An Anti-abortion Argument Essay, Research Paper

Abortion in America is a controversial issue in which both

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

sides have valid statements at face value. The pro-choice side has many

statements to back up it belief in maintaining abortion legal. Many of these are

faulty, and argue points irrelevent to the issue as I will try to

illustrate, thereby extinguishing the chief pro-choice statements.

The pro-life place has slightly different thoughts. The most

popular of these is: The unborn entity is to the full human from the minute of

construct. Abortion consequences in the knowing decease of the unborn entity.

Therefore, abortion can be defined the knowing violent death of a human being.

This violent death is in most instances undue, since the unborn homo being has a

full right to life. If, nevertheless, there is a high chance that a adult female & # 8217 ; s

gestation will ensue in her decease ( such as tubal gestation, for illustration ) ,

so abortion is justified. For it is a greater good that one homo should

live ( the female parent ) instead than two dice ( the female parent and her kid ) . Or, in

such instances the purpose is non to kill the unborn but to salvage the life of the

female parent. With the exclusion of such instances, abortion is an act in which an

guiltless human being is deliberately killed ; hence, abortion should be

made illegal, as are all other such Acts of the Apostless of killing.

One statement made by people in favour of abortion is an

entreaty to commiseration. When one fallaciously argues by appealing to commiseration, one is

reasoning that certain actions should be permitted or tolerated out of commiseration for

those executing them when in fact the footing for demoing them commiseration is non a

legitimate footing for the action. For illustration, a adult female who argues that she

should non have a parking ticket because her kid was shouting and she took

her kid to a confect shop to hearten her up is appealing to commiseration. The

following abortion rights statements are illustrations.

Anyone who goes to pro-choice presentations in the United

States will see on pro-choice buttons a drawing of a coat hanger. This is the

symbol of the pro-choice motion stand foring the many adult females who were harmed

or killed because they either performed illegal abortions on themselves

( i.e. , the surgery was performed with a “ coat hanger ” ) or went to doctors.

That means, if abortion is made illegal, so adult females will one time once more be

harmed. This statement does sound true. Although the idea of happening a dead

immature adult female with a bloody coat hanger swinging between her legs is

unpleasant, and powerful, it does non do a good statement.

The ground this statement doesn & # 8217 ; t work is because it is imploring

the inquiry. In fact, this prevarication hides behind a good per centum of the popular

statements for the pro-choice place. One begs the inquiry when one assumes

what one is seeking to turn out is right.

The question-begging of the coat-hanger statement is really obvious: but merely by

presuming that the unborn are non to the full human does the statement work. If the

unborn are non to the full human, so the pro-choicer has a legitimate concern,

merely as one would hold in turn overing a jurisprudence prohibiting appendicitis

operations if infinite people were needlessly deceasing of both appendicitis and

illegal operations. But if the unborn are to the full human, this pro-choice

statement is the same as stating that because people die or are harmed while

killing other people, the province should do it safe for them to make so.

Even some pro-choicers, who argue for their place in other ways, admit

that the

coat hanger/back-alley statement is crap. Although statistics cant set up

a peculiar moral place, there has been statements over both the existent

figure of illegal abortions and the figure of adult females who died as a consequence of

them before legalisation. Prior to Roe vs Wade, pro-choicers used stating that

about a million adult females every twelvemonth obtained illegal abortions performed with

rusty coat hangers in back-alleys that resulted in 1000s of human deaths.

Given the earnestness of the issue at manus, these statements are more than

hyperboles, because several proved facts set up that the pro-choice

motion was lying.

Another statement by people in support of pro-choice say that

before abortion was legalized, rich pregnant adult females were able to go to

other states to acquire abortions. And this was unjust to the hapless. This is

stating that Roe v. Wade has made the current state of affairs fairer for hapless adult females.

Therefore, if abortion is prohibited it will non forestall rich adult females from

holding safe and legal abortions elsewhere.

This statement is false: it assumes that legal abortion is a moral good which

hapless adult females will be denied if abortion is made illegal. But since the morality

of abortion is the point under inquiry, the pro-choice protagonist assumes

what he or she is seeking to turn out and hence begs the inquiry.

There are a figure of illustrations to exemplify this point. For illustration, we

would see it incorrect if person argued that the hiring of hit work forces to kill

one & # 8217 ; s enemies should be legalized, since the hapless do non hold easy economic

entree to such “ professionals. ”

In the abortion argument the inquiry of whether abortion entails the decease of

a being who is to the full human must be answered before the inquiry of equity

is even asked. That means, since equal chance to extinguish an inexperienced person

human being is seldom a moral good, the inquiry of whether it is just that

rich people will hold entree to abortion if it becomes illegal must be

answered after the inquiry of whether abortion in fact is non the violent death of

an guiltless human life is answered. This is like stating the benefits of the

wealthy are virtuousnesss merely because the hapless are denied them. Sounds like Bachelor of Science

to me.

Although the abortion statement will likely travel on everlastingly,

extinguishing faulty statements will assist people make a sensible determination on

the issue. When the pro-choice side argues such points as the 1s above, it

fast ones many people by playing on such things as peoples understandings and

compassion wrongly. If each side was represented reasonably, it is likely people

would go in favour of a prohibition on abortion when facts are the issue alternatively

of a false drama to people & # 8217 ; s emotion.