QuestionHello, I am a sophomore high school student who is doing a persuasive essay on abortion. I of course am pro-life, but would like to ask some questions for the sake of an interview required in the paper. If you could help, it would be greatly appreciated.
The first question I have is, what are the defining misconceptions of the pro-choice argument in regards to the baby being a human life?
Next, what are some suggestions made by recent medical reports against the use of abortion, and some of the errors made by those that support abortion?
Also, how is the position of "life" at fertilization any better than at the "quickening", when life has been actually proven?
What are the flaws in the statements made by Justice Blackmun in the opinion of the court for the Roe v. Wade case?
Thank you very much, and any additional insight would be appreciated.
AnswerAndrew,
I'm more than willing to help answer those questions.
1) The biggest misconception of the pro-choice argument concerning "life" is to confuse a human person with a human being. Human beings have the right to live (this is the pro-life position and one most people agree with). However, although we can define personhood (we did with women and slaves in the past, Germany did it with a Jews), we can not change a human's being. A human being is a living, individual member of the species Homo Sapiens with the inherent capacity to function as a person. Many people say, look at the fetus, it doesn't even look like a human being. However, it does look like a human being. One at that stage of life. Conception is the beginning of life, it is the only time when a radically different genetic structure is formed, completely different from the previous. Two haploid cells (sperm and ovum) become one diploid cell, a new human being. The conceptus is alive, it is of the species Homo Sapiens (if not, then what species is it) and it is a distinct member of that species (the genetic structure is different from the mother, 50% of the time the sex is different also). Scientifically, this is all you need for a human being. I reason that human personhood is the same as human being, the pro-choice flaw is to separate the two. Scientifically, the only thing the unborn can be is a human being. This is a fact and not a matter of opinion. A good background for this is the book "Politically Correct Death" by Francis Beckworth, an excellent book that details these arguments.
2) Recent and past medical reports have a variety of negative medical reasons against abortion. One is that it is pyschologically traumatic for the women. Others show punctured uteri (this prevents future pregnancy). One of the most recent debates concerns a highly likelihood of breast cancer (this is from cellular changes in the woman's breast taking place during the pregnancy and becomming interrupted). Another issue is the use of anestesia on the fetus during the abortion, studies show that the fetus does experience pain, so this eases the pain of dismemberment. Another recent issue is the medical safety of the morning after pill, RU-486. The pill has numerous side effects (do an internet search to check).
3) Quickening is simply when the baby starts kicking. The problem with this is that it isn't the definition of life. This is merely when the women can feel the baby moving. Life at conception is the only point when the genetic structure changes so radically it can truely be called miraculous. After conception, the DNA doesn't undergo any significant changes. A better comparison lies between the unborn and the newborn (which most people agree is worthy of life (some don't like Peter Singer at Princeton)). The newborn and unborn only differ in 4 ways: size, level of development, environment and degree of dependency. None of the reasons are morally relevent for demoting the human beings life as unworthy. These arguments are also discussed in Beckworth's book and another book (short but good) called "Pro-Life 101" by Scott Klussendorf from Stand to Reason www.str.org Nevertheless, life has been proven to start at conception. This is easily noted because we have to kill whatever is living with an abortion. If it wasn't alive, we wouldn't need abortion. Hence, the question isn't when life starts, but "what is the unborn?" Is it a human being or is it just a blob of cells?
4) Other than that Blackmun is an idiot? Just kidding. He mistakenly forgot that we're involving two people in this. I agree women's rights are important and support them. I would even support abortion if it didn't take the life of someone else. Fact is that it does. This is why I feel truely pro-life. I hesitate at anti-abortion because I could care less about abortion if it didn't kill a human being. I'm also not anti-choice because I want women to make choices, but I'm also counting the unborn women as well as the born. Blackmun is right on the right to privacy, but he forgot half the people involved, the unborn.
If I can help you out any more, let me know. Also if any answers aren't sufficient, let me know also. Good luck!
Oh, if you want to address arguments on the pro-choice side. Remember that most can be answered by pointing to the larger question, what is the unborn. Also note that if you can't answer that question, then you shouldn't default to killing the unborn if you're not sure. Again, good luck.
