If you order your essay from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Anti-Abortion. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Anti-Abortion paper right on time.
Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Anti-Abortion, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Anti-Abortion paper at affordable prices!Anti-Abortion The Fight for Life
Since the Darwinian Revolution of the 1th century, our society has turned upside down. Everything under the sun has become questionable, the origin of life, how we came to be, and where are we headed.But one of the greatest impacts of this new age thinking is its effect on our Old World values.Western societies values, morals and ethics have become debatable, with some people striving for change and others clinging for stability.Battle lines have been drawn and the Liberals and Conservatives were ready to duke it out on a number of issues.One of these debates centers on a woman's right to have an abortion.
According to the Webster's dictionary an abortion is defined as a miscarriage, something misshapen or unnatural.It further defines an abortion as a procedure in which an embryo or fetus is prohibited from developing by artificial means, which one could argue that this is next to murder.The question is how can we as a society sanction the murdering of developing babies?
It can equally be stated that abortion is unnatural and a health hazard to women who have undergone the procedure.Whatever the case, abortion should be outlawed because it is immoral and mothers should face the responsibilities of their actions.Many arguments have been used in order to put an end to abortion or at least in order to establish dialogue, and one of the oldest arguments against abortion is the religious standpoint.
Buy custom Anti-Abortion term paper
In recent times we have become an increasingly purist society the Old World thinking is still at the heart of our social relations and laws.The Bible says, "Thou shalt not kill" thus prohibiting people from harming others or themselves.Abortion and its advocates violate this law.They seek to change one of the most fundamental values of our society.Pro-choice under this stance is equated with murder and "playing God".Pro-choice may raise the question, how can a minority inflict its views on the majority? According to Francis X. Meenan, this is a false assumption.He actually claims that those who favor abortion on demand are the real minority (Bender & Leone, 7).Meena further points out that the issue of abortion is a moral debate and cannot be settled by numbers.So even if pro-choice advocates outnumbered pro-life advocates, this would prove or settle nothing (7).This stance claims that we should focus more on moral principals and eradicate the practice of abortion in our society.The Biblical understanding of life is not the only religious argument that opposes abortion and its practice. Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and many other world faiths have a similar stance on abortion.Hinduism claims that the soul enters the embryo at the time of conception and abortion should hence be outlawed except in the case of rape or incest.Buddhism takes a similar stance and claims abortion is "murdering", it also states that each case should be individually analyzed.Islam considers abortion as a moral crime and sees life (its start and finish) as the jurisdiction of God.Islamic law states that abortion is illegal except in those situations in which the woman's life is in jeopardy.The question that arises after examining these numerous perspectives is how can abortion, a practice that violates or threatens our fundamental beliefs, be tolerated?
The critics of the anti-abortion perspective, "pro-choice", have argued that biblical law and its perspectives are codes of life for believers and in a pluralistic society this view shouldn't be a reference or a deciding factor.One could imagine how it would be to have another foreign view imposed on us so why would anyone impose their views on others or the society at large?Other pro-choice arguments have gone on to claim that abortion is not immoral because morality is subjective hence people decide on their own what is moral or immoral.According to Daniel C. Maguire, even religious people can disagree on abortion. Bender and Leone claim that religion is against abortion because the church is dominated by male influence (101). Maguire wants to know how and why men have the authority to dictate what women decide to do with their bodies and asks is it "life" they seek to protect or is it the female "sexuality" they wish to control? (101) The Catholic Code of Canon excommunicates one for aborting a fertilized egg, but not for killing a baby after birth.This hypocrisy thus discredits the religious argument against abortion.The counter-criticism, which in turn disproves of abortion claims that advocates of pro-choice are imposing their values on the greater population and not the other way around.In my opinion this is a good counter-strike because too often pro-choice individuals claim that the other side is being closed minded and yet seem to neglect their own errors.But there must be a line drawn at some point.People are not allowed to murder other people because it is wrong.This is all a basic example of knowing right from wrong.The law that states that you are not allowed to murder people came from a religious stand point many years ago, but did people argue that it is not right to make up such a law and force someone's beliefs in what is right and wrong on others?No.So, how does this situation differ from any other?America was founded on religious beliefs.Many other practices in America are based on religion and the morals that are involved in religious practice whether "pro-choicers" believe it or not.Pro-life simply states that abortion is wrong for the same reason our four fathers stated that murder of other human beings is wrong.
Abortion is murder; there should be no argument to that.I find it ironic that most pro-choice people are against the death penalty and angrily call it, "cold blooded murder."This is not to get off the subject, but to give a comparison.Many pro-life people also oppose the death penalty.I find it impossible to understand how someone who is pro-choice can staunchly protest the right of a woman to abort an innocent baby and yet become enraged if the state executes a guilty killer?While the morality of capital punishment is debatable, and in rare occasions an innocent person might be executed, 100% of abortions result in the death of truly innocent lives.Regardless of your position on the death penalty, it is important to recognize that if a criminal is executed, he is at least guilty of something terrible i.e. murder.A baby, however, is guilty of nothing, and is similarly terminated through abortion.Abortion is a premeditated act on part of the mother to end the life of the living baby inside her womb.Murder is also premeditated act on part of one individual to take an innocent person's life.
