Essay About Legal Abortion And Pro-Life Activists

Legal Abortion: Arguments Pro And Con.Essay Preview: Legal Abortion: Arguments Pro And Con.Report this essayLegal Abortion: Arguments Pro and Con.Abortion is one of the most controversial issues in the world nowadays. Currently, abortion is legal in America, and many people believe that it should remain legal. These people, pro-choice activists, say that it is the womens right whether or not to have a child. However, there are many groups who are lobbying the Congress to pass laws that would make abortion illegal. These people are called the pro-life activists.

Both pro-life and pro-choice activists refer to religion to back up their point of view. Pro-life supporters claim that human life begins at conception. Therefore, abortion is a murder of a person. Conversely, pro-choice activists say that personhood at conception is not a provable biological fact, it is a religious belief. For example, Mormon churches believe in personhood at conception. However, Judaism holds that it begins at birth, and abortion is not a murder. Islam claims that abortion within 40 days after conception is not a murder, because the fetus is not given soul yet.

Some pro-life supporters refer to their opponents as “pro-abortionists”, because they support the right to choose a legal abortion. Member of pro-choice organizations point out that “pro-abortion” is inaccurate, as it implies favoring abortion over child birth. Pro-choice activists support reproductive freedom, which means that an individual woman should be able to make her own choice.

“Right to Life” organization is trying to stop abortions, their opinion is that abortions should be outlawed in the United States. Their argument is that the right to life must be protected. In contrast, their opponents point out that laws have never stopped abortion, but only relegated it to the so-called back-alley butchers. They state that illegal abortion would kill more and more pregnant women in America.

Pro-life supporters have a strong argument against abortion: it is morally wrong. Pro-choice activists, however, claim that under certain circumstances abortion is morally right. For instance, abortion is considered by them to be right when we need to preserve the life or health of the mother; or to terminate pregnancy brought about by rape; or, for example, to prevent a child being mentally or physically disabled.

Whose right is more important: the one of an unborn or the one of a woman? Pro-life supporters say that the right of the unborn supersedes any right of a woman to “control her own body”. But the founder of the American Birth Control League, Margaret Sanger, has an opposite opinion, “No woman can call herself free who does not own and controls her own body.” This concept became fundamental for pro-choice women.

“Right to Life” activists want to pass a “human life amendment” to the Constitution, declaring the unborn to be full persons from the moment of conception. It is a biological fact that the heart begins to beat around twenty-two days from conception. Pro-choice supporters dispute that if a “person” were defined as beginning at conception, then abortion would be the crime of a murder. Womens bodies, rights and health would be subordinated to the protection of the embryo. Pro-choice organizations predict catastrophic consequences of such an amendment. For instance, no abortions would be permitted for any reason, including rape or incest. Each miscarriage would have to be investigated.

The ACLU of Texas argues that a ban on abortion in Texas “will have little impact on protecting people born with Down syndrome, who are still a human being.” The ACLU of Texas argues that a ban on abortion in Texas “will have little impact on protecting people born with Down syndrome, who are still a human being.” The Associated Press claims the bill “would allow the Department of Health and Human Services and Planned Parenthood to refuse to allow its employees to perform abortions after 15 years of medical approval,” a passage many think would be difficult to overturn in Texas. The ACLU of Texas asserts the proposed law would open medical facilities to “inherently unconstitutional discrimination against women and children.” Women’s Health & Human Services spokesman Scott Schulkin wrote that the U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Texas’s capital, Dallas, opposes the proposed ban, despite the fact a federal judge wrote earlier this year that banning abortion “would not be a ‘good thing’ for individuals seeking a career in medical services. Planned Parenthood, by contrast, offers abortion services with limited health care, with women as much as 50 percent more likely to have low reproductive health.” Planned Parenthood’s spokesman is in a rush to get in there, according to the Associated Press. (The AP has added Planned Parenthood has also threatened to sue over the proposal, saying all of its clients will be forced to pay for abortions from a state health department. The Associated Press reported in June that the city of Fort Worth sued the state over fetal tissue procurement, and the lawsuit has been continuing; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is in the Texas Senate, while a number of other Republican lawmakers have been in the statehouse).

The ACLU claims there are “vast implications” for the federal courts if the state constitution bans such “inhumane, cruel or degrading” abortion. The ACLU claims there are “vast implications” for the federal courts if the state constitution bans such “inhumane, cruel or degrading” abortion. The ACLU points out that “abortion is the one human life that protects us all.”

In other words, in Texas, women like me face death threats every day because abortion is our only hope. That’s not to say that my fellow Texans are not safe when it comes to protecting our right to life. It is not about the fact that our women have health care because they can’t afford it. Abortion is the only human life that protects us all.

The ACLU of Texas asks more questions and is trying to raise awareness of the abortion bill in Texas, which I believe should pass to the legislature.

The ACLU of Texas asks more questions and is trying to raise awareness of the abortion bill in Texas, which I believe should pass to the legislature.

Advertisements

The ACLU of Texas argues that a ban on abortion in Texas “will have little impact on protecting people born with Down syndrome, who are still a human being.” The ACLU of Texas argues that a ban on abortion in Texas “will have little impact on protecting people born with Down syndrome, who are still a human being.” The Associated Press claims the bill “would allow the Department of Health and Human Services and Planned Parenthood to refuse to allow its employees to perform abortions after 15 years of medical approval,” a passage many think would be difficult to overturn in Texas. The ACLU of Texas asserts the proposed law would open medical facilities to “inherently unconstitutional discrimination against women and children.” Women’s Health & Human Services spokesman Scott Schulkin wrote that the U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Texas’s capital, Dallas, opposes the proposed ban, despite the fact a federal judge wrote earlier this year that banning abortion “would not be a ‘good thing’ for individuals seeking a career in medical services. Planned Parenthood, by contrast, offers abortion services with limited health care, with women as much as 50 percent more likely to have low reproductive health.” Planned Parenthood’s spokesman is in a rush to get in there, according to the Associated Press. (The AP has added Planned Parenthood has also threatened to sue over the proposal, saying all of its clients will be forced to pay for abortions from a state health department. The Associated Press reported in June that the city of Fort Worth sued the state over fetal tissue procurement, and the lawsuit has been continuing; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is in the Texas Senate, while a number of other Republican lawmakers have been in the statehouse).

The ACLU claims there are “vast implications” for the federal courts if the state constitution bans such “inhumane, cruel or degrading” abortion. The ACLU claims there are “vast implications” for the federal courts if the state constitution bans such “inhumane, cruel or degrading” abortion. The ACLU points out that “abortion is the one human life that protects us all.”

In other words, in Texas, women like me face death threats every day because abortion is our only hope. That’s not to say that my fellow Texans are not safe when it comes to protecting our right to life. It is not about the fact that our women have health care because they can’t afford it. Abortion is the only human life that protects us all.

The ACLU of Texas asks more questions and is trying to raise awareness of the abortion bill in Texas, which I believe should pass to the legislature.

The ACLU of Texas asks more questions and is trying to raise awareness of the abortion bill in Texas, which I believe should pass to the legislature.

Advertisements

“Right to Life” movement activists claim that abortion should not be permitted for rape, because it is wrong