Abstract
This paper puts forward the argument for legalized abortion. It discusses how all women of all races and classes should have the freedom to control their own reproductive lives. It describes how abortion is only an option for the wealthy who can afford to do it properly but when legal termination of pregnancy is prohibited, it is women who live in poverty who suffer such as lower class females from Black, Hispanic, and Native American ethnic groups, as well as whites below the poverty level. Every day mothers have babies who are unwilling or unable mentally, physically, or emotionally to take care of them. It also examines how poor women and women of color and are much more likely to suffer deaths or injuries from illegal and botched abortions in back-alley clinics.

From the Paper
"In the latter part of the twentieth century began to think of themselves as not identified totally with biology and relegated to a life of nothing more than marriage and childbearing, but as having the right to develop their own potential as males had always done. In agreement with the feminists, I believe that women, like men, should have the right to sexual freedom, independence, and control over their own bodies.
Among the many pro-choice arguments with which I agree are that abortion must be kept legal, especially for all the rape and incest pregnancies and that abortion is often a form of preventive medicine which may preserve the life of a woman whose health might be jeopardized by a completed pregnancy. Both these arguments support a woman's right to control her own life and health as opposed to emotional anti-choice arguments that describe abortion as foetus murder."

Tags:class, wealth, ethnic, groups, whites

Abstract
This paper looks at a brief history of abortion in America, which remains a controversial issue of human rights with social and moral ramifications. Several legal cases that influenced "Roe v. Wade" are discussed, starting with " Meyer v. Nebraska", which was filed during the early twentieth century. The paper explains that, despite "Roe v. Wade" stressing the constitutional rights of women, this hallmark case has created a societal division between the pro-choice position that supports abortion and the right to choose and its pro-life opponents who strongly disagree with this decision.

From the Paper
"Pro-life groups believe that life begins at the moment of conception. Many Catholics feel the fetus has a soul; therefore, aborting it would be considered murder. Pro-choice groups believe in having a choice and a safe place for women to have abortions. The mistake people make in criticizing pro-choice groups is the belief pro-choice means pro-abortion. This is not the case. Pro-life groups fail to recognize that a woman should have the right to decide what is best for her and/or her family."

Tags:safe, birth control, amendments rights fetus

Abstract
In this essay, the writer explains that abortion was decriminalized and abortion clinics were established in Canada as a result of direct challenges to federal and provincial governments. The writer looks at Section 251, which restricted the conditions under which abortions could be performed and not be considered an indictable offense. The writer notes that on January 28, 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada declared Section 251 of the Criminal Code unconstitutional. The writer concludes that social policies that support women, including prenatal education, universal daycare, parental leave, community midwives, affordable housing and economic equality, are needed in order to ensure real freedom of reproductive choice.

From the Paper
"Section 251 was passed in 1969. This law criminalized abortion under any circumstances but in an accredited hospital with a therapeutic abortion committee. Activism in opposition to that law began in 1970 when Dr. Henry Morgentaler was arrested for doing abortions without the consent of an abortion committee and outside of an accredited hospital. He performed the abortions as an act of civil disobedience, and when he was prosecuted in Quebec in 1973, 1975 and 1976, all three juries refused to convict him as a criminal. In 1976 a newly elected Parti Quebecois government refused to continue with the prosecutions of Dr. Morgentaler, and English Canadian activism subsided because the new government promised there would be no further cases brought before the Court for violation of Section 251. Although Section 251 was a federal law, cases were prosecuted in the provinces. Abortion was de-criminalized, but women continued to fight in Quebec for better access to abortion services and for public medical insurance coverage for abortions done in clinics and health centers."

Tags:pregnancy, clinics, Dr., Morgentaler, choice

Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses that the question for abortion according to a recent strain of philosophical thinking, is twofold: first, is the human fetus a person, and second, is it ethically and/or morally acceptable to kill non-persons? The writer maintains that making abortion illegal does not stop abortion from taking place, it merely increases the immorality of the act by endangering the mother's life--and the doctor's livelihood--in addition to the fetuses. The writer argues that all humans could be seen as nothing more than fleshy bags of potential; none of us has fully realized our capabilities until they are by definition ended when we draw our final breath. The writer concludes that not letting someone take their first breath is simply not a moral act.

