Ronald Reagan once said “I have noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born. ” This quote sums up exactly how I personally feel about abortion.
Everyone should have the right to life as they have been given it themselves. However abortion is a very controversial subject and there are many arguments both for Pro-life and Pro-choice, which I will discuss throughout this essay. The first issue I would like to raise is that a baby is a human being from the point of conception, which has been scientifically proven. This should mean that the baby has basic human rights for example, the right to live!Another human being should not have the right to take away another person’s life.
The baby is innocent and like everyone else, deserves a chance at life. A defenceless life should not be taken away under any circumstances, after all the pregnancy is only temporary! The woman would only have to carry the baby for 9 months and then if she couldn’t cope she could give it up for adoption, however the baby has a full life time ahead of it, so shouldn’t the woman allow another human being to have a chance in life, the same way as her mother did for her?If her mother had aborted her then she wouldn’t even be here to make the decision of abortion, so why should this new born baby have fewer rights than this woman herself? On the contrary, Pro-choicers argue their case that a woman should have control over her own body. I agree that this right is important, but is it important enough to override the fundamental right to human life? As much as I believe a woman should have control over her own body it is to a certain extent. For example, I am sure no one would agree that a woman has the right to beat someone to death simply because she used her fists which are part of her body.
This shows an example of a case where a person’s right to life outweighs a woman’s right to control over her own body. It illustrates that this right is not absolute and is dependant entirely on what she is doing with her body. Another reason why Pro-choicers are for abortion is that the baby may be a result of rape and therefore the woman should not have to give birth to the baby, as it was unwanted, unplanned and a vivid reminder of the assault itself. As rape is evil, they may claim that having the baby would just be even crueler to the victim.
However abortion is also evil, as it is the immoral killing of an innocent human life, and two wrongs do not make a right do they? Also is it only a tiny proportion of abortions that take place due to the baby being a result of rape. In England and Wales in 2002, 92% of abortions where due to the reason of, “Risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the woman”. However this is broadly interpreted by doctors to mean any distress on the woman’s behalf, so many abortions are happening, on the basis of the woman being stressed or depressed.If they are stressed or depressed though, does this not mean they are in no mental state to be making correct and clear decisions? In my opinion, the arguments for pro-choice are simply not strong enough to overpower those of pro-life.
Another complication, which many women forget about when considering abortion, is the health risks which are involved in this process. For example if the abortion goes wrong the woman could become infertile. What if she then wanted to have children in the future? Would this not lead to even more emotional stress than having the baby itself, as she knows it’s her own fault that she can’t have children?Also having an abortion increases your chances of getting cancer. I don’t see why a woman would wish to risk her own life, just to kill another.
I do realise there are cases when babies are aborted due to health risks to the woman of actually going through with the pregnancy and to them this may be the right option, but realistically a tiny number of abortions take place due to this reason, therefore is it not a strong enough reason to justify the pro-choice argument based on the actual number of abortions which take place.Finally, I am against abortion as there is other options available to the woman, rather than to have an abortion. For example if the child is being aborted on the case on that is it unwanted, it could then be given up for adoption, where it then gets a chance of a full and normal life, like every human being should. Also if the baby is being aborted on the basis that the woman cannot cope financially with the baby, there are many support groups she can contact which will fully support the baby and provide the mother with clothes, food and any other essentials the baby may need.
With all these options available, I fail to see the need to kill an innocent human life and therefore feel abortion is a selfish immoral act. Reflecting on all the arguments I have heard for pro-choice and those I have heard for pro-life, I feel that those of pro-life’s overrule all of those of pro-choice. For example I once read that a group of people were claiming unwanted children are more likely to become criminals, and therefore abortion should be allowed.However, the killing of a human life is against the law, it is murder.
Therefore are they not contradicting themselves, as are they themselves not criminals? The basic right for each unique human life is more important than any other right we may possess; therefore we should take responsibility and not take that right away from anyone else. That is why I am pro-life.