The Pro-Choice Group Builds Their Moral And Legal Case

Pro-life supporters believe that human life starts from fertilization or implantation until natural death. From the view of a pro-life advocate and action that destroys an embryo or fetus kills a person, any purposeful destruction of a human life is considered ethically and/or morally wrong. Some advocates of pro-life even oppose abortion of a fetus that would almost certainly die a short time after birth. The pro-life movement is

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).

One of the first moral issues addressed by both sides of the abortion debate concerns a pregnant woman’s so-called natural “right” to make “reproductive choices.” (“The Rights of Pregnant Women”) Anti-abortion advocacy groups claim that “the only way to actually protect the mother’s rights will be by enforcing laws that secure her child’s right to life,” (“Argument 2”) whereas pro-abortion groups contend that these laws “create a dangerous precedent for wide-ranging government intrusion into the lives of all women.” (“The Rights”) With two fundamentally contrasting viewpoints at odds with each other, it is apparent that one of the core issues concurrent with abortion is a woman’s rights versus the rights of her unborn fetus.

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 restrictions and the debate that surrounds the issue of abortion has changed dramatically throughout the course of history and it continues to change until this very moment. All around the world and in every known society, women have used abortion to control their reproduction, regardless of it’s legality. Abortion used to be exercised freely in the United Sates, up Until all the states started to ban It and place a lot of restrictions on it. They stated that a woman can not abort except in extreme cases in which the mother’s life might be in danger. After the restrictions caused a lot of health issues and raised concerns on women’s health, The Government abolished all the restrictions. In this paper I will analyze and discuss three main positions on the issue of abortion. First, there are those who associate themselves with the title “pro-life”. These individuals are anti abortion, birth control, embryo research or anything that can control or cause any harm to the fetus. Second, there are those who at the other end of the spectrum who firmly believe that if a woman decides to abort, then it is her constitutional right to do so without any interference from the government. Third, are those who believe that if a woman is raped or her life is in danger, then abortion should be completely and solely up to the woman, but other than that, abortion should be illegal. This group of individuals are also for birth control and do not oppose educating

Thou shalt not kill; one-tenth of what may arguably be the most famous guidelines of morality in the western culture, and also the main driving force for pro-life advocates. The argument supporting their beliefs typically starts with the premises that a fetus is a person, and to destroy or to kill a person is unethical. Therefore abortion, the premeditated destruction of a human being, is murder, and consequently unethical. I deny the fact that the fetus, what I will refer to as an embryo up to 22 weeks old, has the right to live. The opposing argument is invalid because a fetus, although perhaps a part of human species, is not formally a person. This leaves it simply to be a part of the woman?s body, whose fate lies solely in the

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

Another argument in favor of abortions is the issue of freedom. If a woman chooses to end her pregnancy, she should have the freedom to do so. Taking away this freedom would be taking away a basic right. A fetus is part of a woman’s body and it would be illogical to restrict a woman’s choice to go through with the procedure. Moreover, the government and prolife activists should not try to regulate the practices of abortion; the fact of the matter is that an abortion is

Pro-life is one side of the highly debated topic of abortion. However, by pro-life being viewed as the “God” side of the argument, abortion has more of a moral and ethical base to the discussion (ProCon). By understanding the views behind pro-life which aid in understanding the views and standpoints such as the role the government plays in how abortion functions in American, the role religious views and values play in how abortion is viewed from a religious standpoint, as well as how abortion is viewed from a medical standpoint, and finally a ethical and social view on the issue.

However, the pro-choice or the activists for abortions, argue that if a family is in a state of financial trouble, then abortion should be a practical option. Otherwise, the child would be born into a life of suffering, and inadequate living conditions. The pro-choice believers, bases their beliefs, upon the fact that having an abortion is the inalienable right of women. They believe that by outlawing abortions, women aren’t allowed to practice their freedom of privacy. In a way, women are being denied their constitutional rights. Many pro-choice activists also state that abortion is justifiable, because at the time of fertilization the ensuing embryo is not yet a human being. It is not a human being, but a potential one. Therefore, its death does not constitute a murder. Pro-choice activists’

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.

The argument of abortion has been raging since the Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade, in 1973. This court case has divided the country into two factions: pro-choice and pro-life. Pro-life advocates argue that abortions are murder and extreme levels of child abuse. While pro-choice advocates believe abortions are a justifiable means to end pregnancies. The pro-choice argument is that the fetus is not yet a human being and its rights should not override that of the mother’s.

In the article Ethics of Abortion, much of the pro life argument seems to be

Abortion rights are one of the most heatedly debates in society. There are many arguments for and against abortion. Each woman has the right to an abortion and the right to have a child. Women have the resources, rights, and respect to make reproductive health decisions that are best for themselves. (“Women’s”) We live in a free country and women should continue to have the choice to do whatever with their body, concerning women’s rights, health issues, and religious reasons.

If one were to abort an embryo then that embryo, that human life would never be duplicated again. For example, a scientist that may have found the cure to A.I.D.S would be killed. There is a better way to solve our problems than by killing children. A fertilized egg is the most beautiful, most innocent being that we could ever create and can redeem even our worst mistakes. This fertilized egg is not just a mass of tissue, for if it were there would be no debate. It is immoral to kill; therefore, abortion is immoral.Abortion should be banned because life begins at conception.