The Right to Life

The Right to Life

One of the biggest topics thrown around in politics, government, and everyday conversation is abortion. Abortion can be defined in many ways, but a basic definition would go something like this..."Any method used to terminate a human life from the moment of conception until birth. (Erlandson). Abortion is such a difficult subject to come to an agreement on because different people's lives and rights hang in the balance. Two major questions lie in the determination of whether abortion is right or wrong - "Is this a human life?", and "When does a human life begin?". Roe v. Wade was the first legal case to try and examine this subject at a closer look back in 1973; and nearly three decades after the Roe v. Wade decision made abortion legal in the U.S., the public debate continues to follow the well-worn path between condemnation and choice. Public attitudes do not.

Those who support abortion rights justify their position in several ways. To start, these people believe that life as a fetus is not technically a human life until after the second trimester of birth. They believe that an embryo is only a "potential" human being (Peikoff).

Aside from the argument of whether the fetus is viable or not, the basic idea of taking a women's rights to her own body disturbs many pro-choice believers. They feel that abortions are private affairs and do often involve painfully difficult decisions with life-long consequences. But they also feel that, tragically, the lives of the parents are completely ignored by the anti-abortionists. Yet that is the essential issue. They feel that in any conflict it's the actual, living persons who count, not the mere potential of the embryo. They are firm in the belief that what a woman does to her own body is her own business. In addition, they believe that it is best for a child to not be born at all than to be born hated, to a mother who is forced to have him because she has no choice, and not because she wants the child.

But there are also other issues defended by pro-choice believers. They feel that there are many other legitimate reasons why a rational woman might have an abortion--accidental pregnancy, rape, birth defects, or danger to her health. In cases such as rape and incest, they feel it is unjust to force a woman to complete her pregnancy due to someone else's mistake or problem. In cases where the mother's health is in jeopardy because of the pregnancy, they believe that the only logical and just thing to do is abort the baby, if the woman so desires.

I'm sure everyone would probably agree that in cases such as rape and health problems, abortion is a logical and just step. No one wants to harm a woman's life or cause her anymore more harm after a raping or bad experience. It would be an injustice to completely abandon a woman's rights to her own body. But I'm sure there are many pro-choice believers who also feel that there are certain times where abortion may become a sticky situation to look at and do see government's difficult task in settling this argument down.

I agree that we should do everything to protect a woman's rights, but at the same time feel that abortion is morally and physically a crime. Imagine yourself or perhaps one of your children, sleeping in your bed. Beyond your range of vision, an intruder enters your house. Without warning, the intruder cuts your arms, legs, and finally your head off. You only die when your heart cannot beat any more. In this world, a crime like that would be punished severely, but yet for some reason it is not. What has been described is abortion. Abortion is the killing of an innocent human life, and is wrong.

Contradictory to what many believe, I feel that once conception has taken place, a human life is in the midst of evolving. To say that a fetus is not a child is to believe in a world outside that of real life. Just as you can not get fruit without first starting with a seed, you can not get human life without first starting with a fetus. The fetus is a human. Just because it is not outside of the mother, does not mean it does not have feelings or sensations or anything else that born children do. If life does not begin at the conception, then what does? To say conception does not begin a life is to say that conception has no meaning, which everyone knows it no where near the truth.

Abortion is the outright killing of a human life. During the process of abortion, the baby's voice is not heard. Many believe that the woman should have control of her own body; and in a way, I do agree with this. But who has control of the baby life's and the baby's body? Why should the woman have the right to murder a child just because she does not want to go through with the birth? There is no reason. The baby has a life of its own and should not be subject to the woman's false beliefs and unjust actions. Because the baby is not outside of the womb, does not mean it does not have sensation or feeling. It knows that it is being killed, but because many believe that it is not technically a baby yet, the murder is allowable. I'm reminded of a picture in which a baby inside the mother's womb is grabbing the finger of a surgeon during a fetal operation (Appendix A). This baby was at a stage where it could've been aborted legally is the mother so wished. This just goes to show that a baby is still a baby and should be considered murdered when killed inside the womb.

All of the methods used for abortion are painful for the child. The most common method used is the tearing of the body parts, piece by piece, from the baby's body. It is a scientifically proven fact that there are nerves in the child's body, and that they do feel themselves being slowly pulled apart and smashed. Their nerves are close