Abortion Debate Analysis

Nate Mcnally 7/5/2017

Missing

For decades, the subject of much controversy has been the discussion of abortion. To first understand what the sides are, one must first understand what abortion is. For starters, abortion is the intentional termination of an unborn human offspring. The term in that conclusion, i.e “human,” causes the most controversy amongst those who even have the “gaul” to discuss the topic. However, that isn't the only issue amongst the debate, it has been considered to be a women’s rights issue and resulted in the Supreme Court case Roe v Wade in the 70s. That being said, the topic of discussion is filled with diverse opinions and worldviews, this will just be the underlying ideas behind both sides.

         Those who are for abortion, or pro-abortion, fall into two base categories involving the discussion. Perhaps the two categories intertwine but this is a simplified version of the pro-abortion side. The first argument is that the fetus doesn't warrant the title of a “human” due to the fact that it is not sentient. The premise is that if it is not self-recognizing or any of the sort, is not deserving of human rights. Studies show that abortions are typically done within the first 8 weeks. That being said, the unborn life forms its heart at 6 weeks. However, the combat to this is the argument that babies do not feel pain until around the 24-week mark, however, opposing studies have shown that the fetus can react to negative stimuli as early as 5 weeks into the development cycle. Negative stimuli cause the fetus to attempt to move away, though there isn't a full central nervous system, the fetus can evidently respond to what would normally cause pain in a negative manner. This argument has faltered within the past fews, the women’s right argument has not. The premise is that the child can be a burden on the woman and that making a woman give birth with a child she cannot take care of is immoral. The idea is that if a woman is not economically stable, statistically speaking this is mostly the case amongst mothers who have an abortion, then she should not be burdened with the child should she not want to be. Furthermore, the idea is that it should be the mother’s choice because “it is her body” as many of those who support abortion state. Both these arguments can blend however and create the ultimate conclusion that the mother should have full authority over the entity that doesn't warrant the human label.

         Those who are against abortion are often labeled as pro-life. The premise is simple, the developing fetus inside the woman is a human life and as such deserves life as much as any other human. The argument is that by the 6-week point the developing baby already has a heartbeat, and the heartbeat is not in the possession of the mother for it is a completely independent heartbeat. Not only that, but there is the premise that the baby should not be aborted due to the scary numbers and sights that come from abortion. The amount of abortions reported by the CDC in 2013 alone was 664,435. There have been reports that organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, have sold the sample tissue of the aborted. The treatment of the aborted children is seen as very harsh and inhumane, and that has driven many to be pro-life. Overall, that is the objective argument made by the pro-life side. However, there is also a religious additive to the argument. Many members of the clergy have publicly denounced abortion; however, not the individuals themselves but the act of abortion. The belief is that it is potential human life and is one of God’s children, and if the baby is aborted then that is considered murder by many of the clergy.

         All in all, it is a very hard and complex topic to discuss. With that in mind, it should most certainly still be discussed and debated. No one side should be favored over the other and real cases can be and sometimes often are made by both sides. He growing fear of discussing this topic is an insult to the magnitude and gravity in which is possesses. There has been, like most things, no definitive answer or even common ground (mostly) in the discussion. This mostly derives from the fear of pro-lifers being labeled as “sexist” or pro-abortion individuals being labeled as “anti-human.” Either way, the quick labeling and disgust being destroyed is mutually beneficial and should be attained. This most likely will not be, but it is the ideal situation for progression and ought to be at least be strived for as without discussion, we are left with shouting and incoherent arguing which never leads to popular results.

        

missing

Subscribing to our mailing list to stay updated!

* indicates required