We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

Abortion Essay Pro Life

n Roman times, abortion and the destruction of unwanted children was
permissible, but as out civilization has aged, it seems that such acts were no
longer acceptable by rational human beings, so that in 1948, Canada along
with most other nations in the world signed a declaration of the United
Nations promising every human being the right to life. The World Medical
Association meeting in Geneve at the same time, stated that the utmost
respect for human life was to be from the moment of conception. This
declaration was re-affirmed when the World Medical Association met in Oslo
in 1970. Should we go backwards in our concern for the life of an individual
human being? The unborn human is still a human life and not all the wishful
thinking of those advocating repeal of abortion laws, can alter this. Those of
us who would seek to protect the human who is still to small to cry aloud for
it’s own protection, have been accused of having a 19th Century approach to
life in the last third of the 20th Century. But who in reality is using arguments
of a bygone Century? It is an incontrovertible fact of biological science –
Make no Mistake – that from the moment of conception, a new human life
has been created. Only those who allow their emotional passion to overide
their knowledge, can deny it: only those who are irrational or ignorant of
science, doubt that when a human sperm fertilizes a human ovum a new
human being is created. A new human being who carries genes in its cells
that make that human being uniquely different from any and other human
being and yet, undeniably a member, as we all are, of the great human family.

We will write a custom essay on Abortion Pro Life specifically for you
for only $16.38 $13.9/page

