This was a recent study done a couple of years back
Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives
By Lawrence B. Finer, Lori F. Frohwirth, Lindsay A. Dauphinee, Susheela Singh and Ann M. Moore
In 2004, a structured survey was completed by 1,209 abortion patients at 11 large providers, and in-depth interviews were conducted with 38 women at four sites. Bivariate analyses examined differences in the reasons for abortion across subgroups, and multivariate logistic regression models assessed associations between respondent characteristics and reported reasons.
In the table below, violent crimes and health reasons are at the lower end of the scale.
http://www.guttmacher.org/tables/370305/3711005t2.pdf
http://www.guttmacher.org/tables/370305/3711005t3.pdf
The focus is not on the extreme cases of abortion which is listed in the above tables. This includes only the external influences on the foetus.
Some Pro choice arguments
1. It is my body, and can do with it what I want.
2. The foetus is not life, but cells
Most of the pro choice users has an atheistic view and therefore naturally support all scientific evidence.
A part of evolution theory is that all life shared a common ancestor. It is known as the LUA (Last universal ancestor) or RCA (Recent common ancestor)
This ancestor was define as following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_universal_ancestor
“The last universal ancestor (LUA), also called the last universal common ancestor (LUCA), or the cenancestor, is the most recent organism from which all organisms now living on Earth descend.
Considering what we know of the offspring groups (see phylogenetic bracketing), the LUA was a small, single-cell organism. It would have had a cell wall and a ring-shaped coil of DNA floating freely within the cell, like modern bacteria.”
Now if science concluded this as the first life form, then the argument that the foetus isn’t life is no longer valid. This would also include humans, as humans are life forms as well. So again the “it isn’t human” argument isn’t valid either.
There have been plenty debates on the culling of animal life, and the cruelty that comes with it. This happened on a blogger, Emmett’ s articles. Abortion could be seen as a form of control and one thinks that if pro-choice proponents were so passionate about the culling of animals ( life) why not be as passionate about human “culling”.
The other argument of pro-choice people is that the world is over populated and birth control measures should be in place. One of the blogger stated that compulsory contraceptives should take place, as involuntary sterilisations were against basic human rights.
That would be against the first argument that it is her body and could do what she wanted.
It is quite surprising that when parents lose the baby due to miscarriage or still born baby, there is a lot of tears, hug, sympathies etc. even by pro-choice proponents. This however is absent when it comes to abortions. Surely, it must be traumatic to the women how had the abortion. Recent studies showed women who had abortions experience mental health issue later in their life.
Seems pro choicers have double standards…
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
