Abortion

ABORTION This topic has always been a concern between the people and the government. There are approximately 1.6 million abortions. Abortion means “Induced termination of pregnancy and expulsion of an embryo or fetus that is incapable of survival. I think that basically, people can do whatever they want to do, as long as they know what they are doing. What abortion is, is that if a woman has a baby in her stomach, and she does not want to have the baby, she can go through abortion or have the baby and put the baby for adoption.

The main reason for aborting a baby is because that they can not handle the responsibility, another one is because they can not afford it. There are three stages in a womans pregnancy. The first stage is when the baby is still a small egg kind of growing. The second stage is when it actually gets their feet and hands and a heart. The third stage is when it is actually living off of your body as another human being.

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


order now

think that if you are too young to have a baby, and you are pregnant, then I think it should be ok for the person to abort the child. One of the side effects for having an abortion is that you feel the pain and you can get diarrhea, nausea, also it increases chances of getting cancer, anemia, and lung disease. Another effect that has on the women is the psychological effects. About ninety five percent of the women who had an abortion had a negative psychological effect, and ninety seven percent thought they have taken a humans life. There are many ways to abort a child, most of the time the doctor would just prescribe medication to take.

If medication does not work, they will pull it out. Most of the time, the medication would kill the baby and the woman would just have to give birth to a dead baby, or they can make it so that you have a miscarriage. However, if the baby is in its first trimester, a vacuum can suck it and it will have hardly any damage to your body, except for that if a part of a fetus is left behind, it can infect. The main reason there are debates over this issue is because it is a new life in a stomach, never seen the outside world before. The government can not stop the people from going to an abortion clinic because, a fetus does not count as a citizen and you can still kill the baby and get away with it. However, the government is trying to ban or have banned a couple of methods that were brutal. One of the methods that the government was the partial birth abortion.

What this is, is that you give birth to a part of a baby by killing the fetus inside your stomach. The good part about pro-life is that it saves an unborn life which never has seen this world. Also that when a baby is aborted many people suffer, even when the women has taken counseling, there are still remaining psychological effects and you can get harmed, from the drugs that you have taken. The government basically assumes that each fetus does not have citizenship. It has to be born in order to have its rights as an U.S.

citizen. The bad part about pro-life is that if the woman is having a baby and she is 13 and she has no responsibility, there are no father, she does drugs and alcohol, and if she does not abort the baby will be suffering. Another reason why I think it should be allowed is because even though you put your baby for adoption its just going to be harder for the baby not knowing his/her real parents when the baby grows up. Another reason that pro-life can get kind of annoying is when you dont have the money to have a baby, because it costs a lot of money in order to raise a child. I dont think people understand that you need to have a job in order to have a baby so you can support the child. A baby needs to have both parents because a baby is a lot of commitment.

Also, if you put it for adoption, you never know if the baby will live happily, maybe he might get stuck in a house with no freedom. So I think that abortion should be allowed. I think that if you really care about the baby, then why make it suffer? By putting it for adoption? In conclusion, comparing the two sides, I think that pro-choice would be a better choice in this country because of the fact that so many people do drugs and half of the married couples get divorced. Why make a child go through all this trouble when you can just choose if you want to have a baby or not. If you would not like to have a baby, I would suggest using a condom.

Abortion

101-36 Persuasive Essay 9/22/96
Abortion, the easiest way to fix one’s mistakes. I mean, if one is
going to screw around and accidentally get knocked up, why should they have to
be responsible for the outcome of messing around. Why not just murder the
unborn child. That is what goes on daily, slaughtering of young, innocent
children, that if born, would easily find a home. What did they the unborn
child do wrong? Oh nothing, it’s just that the mother and/or father are just
so lazy and irresponsible that they would rather see their child be butchered
than have to change it’s diaper or feed it. Society today does not respect
life and therefore accepts the murdering of unborn children.


A major factor that is missing is society in today’s world are moral
values. If people actually had morals, then abortion might not occur. No
matter what anyone argues, abortion is murder, plain and simple. How could one
deny that when a doctor grabs his forceps and crushes a child’s skull and sucks
out what was once a brain, how could they say that is not murder, how could
someone get away with doing this. Then again people ask that same question
about OJ.

