TOULMIN ESSAY: THOUGHTS ON ABORTION
Abortion should be allowed in the United States. It should be allowed because a woman should have the right to control her own body. Abortion has become a very politically-charged issue in past years with political parties and candidates using their stance on it as ways to gain votes and support. Abortions are not only performed for convenience, but are an actual medical procedure that has its purposes. For instance, in the case of rape or incest, the impregnation of the woman would be through no fault of her own, and she should therefore have the power to remove the baby if she so chooses (fwhc.org/abortion).
Opponents of abortion argue that once a child is conceived, it is a living human and therefore cannot be killed without it being classified as murder. This is a very conservative stance to take, in my opinion. Things are not always as black and white as whether it is right or if it is wrong. On the other hand, I do see how people can believe that it is immoral. The idea of ending the life of something, no matter how small or young does toe some ethical boundaries. However, it can sometimes be the best option for all parties involved.
Abortions can also be an optional choice for pregnant women that are not necessarily prepared for having a child. If a woman, usually a young, non-expectant woman, is pregnant and decides to have an abortion because she would not be able to be a good mother to the child then that choice should be respected. It takes a lot of courage to admit that one is not ready for something, and abortions are not something that people want to do, but sometimes they have to be done.
Also, the prohibition of abortion, like the prohibition of anything, will lead to the development of illegal abortions. Also, women could simply travel to a country where abortions are legal if they wanted to get an abortion. Also, these potential underground abortion methods that would develop would be extremely dangerous to the mother, unlike abortions performed by licensed professionals. If abortion is completely prohibited, I believe the abortion issue could get even worse, with women going to extreme and dangerous lengths in order to make the choice that they feel is best for them.
As much as abortion has been a political issue, it has also been an issue of a religious nature. Christians believe that abortion is destroying something that God has helped to create, and that it is as morally damning as murder. These religious groups feel that not only is the act of abortion immoral and worthy of scorn, but also that the individuals associated with the act are as well. This leads to these groups doing such things as protesting outside of abortion clinics, and misinforming potential abortion recipients.
Recent developments in technology have created another abortion-related issue. Medical professionals have the technology that can tell if a child is going to be severely disabled and therefore only capable of living an extremely hard, painful life (fwhc.org/abortion). If an abortion could be performed to save the child from a short life of misery then why not allow it? While some will argue that an abortion of a disabled child would be a horrible thing to do and would be considered as “taking the easy way out”, others will be able to see the good it could do in preventing the development of a life that would be painful and expensive for all of those who are involved.
The opponents of abortion for disabled children argue that nobody is at liberty to decide if one’s life is worth living or not especially when that person has not even had a chance to live it. This is a very valid point; one of the most valid presented by abortion opponents in my opinion, and should be looked into more. The fact of the matter is that there is no true way of knowing if the child would have wanted to live its life or not. There is no way of knowing whether the child would have discovered a cure for cancer or done something else great. The fact is that it should be the decision of the mother. It is the mother who must carry the child, and she alone should have the authority to decide what is best for her own body.
Opponents of abortion argue that once a child is conceived, it is a living human and therefore cannot be killed without it being classified as murder. This is a very conservative stance to take, in my opinion. Things are not always as black and white as whether it is right or if it is wrong. On the other hand, I do see how people can believe that it is immoral. The idea of ending the life of something, no matter how small or young does toe some ethical boundaries. However, it can sometimes be the best option for all parties involved.
Abortions can also be an optional choice for pregnant women that are not necessarily prepared for having a child. If a woman, usually a young, non-expectant woman, is pregnant and decides to have an abortion because she would not be able to be a good mother to the child then that choice should be respected. It takes a lot of courage to admit that one is not ready for something, and abortions are not something that people want to do, but sometimes they have to be done.
Also, the prohibition of abortion, like the prohibition of anything, will lead to the development of illegal abortions. Also, women could simply travel to a country where abortions are legal if they wanted to get an abortion. Also, these potential underground abortion methods that would develop would be extremely dangerous to the mother, unlike abortions performed by licensed professionals. If abortion is completely prohibited, I believe the abortion issue could get even worse, with women going to extreme and dangerous lengths in order to make the choice that they feel is best for them.
As much as abortion has been a political issue, it has also been an issue of a religious nature. Christians believe that abortion is destroying something that God has helped to create, and that it is as morally damning as murder. These religious groups feel that not only is the act of abortion immoral and worthy of scorn, but also that the individuals associated with the act are as well. This leads to these groups doing such things as protesting outside of abortion clinics, and misinforming potential abortion recipients.
Recent developments in technology have created another abortion-related issue. Medical professionals have the technology that can tell if a child is going to be severely disabled and therefore only capable of living an extremely hard, painful life (fwhc.org/abortion). If an abortion could be performed to save the child from a short life of misery then why not allow it? While some will argue that an abortion of a disabled child would be a horrible thing to do and would be considered as “taking the easy way out”, others will be able to see the good it could do in preventing the development of a life that would be painful and expensive for all of those who are involved.
The opponents of abortion for disabled children argue that nobody is at liberty to decide if one’s life is worth living or not especially when that person has not even had a chance to live it. This is a very valid point; one of the most valid presented by abortion opponents in my opinion, and should be looked into more. The fact of the matter is that there is no true way of knowing if the child would have wanted to live its life or not. There is no way of knowing whether the child would have discovered a cure for cancer or done something else great. The fact is that it should be the decision of the mother. It is the mother who must carry the child, and she alone should have the authority to decide what is best for her own body.