From the Paper
"It is generally accepted that it is immoral and/or unethical to kill a ``person,'' that is, one whose personhood is not in question. If we cannot determine whether or not a human fetus qualifies as a person, then the only safe moral choice is to not have an abortion. If abortion only might be killing a person, which is considered an irreprehensible and immoral act, then wouldn't not committing this maybe-crime be the only logical action? If personhood does not exist outside of the brains of a few philosophers--as I maintain it does not--then there is no discernible biological difference between the human fetus and the full-fledged adult other than developmental differences. Some might argue that these differences are large enough to warrant a skeptical consideration of the full human-ness of the fetus--this is, in fact, one of the ways in which personhood is applied to the abortion issue. This argument does not hold water, however, unless infants, toddlers, and arguably anyone who has not yet reached puberty is also not considered a full person."

Tags:human, fetus, person, immoral

Abstract
In this article, the writer explains that an abortion is the termination of a pregnancy associated with the death of an embryo or a fetus. The writer discusses issues related to abortion and argues that women have the right to have the abortion procedure done in a healthy and safe manner, pointing out that if a woman wants an abortion badly enough, she will find a way to do it whether the method is safe or unsafe. The writer concludes that the legalization of abortion has saved many lives because abortions are now performed in safe environments and this is reason enough alone to make the procedure legal.

From the Paper
"Unwanted pregnancy can result in a horrible life for the child in question. Many people who don't want children and are forced to have them end up being horrible, abusive parents. Why should society hold the burden of forcing a woman to bring an unwanted child into the world? Many cases have occurred where an unwanted child is born and then abused by his parents and therefore ends up living in foster care until he is old enough to get out. It is so ironic that because of society, many unwanted children were born and as a result, these children have become society's problems, but when it comes to taking care of these children who were forced into life, society does not do much to take care of them. How can people expect women to carry the burden of having a child against her will and then when she finally does give birth, tells her to go ahead and live with it? Was it her choice to carry this baby to term? Shouldn't those forcing her to have the child do everything necessary to make sure this child grows up in a safe
environment? Technically, it was not her choice to have the child, so why should she have to hold the burden to raise it, and why should this innocent baby fall victim to a life full of resentment from his mother?"

Tags:unwanted, pregnancy, rights, doctors

Abstract
This paper explains that in Roe vs. Wade, 1973, called Roe and the companion ruling Doe vs. Bolton, 1973; the Supreme Court judged the constitutionality of two state abortion laws. Since Roe vs. Wade, the federal government and individual states have taken measures to curb abortion by inflicting more arduous requirements. The author points out that almost 93% of legally induced abortions are done not for medical but voluntary, personal reasons. The paper concludes that, although it is lawful, abortion is often morally wrong when it is a personal choice and not to secure a woman's health.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Evolution of the Law concerning Abortion
Legal Issues of Abortion
Moral Issues of Abortion
Personal Observations

From the Paper
"Specifically, during the mid 1960s, the abortion restructuring development had acquired ground and pushed for legislative changes, depending on the backing of women's groups, birth control organizations, civil rights advocates, the medical and legal professions and Protestant churches. These led, during the period of 1966 to 1973, to reformation of their statutes by about fourteen states to lawfully allow abortions for therapeutic reasons, when the fetus could be born with a grave mental or physical handicap, in addition to when pregnancy was the consequence of incest or rape. Four other states, New York, Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington, went to the extent of permitting abortions on stipulation upon meeting just few routine requirements relating to the site of abortion facilities, the phase of fetal development, and the pregnant woman's place of living."

