Khan !

Humza Khan

Dr. Sterling

English 1302

15 April 2017

Abortion: Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life

Abortion is an extremely polarized and controversial topic in the United States. Namely

the act of exterminating a fetus according to the aspirations of a pregnant woman in a range of

dynamic situations. Most of the people in the United States are divided into two main factions.

Pro-Lifers are a group of people supporting the conservative stance, not bringing any harm to a

newly formed life form or fetus. Pro-Choice members, on the other hand, are the supporters of

womens rights concerning their own bodies and are a catalyst in propagating laws affecting

womens First Amendment rights. Abortion is one of the most common medical procedures

performed in the United States each year. More than 40% of all women will end a pregnancy by

abortion at some time in their reproductive lives (Trupin 1). The topic of abortion, as

controversial as it is, needs to be analyzed from both points of views as a Pro-Life supporter and

as a Pro-Choice debater.

The Pro-Choice proponents of the abortion movement characterize their ethical

discussion by appealing to societal moral norms. A majority of Americans are pro-choice, yet

many who support abortion rights dont appear to feel the need to fight to insure

them (Baumgardner 20). In other words, Baumgardner is focusing on millennial generation who

are uninformed of their rights as an individual in a free liberal ideal democracy. In addition to

more Americans being Pro-Choice young women tend to view reproductive freedom as their
 Khan !2

birthright. This statement needs some deconstruction: Most younger women were born after

Roe and thus with the right to an abortion (Baumgardner 20). Meaning, the right of a woman to

either bear the baby she conceived or to not have it and choose a different avenue of a lifestyle.

The millennials correspond that right to the First Amendment rights of the basic liberties.

According to Shaw, They insist on perpetuating the impulsive abortion patient trope,

infantilizing women in the process. This is perhaps most evident in pushes for anti-choice

legislation requiring waiting periods, counseling, and forced ultrasounds for people seeking

abortionsas if they cant or wont make informed decisions (1). Here Shaw argues that

woman are compared to young children when making choices about their own bodies and their

offspring enforcing unnecessary medical procedures de-voiding them choice. Similar tactics of

blocking women from making choices for their own bodies have been used by the Pro-Lifers for

anti-choice legislation. Moreover, Everyone deserves to enter parenthood willingly, and every

child deserves a parent who is willing to bear the responsibilities of this lifelong commitment.

Children should be wanted and cherished, not forced into this world as punishment for their

parents engaging in sex (Shaw 1). Perhaps Shaw explicates that its better not to have a child

with no resources to take care of it then to have it and compromise its upbringing.

The Pro-Life proponents of the anti-abortion movement characterize their argument by

stressing the need for the preservation of life. Trupin discusses the issue of parental notification

by saying a number of state laws do require that some minors notify parents before obtaining an

abortion, but what provisions are necessary to protect young women who feel they cannot notify

their parents (1). Part of Trupins argument here is the ethical dilemma of teens getting pregnant

at a very early age in their lives and social responsibilities of a society pertaining to those
 Khan !3

individuals. She implies that the family structure of modern American families should be

conservative and family oriented, hence, the question of a child birth not being reported should

be out of question. According to Kaczor, there is no difference between the decision to abort at

six weeks and the decision to do so when the fetus would be viable outside of the womb, which

today is generally right before predisposition (2011). In essence in his argument, the killing of a

fully formed human at any stage of life should be considered morally unacceptable. Moreover,

Kaczor argues that the physical health of a human being is a basic right and would call into

question the basic equality of all human beings prejudiced upon their level of development in

their life-cycles (2011). His argument raises a serious dilemma in analyzing ethical standards

pertaining to abortion. He delineates We should reject, for example, the analogy between the

gradual development of a right to life and the gradual attainment of other rights. There is a

radical difference between the right to life and the rights to vote or drive or hold public

office (Kaczor 2011). Perhaps a young child has no right to drive due to his age relating to

driver responsibilities, whereas there is no such responsibility for a persons right to life.

Furthermore, Worldwide, some 20-30 million legal abortions are performed each year, with

another 10-20 million abortions performed illegally. Illegal abortions are unsafe and account for

13% of all deaths of women because of serious complications (Trupin 1). The figures provide a

vivid picture of an unprecedented dilemma worldwide, reflecting the danger of choosing

abortion and mistaking it for a womans natural right.

Even though Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choice supporters differ on a number of topics they have

consensus on a few others. Saad proclaims:

 Khan !4

Pro-life and pro-choice Americans also broadly agree that abortion should be legal when a

woman's life or physical health is endangered by pregnancy and when pregnancy is caused by

rape or incest. Both groups favor banning partial-birth abortions, and requiring parental consent

for minors. Additionally, a slim majority of pro-choice Americans (52%) agree with 90% of pro-

life Americans that abortion should be illegal in the second trimester (1).

In essence, when the individual liberties of Americans are questioned both Pro-Life and Pro-

Choice supporters start seeing the light and become more reasonable putting human lives first.

Similarly, on the issue on the passing of legislation regarding abortion the lawmakers become

more amicable and see common ground on most of these issues. According to Pro-Choice and

Anti-abortion, both sides of the spectrum are contentious on ignoring the pregnant womans

viewpoint (1). Obviously, the womans body in question does not take into effect the fact that

the womans right to do whatever with her body is being nullified.

In spite of all the differences between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice groups there are some

ways of compromise. One way to compromise amongst these groups is the use of contraception

to lower the chances of a pregnancy. Pro-Choice and Anti-Abortion states typical condom use

has a 5-year failure rate of 56%, contraception used perfectly has a 5-year failure rate of 10% to

27% (depending on the kind of contraception used), and vasectomies have a 5-year failure rate of

0.5%. Contraception believers may feel a little better because of this 0.5%, but such a percentage

applied to any multi-million population still represents at least thousands of pregnancies (1).

Another area of compromise would be defective birth in children. Their positions are both total

no-responsibility towards defective births and children suffering of bad health. No one is

responsible for them, its Gods will that they be born that way, or its just a natural event and
 Khan !5

thats how it is, as if the suffering child popped into existence by magic (Pro-Choice and Anti-

Abortion 1). A defective birth absolves believers of Pro-Choice and Pro-Life from all

responsibility of wrong doing and the matter becomes a work of God. Lastly, working together to

come up with reasonable legislation that minimizes the harm done to a human life should be the

main focus of both the Right-Wing and Left-Wing people.

 Khan !6

Works Cited

Baumgardner, Jennifer. The Pro-Choice PR Problem . EBSCOhost, The Nation, 5 Mar. 2001.

Accessed 15 Apr. 2017.

Kaczor, Christopher. Equal Rights, Unequal Wrongs. First Things, Firstthings.com, 1 July

2011. Accessed 16 Apr. 2017.

Pro-Choice and Anti-Abortion: What They Have in Common. The Prime Directive,

Wordpress.com, 9 Mar. 2012. Accessed 15 Apr. 2017.

Saad, Lydia. Plenty of Common Ground Found in Abortion Debate. Gallup.com, Gallup, 8

Aug. 2011. Accessed 15 Apr. 2017.

Shaw, Maureen. Becoming a Mother Made Me Even More Pro-Choice. Rewire, Rewire, 2

May 2016. Accessed 15 Apr. 2017.

Trupin, Suzanne R. Abortion. EMedicineHealth, EMedicineHealth.com, 20 June 2015.

Accessed 16 Apr. 2017.