Another argument, which opposes abortion, states that abortion should not be a woman's personal choice.Women only play one role in having a baby.There is a man's role involved and there is a new life, which under the banner of abortion would be extinguished.A pro-abortionist denies humanity to the fetus at all, a stance that shows a lack of moral character (Wennberg, 57). This perspective states that the growing fetus is an autonomous life form that has its own rights regardless and separate of the woman. I would argue that females who have undergone an abortion have infringed on the life of another human being in order to satisfy their own needs.Abortion is an incredibly selfish act on the part of a woman.Not only are they killing an innocent child and stealing its chance for a beautiful life, but she is also stealing another person the chance of a having a child other than herself.
Other arguments opposing abortion state that if we keep abortion legal it will become a choice ethic or a new form of birth control (Wennberg, ).From this point, life will be a privilege only for a chosen few, the value of human life will be cheapened with people only having babies when it is convenient.Critics of this argument that claim abortion should be a woman's personal choice.They state that true woman's liberation is intertwined with the right to bear children or the decision to abort their unborn child at will (Saarni, 104). So is this what women burned their bras for in the 60's?To be able to kill their unborn child?The way I interpret this argument is that a woman has the right to decide whether or not another human being should be allowed to live just because she carries the human.This defiantly is a "playing God" role.If we are to go as far to state that, then what's to stop us from giving the mother the same right after the child has been born.One day the mother decides the child isn't convenient so she decided to kill it.I realize this is ridiculous, but that is what this argument states.Further claims have stated that the pro-choice argument is embedded in a larger issue which the dominant male-oriented society wants to avoid, that being feminism (Wennberg, 68).According to feminist, this statement regards abortion as a social issue, which opens the doors for women's liberation and gives them power to make decisions in their own life.And as one could imagine this is not a view that would be favored by male society.Once again, is this what women were fighting for when they fought for their liberation?I think not.Ask any woman from that time if this is what she wanted the future generation to turn their hard work of fighting for women's rights into, the right to kill their child.Other criticism claims that women who are opposed to abortion do so because they value human well-being and those politicians who seek to outlaw abortion come in the name of "family values" (Saarni, 115).Thus pro-choice isn't seen as a stance that is concerned, about the well being of people.
In a quest to establish a woman's choice the government is viewed as a powerful entity."Perhaps the issue of choice should be left to the individual instead of the state," says Wennberg (8).In my opinion the right to bear children or not should not be just a woman's decision.Why must women's liberation be related to her independent choice and not with a socially intellectual choice where all parties find a middle ground?The statement that the abortion argument is a part of a larger sphere, which includes feminism and that the powers that be are trying to put an end to this, is based on speculation.If this were true why is it that women have gained power all across the board in all walks of life only to be oppressed in this issue?Abortion affects society as a whole, not just the woman.One independent woman shouldn't have the power to make a decision that will affect society.Women who seek the well being for life naturally side up with the pro-life perspective.To claim that politicians with their own personal agendas are manipulating these women is saying that these women value life alongside their male counter parts and that is the reasoning why many strive towards pro-life.
