Ethics Of Should Abortion Be Legal Philosophy Essay

Ethics Of Should Abortion Be Legal Philosophy Essay Remember a long time ago when women died because they could not or did not want to have an infant and they attempted to terminate their pregnancy by themselves or with the help of other unprofessional? Should abortion be legal? Do you believe in Pro-Life or Pro-Choice? What do you do when circumstances come about that is not of your control or wiliness? I believe that both pro-life and pro-choice viewpoints have valid arguments.  These are the questions that we will examine briefly and what has happen since it became legal in the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision case of 1973. It is important to know all that is involved with abortion before you can make a rational choice. It is not whether it should be legal, but when it should be allowed. Abortion allows women to have the choice and can save thousands of lives of women that have tried to do it on their own. I feel that it should be legal, but only to an extent. That is what pro-choice is all about. Pro-choice is the position that also is known as pro-abortion In the United States and in China, where law requires sometimes abortion and it is also known as anti-abortion. The purpose of the pro-choice movement is to ensure that all choices remain legal. The movement argues that a human person cannot be proven, prior to the point of viability and the government does not have the right to impede a womans right to decide whether to continue a pregnancy.(Head, 2010 )   Ã‚   I do not believe in permitting abortions after ten to twelve weeks of pregnancy, because at that time is when a fetus can represent potential life.   Now do not get me wrong, I still think that we should dissuaded women from abortion, and that we should be taking more measures to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Last year over 15,000, women had abortions because of rape, incest, health or just unwanted pregnancies. Most circumstances have come about that is not of your their own control or wiliness. It is because of the Roe vs. Wade case of 1973, states that a woman and her doctor can decide when and if to abort a pregnancy but only during the first trimester. After that, the government can restrict abortion to protect the viability of the fetus. This preserves our constitutional right under our privacy rights (Roe v. Wade , 1973). In addition, another thing we do not think about that how it affects by most of the population is the ignorance when it comes to a very serious illness of mental retardation. About three percent of the people that are considered as mentally retarded and some people have adopted many slang terms, one such as retard to insult them. A lot people do not understand about their mental disabilities and so this is their way of calling them stupid, but really, they are stupid within themselves because they do not understand. Mental retardation is a term used when someone has limitations in their mental functioning and these limitations cause a child to learn and develop slower than an ordinary individual or in some cases, dont develop at all (123HelpMe.com/76990, 2010). I believe in a combination of both pro-life and pro-choice viewpoints. This brings us to the pro-life choice that does not believe that the woman has any rights to have an abortion, no matter what the circumstances are. What they are saying is that they are taking away a womans right to freedom of choice.   A woman should have the right to choose if she wants to have an abortion. They do not think about the consequences of having a child that is not wanted or as some people call them forgotten children. Pro-Life says that the government has the right or the obligation to preserve all human life. In the Catholic Church and other similar groups also prohibits, Euthanasia and assisted suicide, the death penalty and War, with only a few exceptions. In cases where the pro-life ethnic conflicts with the personal autonomy, as in the cases of abortion and assisted suicide, it is conservative. In The cases of ethic, where the pro-life have conflicts with the government policy, as in the cas e of the death penalty and war, it is liberal(Head, 2010 ). Pro-lifers also do not believe in teaching sex education; where pro-choice believes that, we should educate our children on how to handle and in the consequences that fails with proceeding with their urges that they will have in their coming of age years. The primarily conflict of pro-life and pro-choice movements are on the issues of abortion. Pro-life argues that it protects the unborn human life by the government and should not be legal, also that it is murder to abort. Have you ever looked up the definition of murder? It states that when pro-life activists call abortion murder, they are suggesting that abortion fits the definition, namely, illegal killing with malice aforethought. However, this definition fails for two reasons. First, is that abortions are not illegal and secondly, mothers hardly feel malice towards their own unborn children (123HelpMe.com/9909, 2010). The Bible, especially in the Old Testament of Deuteronomy or Exodus, there are laws that command that people be killed for lots of ridiculous reasons. There are countless examples of mass murders commanded by God including the murder of women, infants, and children. The following are a very small amount of the passages approving of murder in the Bible. They are divided into three parts: 1) Capital Punishment Crimes, 2) Gods Murders for Stupid Reasons, 3) Murdering Children, and 4) Miscellaneous Murders. This list is long, but it barely scratches the surface of all the murders approved of in the Bible.(123HelpMe.com/78161, 2010) In conclusion, the arguments of the pro-choice and pro-life movements are both valid arguments, with the evidence that the Bible, with some exceptions, that every child should be born wanted, supports abortion. Under the right circumstances, abortion should be legal with the right medical care and in the proper time and way. Know body has the right to say in the case of a rape or incest whether you have to keep the unborn child. Alternatively, that the unborn child has to come into the world with this hanging over their head from the start. This was because of a malicious act was done and not of your own choice, but therefore neither you nor the child should be penalized for it. These happens so often in cases of pro-life and say for instance, a twelve year old girl is victim of rape that as a result of it becomes pregnant. This has already ruined that girl in the trauma that she has to overcome that has happen to them. Those circumstances is not written of the laws that prohibit abo rtions. Nor are the mothers that might die if they proceed with their pregnancies. Is that not taking one life for another? The only difference would be that one is breathing, where the other has not done so yet. In 1973 in a review of the CSA Discovery Guides, the Ragsdale litigation led a case to the most significant judicial ruling since Roe that resulted in a settlement in which plaintiffs secured the right to a legal clinic abortion during the first 18 weeks of pregnancy. Although, a similar law today might well survive constitutional scrutiny, the case was settled to the satisfaction of pro-choice advocates (Mezey, Susan Gluck; Tatalovich, Raymond; Walsh, Michael, 1994). This at least gives the child and us a chance to do what is best for all. We have enough forgotten children in the world that if we can prevent just one unhappy child or tormented soul, they will bless us all. I still believe the best way is to be careful in the first place and stop before we have to make the choice.