What Does It Mean To Be Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?
A Review of Some Sources
Abortion is no longer a new subject; it has been a controversial subject since its landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1973, yet it is still one of the top subjects in debates today. On one side there is pro-choice activists. Their main argument is that a woman should have the right to do what she wants with her body. Their opposition, pro-life activists. They believe that killing an unborn child is the equivalent to murdering a human being, and that there are so many other options being provided besides abortion that it reflects a complete lack of knowledge and irresponsibility amongst the many who get them. This paper will elaborate on both sides of the argument. While using pro-life and pro-choice opinions, it will be a clear comprehension of what each side consists of.
Pro-Choice is more than Pro-Abortion
Rankin (2013) explained that pro-choice is more than just accepting abortion, it’s accepting all reproductive choices, despite nationality and income. Rankin elaborated on this by referring to a realistic two- tiered reproductive health care system, that only provides abortion to the ones who can afford it. Rankin provided examples of the many reproductive choices a woman can make to allow the reader to comprehend the significance of calling oneself pro-choice: Underneath the choice to let women choose, there is a fundamental right to let all women choose. Rankin closed her argument by stating that abortion has never been nor will it ever be a bad word; if one supports abortion one must stop stigmatizing what they support.
Abortion is a Safe Practice
National Abortion Federation (2010) suggested that abortion is a legal right and keeps the women population suffering from unplanned pregnancies and dangerous pregnancies, safe and protected. NAF argued that pro-life activists underestimate the safety of abortion both surgical and medical, when in fact abortions have a high percentage of safety. NAF elaborated their position by explaining that before abortion became legal in most places, there was a high mortality rate in the practice of illegal abortions. NAF claimed that since abortion has become legal, the risk of death from having an abortion is many times less than a woman’s risk of death during pregnancy and giving birth. NAF closed by arguing that the world is safer when governments understand and notice that the right to an abortion is a human right.
Pro-Life Serves a Larger Role than Anti-Abortion
Haley Henderson and Stephen Boyd (2013) explained that if pro-life activists, specifically the Orthodox Church, are against abortion then they should provide the needed resources to maintain a healthy pregnancy and also accept decisions such as adoption. Henderson and Boyd stated that the main reason individuals are against abortion is due to the fact it’s a human life, which, according to the bible, was created by God, and should remain in place in respect for God. The authors then argued that the responsibility of a pro-life advocate should not cease when they persuade a mother to have her baby. The church needs to be willing to offer help to women. The authors then elaborated that the church shouldn’t make their mark by ranting and protesting, but by improving the lives of the children it has fought to save. The passage closed with the authors suggesting that as the Church improves their idea of what it means to be pro-life, society’s view will improve along with it.
Pro-Life is about Improvement of Life not Preservation of Eggs Friedman (2012) suggested that by being pro-life, one should agree that actions should be taken to improve the quality of life after birth. Friedman elaborated his position by comparing and contrasting gun laws, and the Environmental Protection Agency with being pro-life. Friedman stated that if one is pro-life they shouldn’t be against gun control nor should they be against funding for agencies who provide clean air and water as well as keeping biodiversity lively. Friedman clarified by stating that to be pro-life, is to support the improvement of life not just life itself. The passage closed with Friedman agreeing that life begins at conception, but the efforts put into being a pro-life advocate should also be put into keeping the lives of everybody safe and protect.
Sanctity of Life is a “Choice”
There is right and wrong in either side of the argument. The choice isn’t simple and abortion all boils down to the fact that one has to experience the situation for themselves in order to comprehend their own set of morals and standards. As Rankin (2013) presented, to accept one reproductive choice, is to accept all. Contrary to just accepting abortion, there is different types of childbirth and also adoption. National Abortion Federation (2010) suggested that having abortion available is a safety precaution and also a protection of women’s rights.
On the other side, Haley Henderson and Stephen Boyd (2013) argued that if pro-life activists, specifically the Orthodox Church, are against abortion then they should offer help to teens, and women in general, to help them maintain a healthy and stable pregnancy . In comparison, Friedman (2012) explained that to be pro-life shouldn’t just be about protecting unborn children, it should be about improving the world children are born into. Each argument has obvious differences but one thing everyone can agree on is that it’s more than a choice. It’s about what the choice consists of. Life or Death
