The problem of abortion causes different controversial comments and advice among physicians, ethicians, and activists, who are trying to find an optimal solution of this problem. However, most of them, especially the supporters of abortion, often make a choice for women and, what is more importantly, for their children, pushing potential mothers to crime. They believe that a fetus cannot feel pain or have its autonomous body, so a mother should decide what is better for her. However, this egoistic position unwittingly justifies one’s offence, which is perceived as freedom of choice. None of abortions can be justified by this argument because in such a way it legalizes an artificial termination of life (McMahan, 2002). Moreover, abortion becomes the easiest way of solving problems, minimizing the chance of finding some alternative solutions for the continuation of life. Knowing that abortion can always solve a potential problem leads to the fact that women are ready to commit various extreme acts, including reckless sexual relations with men. In this case, abortion should be banned because it is contrary to the basic right of a fetus, who cannot make a decision by himself/herself, but deserves a chance to realize it in the future, to life from its first day to the moment of natural death.

The rejection of abortion involves a conflict with the fundamental right to life, which artificially violates one’s right to choose. The legalization of abortion allows women to make an extreme choice that leads to fatal physical and psychological consequences for both a mother and a fetus: “But constitutionalizing the right to abortion as Roe did in January 1973 hasn’t relieved women of the consequences of sex or the vulnerabilities of pregnancy” (Bachiochi, 2017). When a woman decides to have an abortion, she automatically rejects her child the right to determine his/her future life by his/her own choice (McMahan, 2002). Most of the opponents argue that an embryo cannot independently choose, and, therefore, it is totally dependent on the mother. However, this logic is hypocritical because it can also lead to making a positive choice instead of abortion. In other words, a woman should do everything possible to fully develop a fetus to the status of a person, giving him/her an opportunity to make his/her own choice in life. Moreover, the violation of fundamental rights consists in the fact that women/doctors stop one’s life artificially, thereby committing murder (Stretton, 2004). No one’s life should be stopped artificially since death is as a natural phenomenon as life itself, and a person does not have a natural right to intervene in these processes.

One more important argument is that abortion justifies murder, allowing women and men to have an unquestionable alibi for their actions. Accordingly, a woman feels less responsible for her pregnancy because she knows that it is always possible to have an abortion. Hence, it is a reliable and fast way to solve one’s problem that blocks and cancels alternatives. A woman chooses an abortion as the best way of sorting out her problems rather than receiving support from society and the authorities (Bachiochi, 2017). This situation leads to the fact that abortion becomes commonplace among many women, and the birth of a child is associated with various problems, including financial costs, social passivity, and psychological illnesses. Moreover, in this situation, a fetus is considered only a thing or an obstacle to one’s own lives, what cancels his/her status as a human being. Accordingly, it forces the opponents to build theories that a fetus is not a human being, resulting in the fact that abortion is not murder (Ney, 2015). However, it is not true because a fetus does not only feel pain from the first few weeks of his/her life, but also exists as a subject, which equally deserves to live. Consequently, the legalization of abortion cannot justify the murder of a child because a fetus fruit is not an abstract and distant object, but a complete organism with its developed life system.

The counterargument to this position is that a fetus cannot be considered a full human being to a certain period of maturation, and a woman does not violate either the fundamental right to life or the law in her decision to have an abortion. The early stages of an embryo are similar to the stages of a cell, which does not have a formed nervous system and a developed system of internal organs. Moreover, it does not have consciousness, and, therefore, cannot make independent decisions (Millstein, 2014). Hence, a mother’s organism is the only body that should make solutions according to her own choice and health, taking into account only her personal rights and freedoms. She cannot be a subject to the charges since she does not make a crime, but only worries about her own life as everyone in the world (Millstein, 2014). Therefore, all the charges against her are absurd, because it can be compared with the situation of eating vegetables as well as killing living beings. In fact, an undeveloped fetus is only a cell or even less than that, something far from what is regarded as a human being in both physical and social aspects.

In conclusion, the most important reason against abortion is that women are not fully aware of the fundamental rights of a fetus. It happens because they do not consider a fetus a human being, justifying their murder by the reason of free choice. In fact, although an embryo has no social or political rights, it is the basis for this in the future, and abortion cancels it in all cases. Moreover, abortion is contrary to the logic of life, which should not be stopped in any way. Therefore, women and men should be keenly aware of the consequences of abortion, not taking killing an unborn person as a legitimate and permanent method of solving their problems.

References

Bachiochi, E. (2017, January 17). I am a feminist against abortion. Why exclude me from a march for women? CNN. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/17/opinions/prolife-and-feminist-under-trump-bachiochi-opinion/

McMahan, J. (2002). The ethics of killing: Problems at the margins of life. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Millstein, S. (2014, March 4). How to argue pro choice: 11 arguments against abortion access, debunked. Bustle. Retrieved from https://www.bustle.com/articles/17141-how-to-argue-pro-choice-11-arguments-against-abortion-access-debunked

Ney, P. (2015). The impact of physician compromise. Issues in Law & Medicine, 30(2), 187-191.

Stretton, D. (2004). Essential properties and the right to life: A response to Lee. Bioethics, 18(3), 264-282.