Abortion Post

Question: The ability of a woman to have control of her body is critical to civil rights. Take away her reproductive choice and you step onto a slippery slope. If the government can force a woman to continue a pregnancy, what about forcing a woman to use contraception or undergo sterilization?

Response: This issue has several factors within it that ought to be addressed if the question is to be responded to. The first factor is the issue’s correlation with abortion. There are few if any Anti-abortion activists who hope to limit the rights of women or even withhold rights from women that they ought to have. Rather instead, the argument is over the unborn and what is the being in question. The issue of abortion is whether it is right to eliminate an unborn human fetus. If the unborn are human, then abortion is as right as murdering a two year old toddler, and if the unborn are not human then abortion is no different than getting ones tonsils removed. The issue rests with the lone question of what is the unborn rather than women’s rights. No one would argue if a woman has the right to murder her two-year old, thus the issue is not rights but the personhood of the unborn.

Next is the more direct answer to the issue. It is indeed true that an unborn baby is part of his or her mother’s person, the two are connected. However a common error in the arguments of those who press this issue is that they discount the baby. Yes the mother ought to have full control over her own body, but should not there be limits on her actions regarding her child? The question boils back to the center of the first question as to the nature of the unborn, if the unborn is human, then a mother must respect the little human inside of her, but if the unborn are not human then she is free to do with the abnormal growth within her as she pleases.

Pregnancy itself is most times a choice, the cases of pregnancy from rape being the exception (which can be excluded for this example since few pro-abortion advocates would be satisfied to out-law abortion in all cases but rape, they are claiming it is a right for all women regardless of rape cases or not.) And as pregnancy is most times a choice, the woman having the option to abstain or engage in activities that lead to pregnancy, the issue of choice comes under fire. To say that banning abortion is taking away a woman’s reproductive choice is half wrong. A woman has the prior choice, to get pregnant or not, and thus banning abortion would be taking half of her choices away, her number of choices going from two to one. Also the nature of the choice; if that choice is wrong, as yet to be determined whether abortion is right or wrong, then the taking away of that choice IS the right thing to do. A woman has the choice to kill her five year old, but that is illegal, thus if a choice is wrong they are taken away, if abortion is wrong then it is not a right but a crime and a choice that should be banned.

Lastly is the progression of taking away choices. The government forcing the use of contraceptives or forced sterilization are fundamentally different than preventing abortion. The biggest factors are that they are preventing a child rather than permitting one. Also these other issues do not include a pregnant woman or an unborn child but the prospects of the two. Also in order to force these two issues they would have to be proved right just as abortion has to be proved wrong (by determining the personhood of the unborn). If Forced Sterilization can be proved right and not a violation of an individual’s rights than it will be passed; this being quite impossible since it and forced use of contraceptives are against the rights of the single involved party.