Abortion is a practice that goes back at least as far as recorded history. The Chinese performed abortions with toxic herbs some 4,700 years ago, and the 3,500-year-old Eber's Papyrus tells us that the Ancient Egyptians were no strangers to family planning. Even the Bible takes a pretty strong stance on the matter.
Abortion and religion have long been hotly debated topics, especially when politicians are involved. When it comes down to it, however, abortion is murder, and should be banned in the United States.Check out this list, and its companion, Every Compelling Argument for Why Pro-Choice Is Right, to get informed opinions about the abortion debate. Vote up the reasons why abortions should be banned immediately below, and be sure to let us know what you think in the comment section.
Stage of Development Does Not Define PersonhoodPhoto: Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY
From the moment we are conceived to the moment we die, we're all in some stage of development. True, we're only actively "growing" until the end of puberty, but even then we're still developing into the next form.
Being in an earlier form of development doesn't alter one's personhood. If you're a human when you're 60, then you were one at 40, 25, 15, 10, 5 years old, one month old, one day old, and the day before you were born.
You were a person a month before that, and six months before that, and all the way back to the day your cells began dividing. Any line of "personhood" drawn at any stage of development from the first cell division is completely arbitrary.307226Agree or disagree?
The Adoption OptionPhoto: flickr / CC0
Obviously, the first and foremost option for many considering abortion would be adopting the child out as soon as it is born. On average, about 100,000 children are adopted every year in America alone; currently, that's a little less than ten percent of the number who are aborted.Worldwide, the demand for adoptions well exceeds the number of abortions performed in the United States every year. Meaning, if foreign adoption is an option, literally no American woman would ever have to raise a child she didn't want.392302Agree or disagree?
Responsibility and InevitabilityPhoto: Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY
Let's say you were to pick up a gun, and shoot someone dead. Should you be accused of murder? Well, let's break it down.
Technically speaking, you didn't kill them - arterial bleeding did. That bleeding was cased by a bullet wound, which was caused by a bullet. The bullet had to fly through the air, which it did after getting its energy from burning gunpowder. The gunpowerder ignited because a primer cap lit it, and the primer cap went off because a hammer's firing pin struck it. The firing pin struck the cap because a spring drove it forward. That was the chain of events. So really, the spring committed murder, because it supplied the initial energy. All you did was pull a trigger, which released the energy already stored in that spring.
And yet, in practical terms, we would hold you responsible for that murder, because the bullet, powder, pin, hammer and spring were simply acting according to the laws of physics. YOU were the only individual involved who made a conscious decision, and hence, you are responsible for the death that results.In the same way, a person could hold themselves responsible for the life that results from sex. Provided that it was consensual, they were the last one to make a decision on the matter; hence, the last person who had an influence on the outcome.259193Agree or disagree?
DNA Says: A Fetus Is Not "Part of the Mother"Photo: flickr / CC0
In any court of law, identity is fairly easily established by DNA. If one person has different DNA than another, then they are a separate person. The fact that a fetus has different DNA from its mother definitively establishes it as a completely separate person.
If it truly were "a part of the mother's body," then it would have its mother's DNA. Put it this way: If that fetus escaped and committed a crime, and left DNA evidence on the scene, it wouldn't be the mother going to jail. Ergo, by our own legal definition, they are separate people.303233Agree or disagree?