Abortion is the process of terminating a fetus before it gets to 25 weeks old. Abortion that happens for couple of time is referred as miscarriage which may result to serious uterus healthy problems to the person that does it. The number of abortion cases has increased worldwide due to factors such as economic, religious and social. In most developed countries they have legalized it while underdeveloped countries are yet to legalize. This paper seeks to investigate the implications that come along with abortion at large by critically looking into the negative effects considering the moral stands in the community.
Introduction
Human beings have been brainwashed by economic factors whereby they weigh a human life with money factor. Since one can decide to terminate the fetus life due to fear of inadequate finance to support the life of the born child. Others are waved away by social factors, teenage who mess around with unplanned sex they may feel overwhelmed by pregnancies, which in turn lowers their self-esteem and the last option in their mind at these desperate moments is abortion with hopes of restoring their lives back.
When the word abortion is mention among people it comes with a huge sense of ideas and opinions according to everyone believes, morals and principles. There are those who believe abortion is morally permissible and they have their own theories and explanations as to why they hold on to it these are pro-choicer. On the other hand, we have the anti-abortionist who have strong belief that abortion is a crime in the sense that the fetuses are a human being and no one who is supposed to take away someone's life.
Abortion has controversial issues since the anti-abortionist views a woman who decides to go for abortion as a murderer, by deciding who should live and not to. When it comes to religion abortion implies that one is taking away God's blessings of life. Since God is the one who gives life and takes it, no human being has right to overrule God. Even though the pro-choicer claims that the woman has the right to do abortion because it's her body, this doesn't satisfy that one has the right to take away human life. Laws prohibiting abortion helps to make sure no people will devastate life given by God.
Arguments
Different people have researched and explained their valid ideas about abortion focusing on both sides of pro-choicer an anti-abortionist. Some of their ideas are invalid and contradicting since some are based on their personal beliefs. In both sides of pro-choicer and anti-abortionist, we have a wide range of ideas and knowledge since each side takes deep defend to their ideas on abortion. Anti-abortionist has a broad moral principle that claims that it's wrong to take away or kill any human being which goes deeper to including fetus as a human being even though they are not yet born (Leigh, Andrew and Justin, 2000). Their ideas revolve around the worthiness of a human life despite circumstances one encounters in daily life, at no point anybody is allowed to terminate a human life. Fetuses have life in them even though they are not yet born they deserve the chance to grow and to experience human drifting changes in behavior, the way of thinking and even feel emotions connection with people, the anti-abortionists hold strongly to these ideas which helps them to build a strong standing ground of their moral principle.
On the other side the pro-choicer have a narrow moral principle that focuses little on personhood psychology and personal traits (Feinberg, 1986). The pro-choicer lay blames on moral principle perceived by the anti-abortionist saying that it's too narrow for the fetus to fall in it. The pro-choicer believes that the moral principle it's too broad to include the fetuses who are not even yet born, also including situations like people who suffer from dangerous cancer diseases and live in pain it's a way too far for the moral principle. The pro-choicer narrow moral principle does not fully entail details why a life of a fetus is worth taking away even though they advocate worthiness of a fetus life depends on the woman carrying it.
Pro-choicer argues that when the life of a mother is at danger the abortion is the best option since a mother's life is more important compared to the fetus life. Their claim is based on the fact that a mother has the right for her life and no one is supposed to decide on her behalf to risk her life for the sake of a fetus. A mother has a life too despite anti-abortionist arguments, a fetus is a person, hence that doesn't give a permit to gamble with the mother's life since she has full rights to life and if the fetus it posing a danger to her life it should be terminated. The pro-choicer advocates for mother's life since they don't have the second thought about the fetus's life which a mother carries.
On the other side, the anti-abortionist lays their arguments on the rights for a human being since to them a fetus is a human from the day of conception, hence the fetus and mother both have the right to life. At no point anyone is supposed to terminate a life, the fetus is innocent to deserve killing since it has done no harm to anyone so the mother has no right to terminate its life. In a situation where a mother's life is a danger, she has rights for her life. The anti-abortionist in this challenging situation bends the rule to grant a mother the right of freedom where she has right to decide what do with the life she carries. Besides no one is supposed to decide for her since it's her life at stake, deciding to terminate the life of the fetus this cannot be considered as murder since it was the act of saving her own life. But anti-abortionist does not agree on pro-choicer view on fetus's life which they claim begins after crossing the birth line, their view was incredible since a fetus has a life despite them being inside the womb for nine months. Both sides have a different view on fetus life which makes it difficult to determine whether terminating its life is worthy.