Order now

All the fetus needs to grow into a babe, a child, an old man, is time, nutrition
and a suitable environment. It is determined at that very moment of
conception whether the baby will be a boy or a girl; which of his parents he
will look like; what blood type he will have. His whole heritage is forever
fixed. Look at a human being 8 weeks after conception and you, yes every
person here who can tell the difference between a man and a women, will be
able to look at the fetus and tell me whether it is a baby boy or a girl. No, a
fetus is not just another part of a women’s body like an appendix or
appendage. These appendages, these perfectly formed tiny feel belong to a
10 week developed baby, not to his or her mother. The fetus is distinct and
different and has it’s own heart beat. Do you know that the fetus’ heart
started beating just 18 days after a new life was created, beating before the
mother even knew she was pregnant? By 3 months of pregnancy the
developing baby is just small enough to be help in the palm of a man’s hand
but look closely at this 3 month old fetus. All his organs are formed and all his
systems working. He swims, he grasps a pointer, he moves freely, he
excretes urine. If you inject a sweet solution into the water around him, he
will swallaw because he likes the taste. Inject a bitter solution and he will quit
swallowing because he does not like the taste. By 16 weeks it is obvious to
all, except those who have eyes but deliberately do not see, that this is a
young human being. Who chooses life or death for this little one because
abortion is the taking of a human life? This fact is undeniable; however much
of the members of the Women’s Liberation Movement, the new Feminists,
Dr. Henry Morgentaler or the Canadian Medical Association President feel
about it, does not alter the fact of the matter. An incontrovertible fact that
cannot change as feelings change. If abortion is undeniably the taking of
human life and yet sincere misguided people feel that it should be just a
personal matter between a women and the doctor, there seems to be 2
choices open to them. (1) That they would believe that other acts of
destruction of human beings such as infanticide and homicide should be of no
concern of society and therefore, eliminate them from the criminal code. This
I cannot believe is the thinking of the majority, although the tendency for
doctors to respect the selfish desire of parents and not treat the newborn
defective with a necessary lifesaving measure, is becoming increasingly more
common. (2) But for the most part the only conclusion available to us is that
those pressing for repeal of the abortion laws believe that there are different
sorts of human beings and that by some arbitrary standard, they can place
different values on the lives of there human beings. Of course, different
human beings have different values to each of us as individuals: my mother
means more to me than she does to you. But the right to life of all human
beings is undeniable. I do not think this is negotiable. It is easy to be
concerned with the welfare of those we know and love, while regarding
everybody else as less important and somehow, less real. Most people would
rather have heard of the death of thousands in the Honduras flooding disaster
than of a serious accident involving a close friends or favourite relatives. That
is why some are less disturbed by the slaughter of thousands of unborn
children than by the personal problems of a pregnant women across the
street. To rationalize this double standard, they pretend to themselves that the
unborn child is a less valuable human life because it has no active social
relationships and can therefore, be disposed of by others who have an
arbitrary standard of their own for the value of a human life. I agree that the
fetus has not developed it’s full potential as a human being: but neither have
any of us. Nor will any of us have reached that point: that point of perfect
humaness, when we die. Because some of us may be less far along the path
than others, does not give them the right to kill us. But those in favour of
abortion, assume that they have that right, the standard being arbitrary. To
say that a 10 week fetus has less value that a baby, means also that one must
consider a baby of less value than a child, a young adult of less value than an
old man. Surely one cannot believe this and still be civilized and human. A
society that does not protect its individual members is on the lowest scale of
civilized society. One of the measures of a more highly civilized society, is its
attitude towards its weaker members. If the poor, the sick, the handicapped,
the mentally ill, the helpless are not protected, the society is not as advanced
as in a society where they are protected. The more mature the society is, the
more there is respect for the dignity and rights of all human beings. The
function of the laws of the society, is to protect and provide for all members
so that no individual or group of individuals can be victimized by another
individual group. Every member of Canadian society has a vital stake in what
value system is adopted towards its weak, aged, cripple, it’s helpless
intra-uterine members; a vital stake in who chooses life or death. As some of
you may know, in 1969, the abortion laws were changed in Canada, so that it
became legal for a doctor to perform an abortion if a committee of 3 other
doctors in an eccredited hospital deemed that continuation of the pregnancy
constituted a severe threat to the life and health, mental or physical of the
women. Threat to health was not defined and so it is variously interpreted to
mean very real medical disease to anything that interferes with even social or
economic well being, so that any unwanted or unplanned pregnancy thus
qualifies. What really is the truth about the lasting effect of an unwanted
pregnancy on the psyche of a womem? Of course there is a difference of
opinion among psychiatrists, but if unbiased, prospective studies are examined
certain facts become obvious. (1) The health of women who are mentally ill
before they become pregnant, is not improved by an abortion. In fact in 1970
an official statement of the World Health Organization said, “Serious mental
disorders arise more often in women previous mental problems. Thus the very
women for whom legal abortion is considered justified on psychiatric grounds,
are the ones who have the highest risk of post-abortion psychiatric disorders.

READ:  International business - coca Essay

(2) Most women who are mentally healthy before unwanted pregnancy,
despite a temporary emotional upset during the early weeks for the
pregnancy, are mentally healthy after the pregnancy whether they were
aborted or carried through to term. Do we accept killing a human being
because of a temporary, emotional upset? All obstetricians and gynaecologists
know of many cases where the mother, be her single or married, has spoken
of abortion early in the pregnancy and later on, has confessed her gratitude to
those who have not performed the abortion. On the other hand, we have all
seen women what have been troubled, consumed with guilt and development
significant psychiatric problems following and because of abortion. I quote Ft.

John L. Grady, Medical Examiner for Florida State Attorney’s Office, “I
believe it can be stated with certainty that abortion causes more deep-seated
guilt, depression and mental illness than it ever cures”. We used to hear a lot
about the risk of suicide among those who threatened such action if their
request for abortion was refused. How real is that risk – it is not – in fact, the
suicide rate among pregnant women be they happy of unhappy about the
pregnancy, is 1/4 of the rate among non-pregnant women in child-bearing
years. An accurate 10 year study was done in England on unwed mothers
who requested abortions and were refused. It was found that the suicide rate
of this group was less than that average population. In Minnesota in a 15 year
period, there were only 14 maternal suicides. 11 occurred after delivery.

