortion in America can help provide a context for an improved policy in the future.

The fetus has a valuable future, just as we consider children, the retarded or mentally ill to have valuable futures, thus killing a fetus is not morally permissible. Another pro-choice argument is that the fetus has no desire to live and consequently there is no wrongness in killing. Marquis criticizes this viewpoint, as society believes it is morally wrong to kill those who have no desire to live, and those who are unconscious or suicidal (Gedge & Waluchow, 2012, p220).

The Theology of the Body is the term used to describe the teaching of Pope John Paul about the human person and human sexuality given during his Wednesday Catecheses in St. Peter’s Square between September 5, 1979 and November 28, 1984. John Paul II says that these catecheses could be called “Human Love in the Divine Plan” or “The Redemption of the Body and the Sacramentality of Marriage.”

In On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion, Mary Anne Warren discusses a few arguments against abortion, namely bringing into play whether the fetus is actually a person, or “not a member of the moral community”. She

While parts of both may be true, both cannot stand side by side as completely true when discussing abortion. As they stand today, fetus rights and female rights are incompatible in arena of abortion. Even the “other side” agrees that the two cannot stand shoulder to shoulder. In a chapter entitled “Abortion Does Not Violate Human Rights”, Christian Beenfeldt quotes Brian McKinely when claiming that female rights have a higher precedence than fetus rights: “It’s actually quite simple. You cannot have two entities with equal rights occupying one body. One will automatically have veto power over the other.” So one question remains, which more important, fetus rights or female rights? The winner of this question can be decided by one simple factor: is the fetus to be considered a true, living human being at the point of conception, or does true human life not begin until after birth? A clarification should be made here, however. In this paper it will be assumed that everyone involved in this debate considers a newborn child to be a human being. That is, at the moment of birth, a child either becomes a human being or continues to be a human being; regardless of the fetus’s life state before birth, it will be assumed that all agree that birth “confirms”, so to speak, the life and human existence of the newborn.

The general argument made from Warren is (1) If a person, they have the right to life, (2) The fetus is not considered a person, and (3) Therefore, since the fetus is not a person they do not have a right to life. Also, (4) A human being needs all the morals of personhood to be considered a person, (5) An infant does not have morals, and (6) Therefore, an infant is not a person because the do not have the morals to be considered a person.

The issue of abortion is one of the most sensitive and controversial issues faced by modern societies. This issue leads to topics of whether abortion is right or wrong, if it is the actual killing of a person, and what actually defines the moral status of a fetus. In this paper, I will be arguing against Bonnie Steinbock, who believes that abortions are morally acceptable. So I will be supporting the view that abortions are not morally acceptable.

The topic of aborting an innocent fetus has been overwhelmingly controversial in the United States. The two sides to this ongoing debate is pro-life advocates and pro-choice advocates. Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo before it can survive outside the uterus; whether it is an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy. Abortions are most often performed during the first twenty-eight weeks of pregnancy and can be performed as a medical or surgical procedure. Medical abortions include two types of abortion pills; while the surgical procedures include vacuum aspiration and dilation and evacuation. Ultimately, I am one of the many “pro-lifers”, and I strongly agree that abortion should be illegal because it negatively affects our people. Women across the nation are becoming impregnated and following a short amount of judgement time, turn to abortion to solve their problems but in the end hurt themselves with this decision. Abortions should be illegal because it is immoral and unconstitutional, causes severe mental and physical issues, and negatively impacts the economy. “During the ancient Roman times it has been supposed that abortion and the destruction of unwanted children was permissible, but as our civilization has aged, it seems that such acts were no longer acceptable by rational human beings, so that in 1948, Canada along with most other nations in the world signed a declaration of the United Nations promising every human being the right to life”

Did you know 80% of women abort their kid if they have down syndrome? Abortion is where they end the baby’s life well it is still in the womb. Abortion has been an issue since the 1960’s and continues to grow today. About 1/4 of pregnancies end in abortion and 1/3 of americans before the age of 45 have gotten an abortion. ( (Guttmacher.) Abortion should be illegal considering the reasons for it, ethics and medical effects.

It is a woman’s right to make decisions about her body. If she is the one that undergoes the stress that comes with childbirth, then it should be her right to ,and her right alone to decide whether or not she wants to go through it or not. Not doing so would violate her right to freedom of choice, as well as lead to unsafe abortions that could harm the mother (Nair, 2010). Another question is how could you kill a fetus or embryo when it is the same as a human being? Which begs the question, if the fetus is alive, then so are the eggs and sperm? How do you make the distinction?

Yet, it is your duty to look after your baby. As Kant suggests, if you

What is abortion? An abortion is a medical or surgical procedure used to terminate a pregnancy. A medical abortion is an abortion that is brought about by taking medications that will end a pregnancy. (1) A Surgical abortion is an abortion which ends a pregnancy by emptying the uterus (or womb) with special instruments. (1) Some of the reasons for a woman to get an abortion may be that they can't afford a/another child, health reason of the child's or her own safety, social reasons such as unwanted child or not ready for having a child, and rape or incest. Abortions performed in the seven to nine weeks of the first trimester are medical abortions. (2) All abortions after nine weeks are surgical abortions. Surgical abortions are

Many would argue that a fetus is a potential person because it is has the potential to become what it is not yet. However, does a potential person have potential rights? An example was used: does a potential doctor have the rights of a licensed doctor? When one is describing potentiality, All he is really describing is what that thing is not. By declaring that a fetus is a potential person, one is also stating that a fetus is not a person. As one can see, this issue of the essence of a person and whether a fetus is a person is a very complicated one. This becomes seven more complicated if one takes into account the issue of rights. Now, the concept of human rights, that is to say, what American society dictates as human rights, conflicts heavily with itself. On one hand, we form a deep and heavy opinion on one’s right to life. On the other, we hold an equally strong opinion on one’s freedom to live that life as they please. American society by and large has a firm belief in an individuals right to live. Therefore, if one comes to the conclusion that a fetus actually is a person, then that fetus should receive the protection to it’s right to live, as much as you or I. This society also holds the firm belief in one’s right to the sovereignty of his or her own body, equal to that of one’s right to live. In this case, it is imperative that we understand what liberties we can and cannot take upon ourselves

     Abortion is the surgical termination of a pregnancy. How odd that people are able to define something, that is such a controversial issue, so easily. There are hundreds, thousands, and even millions of things to say about abortion. When it comes to abortion, I find myself thinking like a symbolic interactionist. Abortion is a personal social issue and it needs to be seen on a micro level first. Although abortion can also be seen on a macro level, seeing abortion on a micro level lets people see the different symbols of abortion. No social condition creates the same symbol. If abortion is seen on a macro level, all the myths and stereotypes of abortion seem more realistic. For example, some of those myths