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


order now


There are many abortion-slaughter techniques that are used today.

Examples are the Dilatation and Curettage (D;C) where a loop shaped steel knife
is inserted and the child is cut into pieces, also there is the Dilatation and
Evacuation (D;E) where the doctor uses forceps with sharp metal jaws and tears
the child apart, piece by piece. Usually the head is hardened to bone and must
be compressed or crushed in order to get it out. Another highly controversial
technique that is getting a lot of publicity nowadays is the partial birth
method. This procedure in performed in the second and third trimesters of
pregnancy or between 20 to 32 weeks, sometimes later.Now according to
Abortion: Some medical facts, a book printed by the National Right to Life,
the partial birth technique is performed like this: “Guided by ultrasound, the
abortionist reaches into the uterus, grabs the unborn baby’s leg with forceps,
and pulls the baby into the birth canal, except for the head, which is
deliberately kept just inside the womb. ( At this point in a partial -birth
abortion, the baby is alive.) Then the abortionist jams scissors into the back
of the baby’s skull and spreads the tips of the scissors apart to enlarge the
wound. After removing the scissors, a suction catheter is inserted into the
skull and the baby’s brains are sucked out. The collapsed head is then removed
from the uterus.” Now I don’t see a difference between the partial-birth
method and say me going up to someone and stabbing them over and over again.

The only difference is the outcome, were I would be charged with murder for
committing such a crime , but the “doctors” that perform the 1.5 million
murders a year get paid and some even praised.


Hopefully people will wake up and see that abortion truly is murder.

The opposition usually contests that women have the right to terminate their
pregnancy whenever they want. Now I was taught that one could not have a right
that conflicts with the rights of others, therefore the claim that women have
such a right is irrelevant. Most uninformed people think that the majority of
abortions are performed because the woman’s life is in danger, well that is not
fact. Fact is that 93% of all induced abortions are done for elective,
nonmedical reasons. To make it simple, they are just irresponsible, they are
murders and will have to live with that for the rest of their lives.
Category: Science

Abortion

.. about abortion and that the time was right for a professionally ambitious leaders to take advantage of the still unfocused opposition of regular physicians to abortion. Horatio Storer laid the groundwork for the anti-abortion campaign he launched later in the year by writing influential physicians all around the country early in 1857 and inquiring about the abortion laws in each of their states (148-149). Reactions around the country continued to bode well for the success of Storer’s national project. Still another prominent professor of obstetrics, Dr. Jesse Boring of the Atlanta Medical School, who was at the AMA meeting in 1857, when Storer called for action, came out publicly against the ” prevalent laxity of moral sentiment of this subject, as evidenced by the increasing frequency of induced abortions”(155).

Between 1860 and 1880 physicians all around the nation worked hard at the job of “educating up” the public attitude toward abortion in the U.S., and by the end of that period they had made some significant progress (171). Public opinion is turned to make abortion illegal the popular press and church had joined with the leaders of the charge the physicians. Mohr continues to state that the anti-obscenity movement rose to prominence during the 1870sunder the leadership of Anthony Comstock, the well-known head of the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice. In the 1873 Comstock persuaded Congress to pass ” and Act for the Suppression of Trade in and Circulation of, Obscene Literature and Articles of Immoral Use. ” As a result of that law, it became a federal offense to ..sell, or offer to sell, or..give away for offer to give away, or ..have in..possession with intent to sell or give away,..instrument, or other article of indecent or immoral nature, or any article or medicine..for causing abortion, except on a prescription of a physician in good standing, given in good faith..(196).

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


order now

Under the law of 1873 Comstock himself became a special agent of the national government empowered to enforce the act’s provisions. In this capacity Comstock became the country’s best known pursuer of abortionists for the remainder of the 1870s. In early spring of 1878 he finally succeed in arresting Madame Restell herself, after purchasing abortifacient preparations from her. The popular press trumpeted the arrest loudly, and when Madame Restell committed suicide on the day before her trial the story became an instant national even international, sensation. As a symbolic act, the Restell suicide of April 1878 may well have marked a turning point in public opinion in the United States (197).