Tags:personal, medical, roe, requirements, reform

Abstract
This paper presents an argument against the legality of abortion, refuting three main claims of the pro-choice movement: 1) that a fetus is not a human being, 2) that abortion is an acceptable means of birth control, and 3) that legal abortion is integral to women's autonomy. It cites a range of sources, including the Medline database articles, several books, news services, and the World Medical Association website.

Abstract
In this article, the writer notes that abortion today has become a highly contentious ethical issue and the limits to which it is enforced within a legal system is primarily centered on the rationale of an unborn baby being (un)able to claim personhood. The writer points out that arguments are numerous both for and against this and are ultimately aimed at legally justifying access, or restriction, to abortion services. This essay argues that grounds for legalizing abortion are not conclusive and that they are in-fact arbitrary and fallacious in some cases. The writer puts forth a case for illegality in abortion law except under exceptional circumstances, through the objection of the pro-abortion arguments of fertilization being process, and a fetus is only a potential human being.

From the Paper
"To insinuate that there is no difference between an ovum before and after fertilization is contrary to current scientific inquiry. The proposition of using the 'process' argument as a justification on relaxing the legal limit to abortion is at very least vague and the consequences of being wrong is worrisome. Being able to distinguish an exact point of personhood, based on subjective criteria, on a continuum, comes across as impossible and plagued by arbitrary judgments.
"Garrett Hardin, formally professor of biology at the University of California in Santa Barbara, writing before the 1967 legalizing of abortion in the United States reasons that the killing of very young embryos is not the same as killing at another stage in life, claiming we are not the same person at different stages of life."

Tags:abortion, legal fertilization fetus

Abstract
The writer addresses the major arguments of abortionists and explains the fallacies inherent in them and then provides an analysis and conclusion explaining why abortion is murder and how it destroys the fabric of society.

From the Paper
"Ever since "Roe v. Wade" legalized abortion in ..., the American public has grown increasingly polarized on the issue of abortion. This has been due, in part, to the fact that the political left and right wings have taken opposing sides on the issue, thus making what is really an ethical issue a political football. Once an issue becomes political, distortion is inevitable and this has certainly been the case with abortion. The pro-abortion rhetoric attempts to use unrelated issues as smokescreens to hide the real issue of..."

Tags:abortion, pro, con, right of the mother, fetus, baby, mid-pregnancy, early, partial-birth, infanticide, murder

Abstract
Almost three decades after the landmark 1973 Roe vs. Wade case legalizing abortion in America, the issue remains the greatest moral flashpoint facing America today. This paper examines the underlying ethical arguments of both sides of the abortion debate, using Ronald Dworkin's "sanctity of life" principles. By "abortion," this paper includes all forms of abortion, from early fetal abortion through the RU46 drug to late-term abortions, from abortions out of "convenience" to abortions in cases of rape and incest. It evaluates how the anti-abortion crusade has framed their campaign on the personhood and the rights of the fetus. The second part looks at the pro-abortion movement, which has framed their issue as a campaign for women's reproductive rights. Finally, the paper examines the approach of a minority of women, activists from both camps who are working to bridge the gap between pro- and anti-abortion factions.
By presenting both sides, this paper argues that because of current societal structures that make unwanted pregnancy more likely to happen and its consequences more difficult to assume, abortion must remain an option, a "necessary evil." Both pro- and anti-abortion factions, however, must work towards their common ground a society where abortions are no longer necessary.

From the Paper
"Despite the legality of abortion and its importance to women's rights, anti-abortion activists have successfully curtailed several pro-choice gains. More important, the "pro-life" camp's appeals to a higher moral law have successfully placed pro-choice advocates on the defensive.
However, pro-choice advocates also frame their stand on morality. Forcing a woman to continue and unwelcome pregnancy is ultimately harmful to the mother and the child. The creation of unwanted and uncared-for children has a two-fold effect of limiting a woman's potential for both the present and future motherhood. As Roiphe states, becoming a mother is a crucial choice and its imposition makes women into "slaves of their biology" (142)."

Tags:fetus, bible, christian, feminists, morality, birth, control