Abortion. It is a topic that has invaded the sanctity of our dinner table conversations, English paper topics and even our court rooms. We are bombarded with pro-lifer’s calling abortion doctors “baby killers.” They yell about how abortion is unmoral, and how g_d wants us to chose life over death, but they seem to have no problem killing abortion doctors or beating up patients. The pro-lifers seem to think that the abortion laws were just thrown together by uncaring “baby killers” instead of Supreme court Justices. The fact is abortion use to be illegal. It wasn’t until the case of Roe Vs. Wade that the Supreme court decided that a woman had the right to an abortion as long as certain guide lines established and then followed. The guidelines that were established following the Roe vs. Wade decisions are or still in effect today.
The current Legislature says that the “state may not regulate abortion at all during the first trimester”( http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/conlaw.htm) That means that if a woman decides during the first three months of her pregnancy to abort the child she has the legal right to do so. The states interest during the first trimester is to the mother well being not the well being of the fetus What is so special about the first 3 months? Well during the first three months the child in unable to survive outside of the mothers womb, therefore dependent on the mother. What about the second trimester?
During the second trimester the state can regulate abortion “but only for the protection of the woman’s health”( http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/conlaw.htm) The states first responsibility is to the mother and then to the unborn child. Those who oppose the use of abortion feel that the state has a moral obligation to the protection of the unborn child. They feel that allowing abortion in any trimester is sending out the message that children are not valued as highly as adults. The fact is the federal government does have a bias against the unborn child. It is because of this bias that abortion is legalized.
The 14th amendment of Constitution states that “no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,…”( National Archives) After the Roe Vs. Wade case the Supreme court decided that “the word “person” in the 14th amendment, does not apply to the unborn” (http://members.aol.com /abtrbng/ conlaw. htm) So according the constitution the state must favor the “person” involved in all legal situations, and since the mother is the only person involved the state must favor her. It is not until the third trimester that the “state may regulate or ban abortion to protect fetal life.” (http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/conlaw.htm) Because it is during the third trimester that the unborn child is considered a person and therefore protect under the 14th amendment of Constitution. The laws surrounding abortion are designed to protect the persons involved, not to kill babies.
Earlier I mentioned Pro-lifer’s and their beliefs, but I neglected to mention their counterpart Pro-Choices. Now while Pro-lifers feel that abortion is evil and should be outlawed, Pro-choice people believe it is the mothers choice. It is important to understand that pro-choice does not mean pro abortion. Do the pro-lifer’s offer other alternatives to abortion?
Yes. Pro-lifers suggest adoption as an alternative to abortion. They feel that the mother should carry he child full term and give it up to a family that would care for it. While adoption is a good idea it is not being done. The fact is that “2 out of every 100 unmarried woman choose adoption” (Olasky 43). So while adoption a nice idea it is not a realistic one. Now the pro-lifer’s blame abortions for driving the number of adoptions down, but the fact is there are many other reasons to explain the decline of adoptions. The main reason according to Marvin Olasky’s article Forgotten choice is that “single-parenting… still receives special economic support via the welfare system.” (Olasky 43) So it economically more beneficial to keep the kid then to give him/her to a two parent family. The supporters of keeping abortion legal feel that adoption is an option but so is abortion.
I am pro-choice and proud of it. That does not mean I feel abortion is a good thing, or that I think it should be used as a form of birth control. When say I am pro-choice I mean that neither I nor the government has the right to tell anyone they can not have an abortion. I truly feel it is within the woman’s rights that are outlined in the constitution for her to be the one to have final. If we take away that right they we literally let the government into our wombs.
Work Cited
Olasky, Marvin. “Forgotten Choice” Adoption is a rebuke to single parenting and abortion, and the liberal media will have none of it.” National Review March 1997: 43-45.

Webmaster@nara.gov National Archive. URL:http://www.nara.gov/ exhall/ charters/ constitution/ 14th/ 14th.html

Constitution Home page http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/conlaw.htm

Registered Members, login
Join now, it’s free

Property of EssaySwap.com