The anti-abortion legislation begins Mohr tells us. Between 1860 and 1880 the regular physicians’ campaign against abortion in the Untied States produced the most important burst of anti-abortion legislation in the nation’s history. At least 40 anti-abortion statutes of various kinds were placed upon state and territorial law books during that period. Some 13 jurisdictions formally outlawed abortion for the first time, and at least 21 states revised their already existing statutes on the subject. More significantly, most of the legislation passed between 1860 and 1880 explicitly accepted the regulars’ assertions that the interruption of gestation at any point in a pregnancy should be crime and that ate state itself should try actively to restrict the practice of abortion (200). Consequently, after four decades of rapid change, American abortion policy re-estabilized during the final two decades of the nineteenth century while legislative responses typical to the 1860s and 1870s wove themselves deeply into the fabric of American law. There they would remain through the first two thirds of the twentieth century (245).

The Roe vs. Wade case is told by Mohr so bring up to today’s law in practice. A single, pregnant woman, assigned the pseudonym Jane Roe by the court to protect her privacy, took action in 1970 against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas, where Jane Roe lived, in an effort to prevent him from enforcing the Texas state anti-abortion statute on the grounds that it violated the United States Constitution. The law that Jane Roe wanted struck down dated form the 1850s. After hearing the case argued in December 1971, and reargued in October 1972, the Supreme Court finally rendered its decision in January 1973. Jane Roe “won” the case in a technical sense, for the majority ruled that Texas anti-abortion sense, for the majority ruled that the Texas anti-abortion statue was indeed unconstitutional as drafted.

Moreover, all similar statues then in effect in other stated were likewise declared to be unconstitutional. By itself this portion of the decision would not only have undone all that the physicians’ crusade of the nineteenth century had brought about, but would have left the nation with an abortion policy considerably more tolerant of the practice than the common law had been two hundred years earlier (247). Roger Rosenblatt gives us his opinion on abortion. My stand on abortion is conventionally. Pro-choice: Every woman in America, in my opinion, ought to have the legal right to choose an abortion. The belief that a clear-cut intellectual or moral compromise is available to the issue, is wrong.

If abortion is considered murder, how can it ever be entirely acceptable to those who oppose it, even though they may allow certain exceptions to the rule. If it’s not considered murder, on what grounds would those who favor abortion rights want them restricted? Nor do I believe that the question of when life begins, over which there is so much scientific and spiritual haggling, is pertinent or useful to the debate. I would be perfectly willing to concede that life begins at conception, yet I would still advocate a system in which the killing of an unborn child is preferable to forcing an unwilling mother to give birth. And I do not believe that community rights in this matter are equal to individual rights. While the rights of the community are not to be ignored, the final decision should be the individual woman’s no matter how misguided she may be thought or how strongly the rest of society disapproves (1-10). Dr.

Hodgson said that she did not think abortion constituted killing at all. The obstetrician said, ” I think I have done a humane service for lots of women in this world. I don’t look upon (abortion) as killing, because I do not consider that any embryo or fetus is a person. It is a potential person “(24). The killer of women is illegal abortion and that is why women should have a choice.

The question is, when you have a woman’s life and her needs and her health on the one side and the developing fetus on the other, a choice has to be made. And the choice should be left to the individual. Father McBrien stated his personal and religious morality forbade his approving of abortion in any situation, but even in this he was willing to accept his role as an American citizen, which requires people to live with several things they dislike (28). Brian Elroy Mc, tells us the abortion stance of most Christians is one sided. In reality there is merely evidence that most people will listen to their pastors and to Christian radio broadcaster. They merely listen to others who quote a verse to support a view they heard from someone else.