The argument that legal abortion harms public health is yet another reason to re-evaluate the case of abortion.The fact is that abortion is a complicated procedure that can harm a woman's body, disabling her from bearing children.Complications include hemorrhaging and laceration of the cervix (Richardson, 6).Other studies done by Stallworthy, Moolga, Oker and Walsh have reported the complications that occurred during 1,18 legal abortions.While there have been no deaths reported, .5% of the patients required blood transfusions, 4.% had cervical lacerations and 1.% of the patients uteri were perforated.Post-abortion infection occurred in 7% of these women.Other complications in pregnancy and with abortions state that there is a correlation between pre-mature birth and a woman's exposure to abortion (Richardson, 4).This perhaps has to do with the fact that the cervix could be damaged after the use of instruments to perform abortion (Richardson, 4).In my opinion abortion decreases public health and is a dangerous procedure.Pro-choice argues that abortion actually guards public safety by providing an outlet for young women who would have otherwise had a "back alley" abortion (Richardson, 57).Advocates of this argument would most likely state that since the legalization of abortion an account of accurate records has been kept thus catering to health concerns.Other statements claim that since 17 the number of women, percentage wise, who are using safer methods, has increased (Richardson, 51).Most pro-choice people usually dont want to hear the facts. Deep down they realize to fully face the truth about abortion, and how disgusting it really is, might cause them to be persuaded it is evil, so many shut their ears. The following is a brief description of two common abortion methods.Abortions performed during the first 1 weeks are done with a suction machine that is 5 times more powerful than a vacuum cleaner. (Weldon, 8)The power of the vacuum tears the body of the fetus apart, limb by limb until all that remains is the tiny head.If the head is too large to be suctioned the abortionist inserts forceps into the uterus to crush the skull so it can be suction out as well. (Weldon, 8)Lest you think the fetus isnt fully developed at this stage in the womb, an 8-week-old fetus has all the same organs and body parts of a baby that has been born. Abortions performed between the fourth and inserting forceps and clamping them onto arms and legs do eighth month. The abortionist twists off body parts piece by piece and yanks them out.It is scientifically proven that babies in the womb feel pain. (Weldon, )In fact, the intensity of pain experienced by both a fetus and a baby istimes higher than a child or adult.If a cannibalistic killer kidnapped your baby and ripped her apart limb by limb wouldnt you be shocked and horrified?Then why don't doctors who have performed thousands of abortions in their lives horrify people?In my personal opinion pro-life arguments simply state how legalized abortion has reduce the black market.It does not attempt to debate on the ethics of the matter, or doesn't mention the risk factor associated with abortion.I am sure military force monitoring our cities could reduce crime, yet is this solution, which serves the best interest? To argue that society is better off with legalized abortion because it reduces the black market is not a very good solution.It is a decision that is poor, unethical, and most of all a tremendous health hazard.This pro-choice argument doesn't even mention the huge amount of couples that are barren and seek to adopt.This argument jumps straight to the conclusion that it is better to kill an unborn child rather than search for alternative, better options.Hundreds of couples are put on waiting lists daily to adopt.These are people who actually want a child.
Another argument, which is often cited as a justification for abortion, is one's economic concerns.Many women who get pregnant but are poor are the first to get an abortion.It seems like the struggles of modern life creates an obstacle for those women, and a child becomes a burden (Saarni, 17).Is this what our society has come to?Is this the condition of our mothers?It seems like more and more women are redirected towards abortion as a solution to their problems.Human life now comes with a price tag and it is no longer regarded as sacred but is seen as a disposable entity when, "the going gets tough".Society no longer values life and is willing to, or demanding that women, especially poor or black women control the number of babies they have or the government will control it for them (Saarni, 4).The critics take the other stance and claim that economics is one of the most important reasons we should keep legal abortions.Legal abortions provide an avenue for underprivileged women who cannot support another child in this world.They claim that abortion is in the best interest for the mother, child and the taxpayers (Saarni, ).They also claim that abortion services are an equalizer, which maintain low birth rates amongst today's women.This means that women use abortion as a method of birth control, which enables them to remain independent, carry out a career, and live a free-spirited life (Saarni, 0).Once again, pro-choice never even offers the suggestion of adoption and letting the child live.I personally believe that economics is not a good reason to abort a life.If one cannot afford to bring a life into this world then they ought to take all necessary precautions to make sure one will not get pregnant.I do not think abortion is in the best interest of anyone but the selfish mother who has willingly destroyed the life of an unborn baby.
Finally, it is a shame if modern women feel that abortion is some sort of birth control.It is unfortunate that life is not valued like it once was and that independence and financial gain have become the new objectives in life.It is perhaps this mentality to equate abortion with birth control in the guise of female liberation that is the most dangerous to traditional family values.The question is what does this say about us as a society when we begin to murder our own and then claim that we are modern and civilized?
In conclusion, abortion has many ominous consequences and shows how the very moral fiber of our society is disintegrating. Everyone agrees that it is wrong to deliberately hurt another person, whether physically, mentally, or emotionally.Abortion is an act contrary to love. It does the ultimate harm by killing a living being! A fetus in the womb feels pain in the same way a fully born baby does. The fetus heartbeat is stopped and depending on the type of abortion, its legs; arms, head, and body are torn to pieces. A woman who has an abortion is not acting in love. She is putting her own selfish needs (whether education, career, or financial) ahead of the baby in her womb.
It is a moral crime, a crime to the unborn child, a crime to society as a whole and therefore should be outlawed.
Work Cited
Bender, David L. & Leone Bruno.Abortion Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego
Greenhaven Press, 186.
Richardson, Erick.The Crime of Abortion.New York Prentice-Hall Inc., 18.
Saarni, Aaron.Abortion Risk Vs. Benefit.New York Oxford University Press, 10.
Weldon, John.The Facts on Abortion.New York Random House, 15.
Wennberg, Robert N.Life in the Balance Exploring the Abortion Controversy. Chicago
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 185.
Please note that this sample paper on Anti-Abortion is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Anti-Abortion, we are here to assist you.Your persuasive essay on Anti-Abortion will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignmentand you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