Anti-abortionist advocates its wrong to kill human it becomes ambiguous approach since ‘human being' is considered to be a biological aspect in the sense that it contains cells and chromosomes. This ideas of anti-abortionist need to go deeper such that it gives a clear distinction between just being a biological aspect and having moral behavior. Since a person is defined by their moral behaviors. For them to outdo the pro-choicer they need to show fetus falls in the category of a person. Ideas, personality is defined by moral attributes that a being possess (Marquis, 1989). Being conscious is what builds a person entirely since one can be able to choose between good and evil, psychology aspect also plays a major part in defining personal behavior since one can be able to perform duties, set goals and emotionally gets attached to others. The main question for anti-abortionist from pro-choicer is do fetus have conscious? If they have conscious then they have the rights for life and their life need to be secured. The anti-abortionist has tried to break down this question by defining a human being as a fetus but pro-choicer is not yet fully convinced by this version.
On the other hand, the pro-choicer has a hard time explaining and proving that fetus is not yet human being since they are unconscious and they don't have the personality traits. Pro-choicer argues that since the fetus has no consciousness rights for life stands no chance for consideration. Despite their ideology, they still have problems in connecting between personhood and psychological personhood in the light of moral sense. Psychological aspect is what define the human beings and gives personal trait (Finlay, 1990). Pro-choicer argues that fetus has no memories or emotional connection with the real world hence it's incredible for them to have consciousness. Rights for ‘human beings' according to courts are applicable to conscious personality which leaves the fetus at the mercy of the mother since the rights for life does not fully defend the fetus in the pro-choice arguments and facts. Both sides have their own facts and ideas when it comes to abortion and they are correct, thus why abortion debates have been held many times globally and both the anti-abortionist and pro-choicer have aired their minds and views but no conclusions are done. Depending on the circumstance in hand any idea from both sides can be used.
Objection to my arguments
Despite the pro-choice arguments and ideas on abortion my arguments solely fights for fetus rights for life whether conscious or unconscious. In a real sense at some point we were fetuses and if our mothers had gone for the choice of abortion none of us could be existing even the pro-choicer. So a life of a fetus is a great deal to consider in the situation where mother's life is at risk abortion can opt, but abortion is done for the sake of eliminating the fetus just because someone doesn't want to take responsibilities of a parent. This is a crime that needs to be punished like any other murder case.
Everyone has been given a gift of life by God and also the laws have ensured every human being is entitled to the right to life. Killing or taking someone's life away is an act that causes great pain to the people connected to the victim, though this doesn't show deeply the loses that killing result too. We all know that after a period of time the memories of our deceased fades away with time and we tend to forget their existence in our lives. The great loss of killing affects the victim, can u imagine how it would be like being deprived all your memories, love connection, wealth and properties you have accumulated over years, most painfully an opportunity to showcase your life purpose and unique abilities you own. This would be the greatest loss to someone's life hence taking away the life of a fetus it's like building a strong wall which cut loose the connection that God has given everyone to experience in life. The theory of killing can be generally be explained in terms of ending the victims future and also taking away the experiences accumulated over time in the account for already born (Marquis, 1989). The act of killing a fetus takes away the chances for experiences, fulfilling desires and also to feel and see the future.
The pro-choicer has tried to reject that killing is wrong since it ends the future of fetuses, they claim that fetuses have no clue on their future value hence ending their lives is not a crime. But the value of something can be deeply understood by the person who owns it or the one who sees it despite the fact that fetuses are unaware of their future value we can really tell. Their future needs to be protected from abortion crimes since they own the next generations, imagine if God says that from now no more conceiving of a baby by the next 130 years this world would have no one left. So the life of fetuses is worthy for protection more than anything else for generation continuation and a better tomorrow. No one has the right to even think of killing a fetus by just mere ideas that they are unconscious or they lack personal traits hence abortion is a crime.
Responses and conclusion
Abortion crimes have been a treat for many years, even with debates and ideologies still young ladies go for abortion in a situation like rape cases, unplanned pregnancies, and stigmatization from their peer and also poverty mostly in African countries. Hence the governments are supposed to create awareness on the best methods to prevent early pregnancies to teenagers and also to create seminars for education in best family planning for couples. Programs should be set into place to reduce poverty and also to offer support to mothers who feel the burden of financial on rearing a child. By implementing these measures we will help the lives of unborn and reduce the percentage of abortions worldwide.
References
Marquis, Don. "Why abortion is immoral." The journal of philosophy 86.4 (1989): 183-202.
Finlay, H. A. "Abortion –Right or Crime." U. Tas. L. Rev. 10 (1990):110-130
Leigh, Andrew, and Justin Wolfers. "Abortion and crime." AQ: Journal of Contemporary Analysis (2000): 28-40.
Feinberg, "Abortion," in matters of Life and Death: New Introductory Essays in Moral Philosophy, Tom Regan, ed. New York: Random House, (1986): 256-293.