By definition, most Christians, rather than reading for themselves, follow the beliefs of a Culture of Christianity – and many of the Culture’s beliefs are based on one or two verses of the Bible, often taken out of context (5-1). Lets take a look at what God has to say in the Bible. The commandment against murder. Psalms 139:13-16, has been used by Christians and taken out of text to serve the point of ant-abortion. These are used to try and state that the fetus is a human and that abortion is murder. A lot of verses in the Bible can be taken out of text Palms 10:1, could be used to state that God has abandoned us. Also Job 10:18-19, could be used to state that the Bible supports ending a pregnancy in the face of a life without quality. According to Elroy, it’s time to stop the one-sided view of abortion being proclaimed by Christian leaders.

These leaders do not despite their claims have a biblical mandate for their theologies. It is time to stop preaching that the Bible contain and undeniable doctrine against abortion doctors and upon women who have abortions, especially when it’s done in the name of a God who has no written such condemnations in his Bible. It is time to stop, because the act of making a judgement against people in God’s name, when God is not behind the judging, is nothing short of claiming that our own beliefs are more important than God’s. We must stop, because if we don’t, then indeed the very type of theological argument being used against abortion can be turned around and used to proclaim that abortion is biblical (18). Effects on an abortion and their ridicule that goes along with it can leave scars that can last a lifetime.

These are a lists of questions asked to an unnamed woman who has become a victim of the anti-abortion propaganda. Lets take a look at how her decision to have an abortion has changed her life. Q: Why did you have an abortion? A: I was too young, and pressured by parents to have an abortion as their religion did not accept premarital intercourse and the child would be considered illegitamate, even if she and the father were to have wed. Q: How does it effect you now? A: I’ve got emotional scars, it’s not a quick fix, it’s a burden that you carry for life. I still think about it. Q: How often do you think about it? A: Once or twice a month, especially in June, which was the month I had it done.

Q: Do you remember the day? A: Yes, June 7th, 1988. Q: How did you feel right after it was over? A: Well, after I woke up and came around, I felt like a huge burden had been lifted off my shoulders and I remember my Dad saying “That’s my Tiger, she’s back” I was back to my old bubbly self, or so I thought. Q: What kind of advice would you give a young girl in the same situation? A: Think long and hard, you will always have a sense of doubt, did I make the right choice or I wonder if I didn’t. Q: Which way would you lean towards in trying to direct this girl in the same situation? A: I would not influence her, it’s her decision. I would tell her my story and how it’s effected my life.

Q: When did you realize it would never go away? A: When my current child was born. Q: Did you think it was a fetus or a live child? A: A fetus, because there was no heart beat. Q: Are you going to tell your children about it to change their views on premarital sex? A: When they are old enough to understand, yes, so they won’t be pressured into the same situation. The suffering caused by abortion can be about many different feelings, such as anger, grief, guilt, shame and spiritual injury. The interview with the victim has clearly shown that these feelings may last a lifetime.

This is even more reason why education before conception, pre and post abortion is so important. There’s a book called Peace after Abortion that can help heal some of these feelings she might be experiencing. A word about Pro-Life from Rosenblatt, the effort to reduce the necessity of abortion, which is the same as an effort to improve much that needs improving in this country, is to choose life as whole-heartedly as it is to be “Pro-life.” By such an effort one is choosing life for millions who do not want to be, who do not deserve to be, forever hobbled by an accident, a mistake, or by miseducation. By such an effort one is also choosing a different sort of like for the country as a whole-a more sympathetic life in which we acknowledge, privileged and unprivileged alike, that we have the same doubts and mysteries and hopes for one another (179). We’ve got to eliminate the cause of unwanted pregnancies, and if we can work together, liberals and conservatives, religious people and non religious people alike, to eliminate the reasons why young women feel that they must have an abortion when they don’t want to have an abortion, then we can, together, do something constructive and stop this useless and endless debate about whether there’s a baby there with a personality or whether or not it’s simply a woman’s right.

It is right that we have the choice, but it would be better if we did not have to make it. Bibliography Elroy, Brian Mc. The Bible and Abortion, Why abortion is Biblical www.elroy.com/her/abortion.html The Every day Bible, ( New century version ) 87-51673. Peace after abortion, an internet site that offers help for women. www.peacesafterabortion.com Mohr, James C.