None were illegitimately pregnant. All were psychotic. In contrast, among the
first 8 deaths of women aborted under the liberal law in the United Kingdon, 2
were from suicide directly following the abortion. Are there any medical
indications for abortion?? Is it valid for a doctor to co-operate in the choice
for abortion? The late Dr. Guttmacher, one of the world leaders of the
pro-abortion movement, has stated: “Almost any women can be brought
through pregnancy alive unless she suffers from cancer or leukemia, in which
case abortion is unlikely to prolong her life much less save it.” As an opponent
to abortion, I will readily agree, as will all those who are against abortion, that
pregnancy resulting from rape or incest is a tragedy. Rape is a detestable
crime, but no sane reasoning can place the slightest blame on the unborn child
it might produce. Incest is, if that is possible, even worse, but for centuries,
traditional Jewish law has clearly stated, that if a father sins against his
daughter (incest) that does not justify a second crime – the abortion of the
product of that sin. The act of rape or incest is the major emotional physical
trauma to the young girl or women. Should we compound the psychic scar
already inflicted on the mother by her having the guilt of destroying a living
being which was at least half her own? Throughout history, pregnant women
who for one crime or another were sentenced to death, were given a stay of
execution until after the delivery of the child: it being the contention of courts
that one could not punish the innocent child for the crime of the mother. Can
we punish it for a crime against the mother? If rape occurred the victim
should immediately report the incident. If this is done, early reporting of the
crime will provide greater opportunity for apprehension and conviction of the
rapist, for treatment of venereal disease and prevention of pregnancy. Let is
give our children good sex education; and let us get tough on pornography,
clean up the newstands, literature and “Adult Movies” and television
programmes which encourage crime, abusive drugs and make mockery of
morality and good behaviour and therefore, contribute to rape. By some
peculiar trick of adult logic, proponents of abortion talk about fetal indications
for act. Whatever abortion may do for the mother, it so very obviously cannot
be therapeutic for the fetus. Death is hardly a constructive therapy. As Dr.

Hellegers of John Hopkins Hospital says, “While it is easy to feel that abortion
is being performed for the sake of the fetus, honesty requires us to recognize
that we perform it for adults”. There is no evidence to indicate that an infant
with congenital or birth defect would rather not be born since he cannot be
consulted. This evidence might exist if suicides were common among people
with congenital handicaps. However, to the contrary, these seem to value life,
since the incidence of suicide is less than that of the general population. Can
we choose death for another while life is all we ourselves know? Methods
are being developed to diagnose certain defects in the infants of mothers at
risk before the infant is born. The fluid around the fetus can be sampled and
tested in a very complicated fashion. If we kill infants with confidential
defects before they are born, why not after birth, why not any human being
we declare defective? It is no surprise of course for many of us to learn that
in hospitals across North American Continent such decisions affecting the
newborn and the very elderly or those with incurable disease, are being made.

What is a defect, what is a congenital defect? Hitler considered being 1/4
Jewish was a congenital defect incompatible with the right to life. Perhaps
you have all heard this story : One doctor saying to another doctor, “About the
termination of a pregnancy, I want your opinion. The father was syphilitic
(venereal disease). The mother tuberculous (small lumps on skin). Of the four
children born, the first was blind, the second died, the third was deaf and
dumb, the fourth also tuberculous. What would you have done?” “I would
have ended the pregnancy”. “Then you would have murdered Beethoven”.

Not content with the Abortion Act of 1969 which allows 40,000 unborn
children to be killed legally in our country in 1973, many noisy and emotional
people are campaigning for abortion on request. They are aided by a
crusading, misguided press and media which continues to utter as fact, the
fiction of fertile imaginative minds. We have been told by the media that the
majority of Canadians wish to have abortion legalized but the latest census
taken by the Toronto Star in March of 1989 reports that 35% of those polled
thought that abortion was already easy to obtain, 26% thought it too hard,
19% about right and 21% had no opinion. Men more then women thought it
too hard. Even if the majority did want it, this does not make it right.

