ABORTION – ANALYZE A PUBLIC DEBATE
There has been hot public debate on abortion with controversies surrounding legal and moral status of abortion. There are some groups supporting abortion and others which are against. Some groups like pro-choice movement regard abortion as morally permissible while pro-life movement view abortion being morally wrong. The political debate on abortion is restricted through legal documents. Protection rights are legally granted by government to citizens. On abortion law, public debate on abortion surrounds right for privacy. For example, debate on abortion regards the extent to which abortion is regulated. Even the Bible declares sanity for human life. There are many arguments for and against abortion like increased cost, checking population, child abuse and increased backstreet abortion among others.
Some pro-choice supporters argue that abortion should be made illegal and government regulate abortion more than medical practices. Pro-life supporters argue that government should be allowed to regulate abortion after 20th week of viability. According to ethics abortion is referred as moral philosophy with its ethical debate focusing more on rights of a fetus specifically right to life and whether the pregnant woman has right over her body. This justifies that fetus has right to life. Ethics of abortion and religion are correlated. There is argument that abortion is morally wrong on basis of the innocent being. Some put difference between human person and human being basing their argument on fetus being biologically human and innocent thus having no right. For example, Mary Ann Warren argues that consciousness, self motivation, reasoning and ability to communicate with self awareness, all these qualify one to have right to life. She concludes that fetus has only consciousness thus not being a person thus abortion being morally allowable (Cain, 1995, p. 27).
According to pro-life movement, there is uncertainty on whether the fetus has right to life with abortion being equal to consciously taking risk of taking one’s life. David Moonin argues that, uncertainty fails on the fact that one may be mistaken in finding persuasive argument like fetus having no right to life. Some believe that abortion is not immoral and there are values like human life which contacts abortion. They argue that, abortion is a notable benefit to the society because it checks on population growth. It is also significant benefit to individuals especially to the mothers. According to pro-lifers life begins at conception thus abortion being similar to murder since it is an act of taking human life. Abortion is a direct disobedience of the commonly permitted idea of sanctity of human life. No civilized society that allows human to intentionally harm or take life of another human without punishment. Later in life abortion can cause medical complications. Many are using abortion as a form of contraceptive. In some countries tax is used in funding medical services including abortion with cost of abortion being high. For example, the Ministry of Health has claimed that 45 000 women who are treated out of abortion costs state around $19 million. This undermines economic growth (Cain, 1995, p. 31).
According to my argument abortion is immoral but to some extent be moral. It is immoral because it deprives off fetus its right to live. It punishes the unborn innocent baby but instead the perpetrator should be the one punished. It can be moral is some circumstances like rape and incest, abortion should be acceptable. Abortion should be illegal because some who commit the crime they don’t fully understand what they are doing, they usually come to realize and regret afterwards. I believe the unborn baby is a human being who has his/her own right to live since conception because everything that has individuality and originality of a person is establish at the time of conception. But I strongly oppose abortion.
List of References
Cain, M. (1995), Fight for Life – a pro-life handbook for Southern Africa, Cape Town: Africa Christian Action, p. 27-35