The Abortion Debate - Essay Example

The Abortion Debate In 1973 The U.S. Supreme Court decided that abortion would be legal. This historicdecision did not end the debate. Nearly 40 years later abortion may be the most controversial and emotional issues in the nation. The divide between the ‘pro-life’ and ‘pro-choice’ sides is wide with people decidedly on one side or the other. Few are willing to try to understand the opposing opinion. Each side firmly believes they have the moral high ground and that the other is horribly mistaken.

One is concerned with the innocent fetus being killed for the sake of convenience, the other concerned with the health of young women who would maim themselves in an attempt to perform an unsafe illegal abortion. Perhaps the national discussion would be furthered if each side better understood the other which is what this paper intends to do. Those are against the idea of legal abortions generally are aligned with the religious right. Not all religious persons are ‘pro-life.’ The religious right describes those with rigid, Christian fundamentalist views.

Though the Bible does not mention the word abortion, this faction of society believes life begins at conception. Many do not think contraception should be legal either because it is ‘playing God’ in their opinion. They say that legal abortions allow the potential father to coerce the pregnant women into killing their unborn child. Abortion makes it easy for the man to say ‘just go take care of it’ and their responsibility for the baby ends there without another thought. The woman must endure the discomfort of the medical procedure followed by a lifetime of regret and guilt due to this irreversible decision.

The concerns of the religious right are understandable if short-sighted. Doctors ‘play God’ every day by curing diseases and saving lives. Who’s to say God, within His divine plan, didn’t inflict a disease on a person and that a doctor intervened when it was ‘their time’ to die? The ‘playing God’ is argument is a tough sell. One must first admit and prove they know the mind of God and good luck with that. The coercion argument is weak too. Yes, too many men do pressure women into having abortions but men found ways to abdicate their fatherly responsibilities long before 1973.

The Supreme Court determined in the famous Roe vs. Wade case that life begins at viability meaning when the unborn child can survive outside the womb, roughly following six months of gestation. This is also when the Islamic religion defines life. The Constitution refers to rights being afforded to those born in the U.S. It seems a reasonable line to draw, one that has been drawn by reasonable people. Class warfare is a phrase heard often in politics today. People are concerned about the widening divide between rich and poor.

Making abortion illegal would serve to further widen this gap. Prior to 1973, wealthy women always were able to have a safe abortion procedure. They either paid domestic doctors high fees to have a secret, illegal abortion or went overseas to a country that permitted the procedure. Hollywood starlet biographies of the black and white and silent movie eras are filled with secret abortion stories. It was commonplace. Poor women did not have access to a safe alternative. Many maimed themselves by using ‘back alley’ type procedures.

Abortions have always and will always happen. The difference is whether society allows them to be safe, whether or not the class divide will include safe procedures for all. Unfortunately many people in this country don’t care if the poor have access to health care of any type, seems that it’s mostly the same faction of society that opposes legal abortion. It’s those who identify themselves as conservative, Republican, Tea Party fundamentalist Christians who generally are against universal health care and legal abortion.

They speak of rights of the unborn yet following birth demonstrate little interest in caring for the child. They identify themselves as ‘values voter’ but these ‘values’ are a term used to describe intolerance not compassion and of discrimination pointed at the poor. Another problem with the argument of those who oppose legal abortion involves this group’s long history of science denial. They consider the Bible to be a science and history text while dismissing evolution, climate change and opposing stem cell research.

Instead of using the benchmark of viability as have the courts, reasonable people and other religions, they insist on the moment of conception as when life begins and when ending that ‘life’ can be considered murder. As with many other issues they fail to follow their unwavering position to its logical end. To them all forms of contraception are murder. Do they have funerals for the miscarried fetus? Of course not yet aborting a fetus of similar age if murder. It doesn’t make sense. A zygote, embryo or fetus up to viability is no more a human life than an acorn is an oak tree.

The abortion debate usually centers on an emotion versus reason debate. Those opposed do not want to attempt to understand the legal reasoning behind the 1973 decision. The U.S. Constitution does not include the word abortion. Still, a conservative Supreme Court decided 7-2 that abortion is acceptable using the nation’s foremost legal document. Conservative presidents, legislations and courts have come and gone since 1973 yet the law remains despite ongoing challenges to it. There must be a reason, a sound legal reason for abortion to still be legal nearly 40 years later.

However, those opposed want to hear no argument concerning the legality of the issue. They claim the moral high ground yet many rejoice when an abortion clinic is bombed or a clinic doctor assassinated. Where is the morality in a young, scared girl attempting to abort a fetus on her own? They say ‘she should have kept her legs together’ but that dismisses reality and does not address the problem. The problem is that those opposed to legal, safe abortion make a habit out of dismissing reality.