Centuries ago, most Americans thought slavery was right. The elected
leaders of this country must have the wisdom and integrity for what is right,
not for what might be politically opportune. One of the uttered justifications
for abortion on demand is that every women should have the mastership of
her own body, but should she? To quote Dr. Edwin Connow, “Should she
have the right for what is really judicial execution of new life – not a cat, not a
chicken but a human being – not only potential but actual”. In a society one is
not totally free to do what one will with one’s own body (we don’t have the
right to get drunk or high on drugs and drive down Young Street.) The great
concern has been shown for the innocent victims of highjacking but what is
abortion but this? The highjacking without reprieve, of an innocent passenger
out of his mother’s womb. Should we really leave the right to hijack as a
personal decision only? Those campaigning for further liberalization of the
abortion law, hope to make abortion available and safe for all who wish it
during a pregnancy. Qualifications have been placed on the abortion on
demand routine by other groups, for example, a time limit for the duration of
pregnancy or clause that the operation be performed in an accredited hospital.

READ:  Asian Americans as Model Minorities Essay

Before exploring the reality of so-called safe abortion, let me tell you a little
method of procuring an abortion. Before 13 weeks of pregnancy, the neck of
the womb is dilated – a comparatively easy procedure in someone who has
already had a child – much more difficult if childbirth has not occurred. The
products of conception in many hospitals are removed but a suction apparatus
– considered safe and better that the curettal scraping method. After 13
weeks pregnancy, the fetus is too big to be removed in this was and either a
dangerous method of injection a solution into the womb is carried out, this
salting out method results in the mother going into what is really a miniature
labour and after a period of time, expelling a very dead often skinned baby. In
some hospitals because of the danger of this procedure to the mother, an
operation like a miniature Caesarean section called a hysterotomy has to be
performed. There area also many other methods. Let us now look if we can,
at consequences of such license to kill an individual too small to cry for it’s
own protection. Abortion by suction curettage is not just as simple as a pelvic
examination performed in a doctor’s office as Dr. Morgentaler and the
television programe W5 who were doing a great disservice to young women
in Canada would have us believe. In Canada as reported in the Canadian
Medical Association Journal (the Statistics from Statistics Canada), the
complication rate and this being for immediate complications of early abortion
is 4.5%. According to the Wyn report with statistics from 12 counties, women
who have a previous induced abortion have their ability to bear children in the
future permanently impaired. There is a 5-10% increase in infertility. The
chances of these women having a pregnancy in the tube increases up to 4
times. Premature delivery increases up to 50% and when one realizes that
prematurity is the commonest cause for infants being mentally or physically
defective, having cerebral palsy or other difficulties, then one realizes that
those doctors doing abortions in great numbers south of the border or across
the water, even in Canada may not be doing the women and her family a
service. They will tell you that abortion has almost no complications. What
most of them will not tell you, is that once the abortion is done they may
refuse to see the women again and that she must take her post-abortal
problems elsewhere. Those seeking repeal of the present abortion law will
rapidly point out that nevertheless, it is safer to have a legal abortion than
illegal abortions, safer for the women that is. This I don not dispute, but here
is the real rub. Liberalized abortion laws do not eliminate illegal, back street
abortions and in some cases, the overall number of illegal abortions actually
rise, usually stays stagnant, and rarely falls. There are still people who would
rather try it themselves or go somewhere they will be completely anonymous.