Abortion in America. New York: Oxford university Press,1978. Rosenblatt, Roger. Life Itself Abortion in American Mind. New York: Random House,1992.

Unnamed Interview. A women who experienced abortion first hand.

Abortion

Abortion What is meant by abortion? Abortion is defined in the dictionary as, “The expulsion of a foetus (naturally or by medical induction) from the womb before it is able to survive independently (around 28 weeks).” This simply means the foetus is removed by either a natural or medical procedure before the time of the natural birth would have occurred, before the foetus could support its own life. Their are in fact three types of abortion. They are: Voluntary – when the mother decides to have an abortion out of choice, Therapeutic – carried out when the mothers health is in danger and Spontaneous – when the foetus dies during the pregnancy (the same as a miscarriage). The Abortion Act is what is used to determine whether an abortion is justified, it was passed in 1967 and then amended in 1990. Currently it states that: 1967 Abortion Act An abortion may be performed legally if two or more doctors certify that: 1. The mental and physical health of the woman, or her existing children, will suffer if the pregnancy continues. Or. 2. The child, if born, would be seriously physically or mentally handicapped. 1990 amendment As the 1967 Act, except that the time limit for when an abortion can be carried out was reduced to 24 weeks. This Act means a pregnant woman has the right to an abortion if: 1. Upon keeping the pregnancy, and therefore having the child, the mother and/or any children she already has would be harming their physical or mental well being. 2. The foetus has been shown to have either a physical or mental disability and therefore would be born handicapped. If two doctors both agree that the woman suffers from either of the points, then abortion is a legal option, as long as the pregnancy has not gone more than 24 weeks after conception. A 15 yr. old girl is pregnant and has requested and abortion without her parents knowing and with no intention to do so. The girl would be allowed an abortion even though she is too young (under 16) to give consent for the medical procedure to take place. The grounds the girl would be allowed the abortion under would be under the first section of the 1967 Act, the pregnancy if continued, would pose a risk to the mothers own mental health. An amniocentesis test shows that the baby has a serious deformity. There is no doubt that an abortion would be legal in this circumstance, it falls exactly under the second section of the 1967 Act, because the baby, if born, would be either seriously physically or mentally handicapped. The pregnancy was a result of rape. An abortion would be permitted to the mother, because keeping the pregnancy would cause the mothers mental health to suffer, this the first section of the 1967 Act. The Abortion Act allows for most abortions to go ahead, as it is open to various interpretations (especially in the first section). One scenario where an abortion would not be permitted would be: A scan has shown that the baby is female and the parents want a boy. These would not be significant grounds for an abortion to be said to be legal. However it could be argued that it would cause the mother mental distress, but it is does not really pose a serious threat to her health. However there has been a case of a mother who had two abortions on the NHS because she didnt like the looks of either of the fathers. This shows that the Abortion Act can be abused and interpreted in, what we presume to be, a way in which it was not intended. What biblical teachings might be used in a discussion about abortion? The bible is used by Pro life and Pro choice groups to prove that their view is the view that God takes, because the Bible is of course the word of God. The issue of abortion is not specifically referred to in the words of the bible, so each group picks out the parts, quotes, that support their cause. Because pro life groups believe that life begins at the moment of conception, their

Abortion

Abortion There are few issues that can cause as many heated and sometimes, irrational, debates than that of abortion. The issue strikes at the very heart of an individual’s religious and philosophical beliefs. Does a woman have the right to terminate a pregnancy? Is it moral to do so in any circumstance? Is a fetus a living human being? The debate has raged for nearly thirty years and there does not seem to be any end to the controversy that often results in violence. Irrational individuals who have committed murder want to make their beliefs heard and followed. In response to the question, some people have resulted to using qualifiers: no, abortion is not moral except if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest is one response heard, in fact, some state laws contain this condition. A very large and strong contingent of people say a very loud and aggressive no, abortion is not moral, not under any circumstance and at least as many say a very loud aggressive yes, abortion is moral; it is the woman’s choice regarding her own body.

