Home >> United States & Canada >> Abortion & Social Issues

     Email   Print 

Abortion Issue Antagonists Can Find Common Ground

Dean Hartwell, JD - 7/31/2005

Perhaps no issue divides the public more than that of abortion. Supporters call themselves "pro-choice" and say they want to protect a "woman's right to choose." Opponents identify themselves as "pro-life" and say they want to defend the "sanctity of life." But, surprisingly, these two sides can agree on some issues.

Abortion as It Now Stands

Roe v. Wade states that anywhere in the United States, a woman has a right to an abortion during her first three months of pregnancy. The state can restrict abortion access in later parts of the woman's pregnancy with laws that protect the woman's health or life. The subsequent decisions of Webster and Planned Parenthood v. Casey have upheld this right, but have also allowed states to attach regulations that do not create an "undue burden." Approximately 1.3 million abortions take place every year. [1]

What Choice?

The pro-choice side says it is not for abortion. Rather, they want the woman, in consultation with her doctor and her moral beliefs, to make the decision. There is a loss of the potential of a life but it is better than the alternative of the government deciding against abortion.

The value of a decision can be measured by its alternative. In the days before Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision which required states to make abortion legal, many women with unwanted pregnancies went to doctors who were not trained or qualified to perform abortions. Some came out of it with terrible physical or psychological scars. Others did not come out of it at all. This problem could repeat itself if abortion again became illegal.

Thus, the real choice is between dead fetuses or dead women.

When Life Begins

Many pro-lifers counter that life begins at conception when the sperm fertilizes an egg. They back this claim by pointing out that medical textbooks teach this belief. [2] Since the act of abortion takes place after conception, it is the taking of a life. Abortion is therefore murder, an unacceptable choice.

Abortion proponents, say the pro-life side, use the word "choice" conveniently. They point out that while abortion supporters want the woman to choose whether to have an abortion, they forbid woman (and men) the right to choose to carry a handgun concealed to protect themselves and others. [3]

Furthermore, abortion opponents cite statistics that show that deaths from illegal abortions were rare. According to one source, citing the U.S. Bureau of Bureau of Vital Statistics, there were only 39 women who died from illegal abortions in 1972, the year before Roe v. Wade. [4]

The pro-choice side says that not everyone agrees that life begins at conception. A fetus is dependent upon the mother to live until it leaves the womb. If we really believed that life begins at conception, why don't we add nine months to everyone's age? Why do we refer to the potential life as a fetus rather than a baby? Abortion is not murder.

Furthermore, say the pro-choice side, abortions typically do not cause pain to the fetus. Planned Parenthood States, "The embryo or fetus cannot perceive pain in the nearly 99 percent of all abortions that occur before the 20th week of pregnancy." [5]

Those supporting abortion rights contend that no one should be allowed to choose to do what would harm society. A woman who has an abortion does not harm anyone, whereas allowing people to carry a concealed weapon opens the possibility that criminals will conceal weapons and have an easier time committing crimes. Also, it would be easier for depressed people to commit suicide if they could carry a gun around so easily.

Why Women Have Abortions

Pro-choice adherents point to the reason why abortions take place as a key to this argument. Many women who have abortions do so because they cannot afford to care for a child. [6] Also, there is a lack of information on birth control in some schools, in part because some pro-lifers don't want children to learn about it. The real problem with abortion lies with these individuals, not those who support abortion rights.

However, the pro-life side says that supporting the right to have an abortion is the same as supporting abortion. It is no different than the issue of slavery, about which many people supported the right of others to have slaves even though they may have personally opposed it for themselves. These people prolonged the evil of slavery by giving opposition to slavery lip service. [7]

Pro-lifers say that women who cannot afford to have children should not be having sex. They should abstain until the time that they are able to afford the costs of having children. But the pro-abortion crowd won't join the pro-lifers in supporting abstinence in schools. The abortion-rights advocates are the ones who contribute to the prevalence of abortion in our society. [8]

Pro-lifers claim to support the right of a life, whether one calls it a fetus or a baby.

Who's on Whose Side?

The pro-choice supporters state that many pro-lifers cite the Bible in their opposition to abortion. The pro-choice advocates state that at no point does the Bible directly oppose abortion. Furthermore, "the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Women's Association have all opposed obstacles that impair women's access to safe and early abortion services." [9]

Pro-lifers claim they don't need the Bible to defend their point of view. They point to medical facts: on day 1, fertilization, all human chromosomes are present; on day 22, the heart begins to beat with the child's own blood; at week 6, brain waves are detectable; at week 8, every organ is in place; at week 17, the baby can have a dream. [10]

Abortion Procedures

Most pro-lifers ardently oppose an abortion procedure known to its opponents as "partial-birth abortion" and to its supporters as "dilation and extraction procedures." The opponents of this procedure claim that their phrase has been sanctioned by Congress and is thus a legal term of art. [11]

Supporters of the procedure claim the correct medical term is "dilation and extraction" procedures and that the opponents' term is commonly used by the public. They go on to say that dilation and extraction is "very rarely performed in the late second trimester at a time in the pregnancy before the fetus is viable. These, like most abortions, are performed for a variety of reasons." [12]

Opponents of the procedure point out that "most partial-birth abortions are performed in the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy. Even early in the fifth month, babies who are expelled by premature labor will often be born alive." [13] Thus, fetuses terminated at this point are technically born.

Common Ground

The two sides appear to agree on something: that the fewer the abortions, the better. The pro-choice side offered a possible partial solution when it discussed the need for more birth control education in schools. If the pro-life side holds true to its belief in the evil of abortion, it could budge from its position that this education would increase teen-age sex.

The pro-choice side also opined that many, if not most, women who have abortions don't have enough financial support to raise a child. The pro-life side cannot deny this opinion. Both sides could take it a step further and call upon the government to make loans to women with unwanted pregnancies to provide them with the money they need to keep the child.

On the other hand, the pro-lifers make a good point that their basis for opposition to abortion is not based on the Bible but rather on medical knowledge. The two sides should argue from a scientific viewpoint to get past the usual biases and mutual misunderstandings.