Another factor enters the total number of people seeking abortion, legal or
illegal rises. The overall pregnancy rate rockets and people become careless
with contraception and a women can have 3 or 4 abortions during the time of
one full term pregnancy. Are doctors really being kind to the girl to allow her
to choose life or death for her unborn child? In aborting a 16 year old this
year with so-called informed consent, we may be preventing her from having
even 1 or 2 children 10 years later when happily married. No, repealing the
abortion law does not make it possible for every women to safely eliminate,
what is for her, an unwanted pregnancy. Would limiting abortions to
accredited hospitals make it safer? Yes, safer for the women, not for the
fetus and it would jeopardize the continued well being of all of the members
of the community with the gross misuse of the medical manpower, hospital
facilities and money. With almost 31,739 abortions performed in Ontario in
1989, the cost to OHIP is about 9 million dollars. Yet to do as has been done
in the U.S.A and the United Kingdom – namely to make legal, abortions is to
turn so-called ‘backstreet butchers’ into legal operators. Patients now go into
the office through the front door instead of the rear. I have heard it said that
is abortions became available on request, many less children would be born
and we could use the pleasant delivery suites and postnatal beds for
abortions. As I have pointed out, however, before today, liberalization of
abortion does not reduce the birth rate. There would be little increase in
available facilities or indeed doctor’s time. By the very nature of the operation
and because the longer pregnancy lasts, the more difficult it is, patients for
abortions are admitted as urgent cases or emergencies so that all other
members of the community must wait longer for their hospital bed or the
surgery they need. Who will pay for there abortions? With medicare, of
course, it is you and I. I know one full tern pregnancy costs most than an
abortion, but not much more. And it does not cost more than 3 abortions and
that is what happens when the climate or choice for life or death of the
unborn child changes. Let us use this money for constructive purposes, not
destructive. It has been suggested that abortions on request would enable the
poor to secure abortion as easily as the rich but regrettably, it has been shown
that abortion-minded physicians in great demand will respond to the age-old
commercial rules, as has already happened in the States and in Britain.

Abortion on demand a women’s right to choose not to continue an unplanned
pregnancy would prevent there being unwanted children in this country, so we
are told. This is the final and desperate emotional plea of people anxious, at
whatever price, to escape the responsibility for their actions. Nobody here or
in Canada, wants there to be unwanted children in this city, and in this
country, and also in this world. There is nothing more pitiable or heat rending
that an unwanted fetus becoming an unwanted babe or an unwanted babe
becoming an unwanted child, or an unwanted child becoming an embittered
adult. But few would think it right to kill or have killed an unwanted baby to
prevent it from becoming an unwanted child. Then how can they think it right
to kill an unwanted fetus, even more defenceless than a newborn babe just
because it may grow into an unwanted child. Once a women has conceived,
she already is a parent, be it willing or otherwise. The only way she ceases it
be a parents is by a natural death or an act of killing. Killing in any form is not
the solution to so-called unwanted human beings at any age. Hitler thought
this was right. Canadians surely do not. It is a permissive and frightened
society that does not develop the expertise to control population, civil disorder,
crime, poverty, even its own sexuality but yet would mount an uncontrolled,
repeat uncontrolled, destructive attack on the defenceless, very beginnings of
life. Let us marshall all our resources financial, educational, those of social
agencies, but above all, of human concern and passion for our fellow humans.

Let us by all means, make available to all, knowledge of conception and
methods of contraception. Let us offer ourselves as loving humans to those

Choose Type of service

Choose writer quality

Page count

1 page 275 words


Order Essay Writing

$13.9 Order Now
icon Get your custom essay sample
Sara from Artscolumbia

Hi there, would you like to get such an essay? How about receiving a customized one?
Check it out goo.gl/Crty7Tt

Abortion Essay Pro Life
n Roman times, abortion and the destruction of unwanted children was permissible, but as out civilization has aged, it seems that such acts were no longer acceptable by rational human beings, so that in 1948, Canada along with most other nations in the world signed a declaration of the United Nations promising every human being the right to life. The World Medical Association meeting in Geneve at the same time, stated that the utmost respect for human life was to be from the moment of conc
2020-05-15 05:09:48
Abortion Essay Pro Life
$ 13.900 2018-12-31
In stock
Rated 5/5 based on 1 customer reviews