The issue of abortion is filled with emotion. Despite the eloquent arguments and the seemingly reasonable reasons supporting abortion, abortion is not moral. It is taking the life of a living being and that can never be considered a moral act. There is more and more support for this opinion. As the Roe v Wade decision reached its 25th anniversary, in fact, there was a growing sentiment in this country that abortion is murder. Perhaps this swell of support against abortion is due to the realization that legal abortion has prohibited 35 million humans from being born (First Things, 1998).

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


order now

In her article, A Defense of Abortion, Judith Jarvis Thomson offered a number of reasons to support abortion. She also used a number of analogies to support her opinions. Thomson conceded the point that opponents of abortion make: a fetus is a person from the moment of conception but she said that abortion is morally permissible even it means killing the fetus and offered a number of analogies and/or hypothetical situations to demonstrate her point. Some of her analogies border on the absurd such as attempting to compare a young boy who does not want to share his box of candy with his younger brother to a pregnant woman who does not want to share her body with this unwanted fetus. It is simply not a rational comparison. Equally absurd would be to counterargue that the little brother is already living, the aborted fetus has not been given the opportunity to live. Ronald Dworkin argued that the law should not call abortion murder.

For him, this is a First Amendment issue that deals with the separation of church and state. Dworkin’s rationale focused on the fact that most religions do not agree on when life actually begins – at conception, as a four-month fetus or at birth. He alleged that abortion was a religious decision and as such should not be restricted by the law. Pope John Paul II, on the other hand, left no question about abortion in the Catholic Church. The Pope has often argued vigorously that abortion is murder and condemns laws that permit abortion as being intrinsically unjust, lacking in authentic juridical validity, and not being morally binding (Thomson, 1996; p. htm).

Dworkin said that there should be an agreement on the sanctity of life, that there is an intrinsic value of life regardless of how it was conceived. But, Dworkin also promotes a metric of disrespect which allows him to distinguish between better and worse abortions and to justify some of the most accepted exceptions to a moral objection to abortion, such as in the cases of incest and rape. In other words, Dworkin does not take a legal stand. He does, however, take a religious stand and bases his arguments from that point of view. He also allows himself a comfortable escape from addressing the morality of abortion by giving exceptions — his metric of disrespect which one could also call his line of tolerance.

It is like a space within which the morality of abortion has no place. If it is a case of rape or incest, abortion is a moral act, otherwise, it is not a moral act. How can an act be moral sometimes and not other times? The fact is that the entire pro-abortion argument has consistently been based on lies. This is especially when the medical needs of aborting have been used as the basis for aborting a fetus. Supporters consistently use euphemisms such as terminating a pregnancy which is dishonest. They also say that the fetus is only a ‘potential’ human being as if this fetus might be born as something other than a human being.

They argue that the decision concerning abortion should be between the woman and her doctor but they fail to point out that in the greater majority of cases, the woman has never met the doctor who will perform the abortion until the time of the procedure. Even in the very beginning of the legal controversy, the supporters of Roe v Wade argued were misled; they believed legal abortion would result in fewer unwanted children born, there would be fewer children living in poverty, and there would be less child-abuse. None of these predictions has materialized. It only takes reading the daily newspaper to show these arguments were empty wishes or hopes. In reality, the opposite has happened.

The numbers of children abused and neglected is increasing exponentially. The number of children living in poverty grows every day. Based on these two facts, the number of unwanted children being born has not been reduced proportionately with the population growth, it has increased. In fact, the issue of abortion has become even more horrible. Today, there is a procedure called partial birth which simply means that the fetus is a human being and there can be no doubt about this. It is clear and plain murder. Technology continues to advance at great speed. There may well soon be a way to take the fetus live from the mother’s womb, place that fetus in an artificial womb and have it grow to infant-hood.

Where will the pro- and anti-abortionists stand on this issue? Will this act be moral? The fetus will not be killed; it will live and grow. This will still not make the act moral. The fetus may continue to live but it is denied the nutrients and nurturance of its biological mother. This would surely have a negative effect on the mental and psychological growth of the infant, if not his or her physical growth. The fetus inside its mother’s womb gains a lot more than just the chemicals and nutrients it needs to grow and develop; there is an emotional bond that occurs even when the pregnant woman does not want the child.

