One of, if not the worst thing a person can think about is how some people feel it’s right to kill innocent babies. How is it that it’s illegal for human beings to murder others and go to jail for it, but not given the same thought to the very idea that kills nearly 500,000 unborn babies, in the idea known as abortion. Ever since the controversial court case of Roe v. Wade in 1973, the issue of abortion has been more alive than ever before. The problems and benefits of abortion drive party politics and fuel ethic and moral tensions in the spirit of every person. It has created a citizen cold war between both pro-life and pro-choice supporters, thus adding more tensions on the country. However if one must choose a side, abortion should be made
…show more content…
Princeton University created a list of references providing further evidence of this idea. Amongst the references was a statement that reads “Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)”(“Life”). Moore, the person whom the quote is from, further elaborates that after fertilization the process of development continues on and life for the fetus gets more complex over time. Throughout the stages of labor the unborn child becomes more noticeably alive, as the child possesses living characteristics such as kicking, sucking there thumb, and stretching. Science even goes as far to say that babies are able to live outside a mother’s womb at the 22 week period. Recent studies as reported by the NY Times tells us that with proper treatment and intensive care, the viability of a fetus can be at 22 weeks of pregnancy (Belluck). With these reported findings why would people still go out and abort these livings human beings, and not place them up for adoption if the mother had no intention in keeping the child …show more content…
ProCon.org reports that “The percentage of infants given up for adoption in the United States declined from 9% of those born before 1973 to 1% of those born between 1996 and 2002.” They go on to say that “US infant adoptions dropped from about 90,000 in 1971 to 18,000 in 2007” (“Abortion”). By looking deeper with these trends it's safe to conclude that the number of adoptions is decreasing drastically as the years progress. It doesn't help the issue either when an average of 500,000 abortions are being performed annually, thus making that previous conclusion even much slimmer than what’s being predicted. What brings more insult to the injury of the whole abortion idea is the fact that there are thousands of infertile women that don’t have the luxury of having a child, and then you have the women who are fertile and can have children, then they go ahead and have an abortion just so they don’t have to go through the process of labor. Why should some people have to suffer for their own losses and consequences, and have some take advantage of what they are able to do and not pay their luxuries
Princeton University created a list of references providing further evidence of this idea. Amongst the references was a statement that reads “Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)”(“Life”). Moore, the person whom the quote is from, further elaborates that after fertilization the process of development continues on and life for the fetus gets more complex over time. Throughout the stages of labor the unborn child becomes more noticeably alive, as the child possesses living characteristics such as kicking, sucking there thumb, and stretching. Science even goes as far to say that babies are able to live outside a mother’s womb at the 22 week period. Recent studies as reported by the NY Times tells us that with proper treatment and intensive care, the viability of a fetus can be at 22 weeks of pregnancy (Belluck). With these reported findings why would people still go out and abort these livings human beings, and not place them up for adoption if the mother had no intention in keeping the child …show more content…
ProCon.org reports that “The percentage of infants given up for adoption in the United States declined from 9% of those born before 1973 to 1% of those born between 1996 and 2002.” They go on to say that “US infant adoptions dropped from about 90,000 in 1971 to 18,000 in 2007” (“Abortion”). By looking deeper with these trends it's safe to conclude that the number of adoptions is decreasing drastically as the years progress. It doesn't help the issue either when an average of 500,000 abortions are being performed annually, thus making that previous conclusion even much slimmer than what’s being predicted. What brings more insult to the injury of the whole abortion idea is the fact that there are thousands of infertile women that don’t have the luxury of having a child, and then you have the women who are fertile and can have children, then they go ahead and have an abortion just so they don’t have to go through the process of labor. Why should some people have to suffer for their own losses and consequences, and have some take advantage of what they are able to do and not pay their luxuries