One of the most heated debates that have lasted for a few decades now, is whether abortion should be allowed or not. Whether legally it is a woman’s choice or not; is it her right as a human being or blasphemy, of such magnitude that no amount of Hail Mary’s would be enough for the absolution. Typically, this debate, or rather fight, has been fought between the so called “science” and so called “religion”. The fight between religion and science is not a new one. It has been there since the birth of science and has shifted its nature from being sheer violent to being more tactical in nature. The layers of this discussion go so deep that almost every semester, most of the universities raise this topic as a debate or a discussion for students to participate in and express their views. Sometimes there is not an open debate; rather it is a presentation by an individual or a group, who express their views in form of preaching. I had an experience of listening to one of the anti-abortion group
According to the presenters, the main focus of the presentation was to create awareness amongst masses about how wrong abortion is; religiously, ethically or scientifically. There were various arguments presented some of them compelling while others not so much.
The presentation began with the fundamental argument of life and the notion that abortion means “killing a human life”. They said that since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking a human life. Therefore, abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life. This is the most argued point that has never been concluded and still prevails as a hot argument between the Vatican and the world of science. An opinion of one of the presenters was that no civilized society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life of another human without punishment, and abortion is no different. Therefore, perpetrators of such an act must be punished.
An argument was also made that Adoption is a viable alternative to abortion and accomplishes the same result. And with 1.5 million American families wanting to adopt a child, there is no such thing as an unwanted child. Therefore, if a new life can be given a chance to be born, why should we snub it? Also, for women who demand complete control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or, if that is not possible, through abstinence; Abortion should not be used as another form of contraception.
From a scientific point of view, a presenter said that an abortion can result in medical complications later in life; the risk of ectopic pregnancies doubles and the chance of a miscarriage and pelvic inflammatory disease also increase. He continued to say that in the instance of rape and incest, proper medical care can ensure that a woman will not get pregnant. Abortion punishes the unborn child who committed no crime; instead, it is the perpetrator who should be punished. In addition, he also stressed on the point that abortion should not be used as another form of contraception.
From the financial point of view, a presenter said that many Americans who pay taxes are opposed to abortion; therefore it is morally wrong to use tax dollars to fund abortion. He said that there is immense amount of money being spent on programs and facilities like Planned Parenthood which is putting unnecessary burden on the financial budget and the allocation of taxes. Therefore, these programs should be eliminated from the federal funding and if someone needs an abortion at all, they should pay it out of their own pockets.
An argument was also made that those who choose abortions are often minors or young women with insufficient life experience to understand fully what they are doing. Many of these women have lifelong regrets afterwards. It was also pointed out that abortion frequently causes intense