If and when this technology becomes available, we will have entered a terrible science fiction movie, one in which there are even fewer morals than exist today. This hypothesis, in fact, reminds this writer of the analogy Thomson used of the famous violin player taking the kidney functions of a kidnapped and unwilling donor. This fetus will be taken unwillingly from its host, kidnapped and taken from the warmth of its natural womb only to be placed in an artificial environment. If life begins at conception, which even Thomson concedes, then that life has a right to say what should happen to it. Since it is not capable of defending itself, others must help; it is like fighting for the underdog.

The fetus is the underdog that must be protected against all forms of damage and ultimately death. Religion Essays.

Abortion

In 1973, the Supreme Courts decision made it possible for women to get safe, legal abortions from well-trained medical surgeons, and therefore led to dramatic decreases in pregnancy-related injury and death (abortion). Now there is a new proposal to close abortion clinics. This proposal takes away the privacy rights of American women that are guaranteed by our Constitution. By closing abortion clinics the government is not only taking away womens rights, but is also punishing those whom want to exercise their right of a pro-choice woman.
Abortion clinics allow thousands of women every year to have abortions. Having the abortion should be womans personal choice. By closing these clinics, there will be no providers to perform the operation, so the choice has already been made for them. Closing the clinics will increase the barriers of having an abortion. When there are too many obstacles, the right to make their own choice is taken away from them. In 1973 the American Supreme Court ruled that Americans right to privacy included: the right of a woman to decide whether to have children, and the right of a woman and her doctor to make that decision without state interference (abortion). The Constitution says we have a right to privacy, so taking away a womans chance to make decisions about her own body violates that right.
The American Civil Liberties Union defends the Constitution and peoples rights.
ACLU has protected the rights of abortion for women, and in recent years has argued mayor cases opposing restrictions that deny woman access to reproductive health care (ACLU). Policy 263 states: The ACLU holds that every woman, as a matter of her right to the enjoyment of life, liberty, and privacy, should be free to determine whether and when to bear children.(The American Civil Liberties Union)
The closure of abortion clinics will be done with the purpose to reduce the number of abortions. This raises the question whether this will be an effective method or not. Before 1973 abortions were illegal yet the number of women who sought abortions did not decrease (abortion). Before 1973 many thousands of women died or suffered serious medical problems after attempting to perform their own abortions, or going to untrained doctors who performed cheap abortions with uncivilized methods or in unsanitary conditions (The Abortion Law Homepage.). If clinics are closed, women will still continue to attempt, and succeed, in ending unwanted pregnancies just like before 1973. Women will risk their health and possibly even their lives. By keeping these abortions clinics open it ensures a higher probability that the women who do have abortions will be in a safe, sanitary environment, and therefore injuries will be fewer in number.
If clinics are shut, the waiting lists of abortion clinics in other countries will be much longer. Women will have to wait longer to get an abortion, and will be treated later in their pregnancy which is much more dangerous for the pregnant women.
Pro-life activists claim that the unborn baby is alive and has feelings when the heart begins beating. But, the heartbeat begins between the eighteenth and twenty-fifth day (Fetus). They also say that women who have abortions are murderers. This problem could be solved by keeping abortion clinics open, because then the woman can be treated before the twenty fifth day when the fetus is not yet a living baby. She will not have to wait because of long waiting lists, but instead will have the abortion as soon as possible with as less psychological pain.
If a woman has to travel to another country to have a legal abortion, she will have to pay more money. She will now not only have to pay for the abortion itself, but also the traveling costs and that does not include the psychological costs as well. Not all people can afford these costs. So by keeping clinics open more women will have the chance to exercise their right and have their desired abortion. If a working woman or student suddenly has to leave the country, this means she will have to think of excuses and lies for an explanation. This is not fair to the woman, she should not have to

x

Hi!
I'm Lydia!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out