The debate between pro-choice and pro-life - Essay Example

Argument The debate between pro-choice and pro-life has been a timeless one the beginning of which pre s our present generation. There appears tobe a constant twist to the facts and thus different people are pro-life at one period of their life and pro-choice at the other. In the present United States Presidential race this debate again rears its head as a key issue in the topics for heated discussions amongst the candidates. Obama has determined that pro-choice is his elementary philosophy. Mc Cain, on the other hand, is determined that Obama cannot conquer over his unwavering stance of pro-life. The author of this paper believes that neither of these two candidates has thus far been able to sway those individuals who were pro-choice or pro-life to change their fundamental belief to a new or different philosophical standpoint. Clearly this debate is a lifelong and never-ending deliberation. Therefore should the individuals who are pro-choice just submit to those who are pro-life and accept defeat? You, the reader, be the judge. The Toulmin Model of Argumentation posits six primary elements in the course of an argument, namely, claim, grounds, warrant, backing support, rebuttal/reservation and clarification. Firstly, the claim is the statement of the argumentation. The second element of an argument is the grounds which are substantiated explanation for the claim. The third element is the warrant which refers to theory or the series of analysis that unite the grounds to the claim. The backing is the fourth element and its main purpose is to support the warrant. Rebuttal or reservation is the fifth factor and it gives an account of ‘counter-examples and counter-arguments’ which are two major components of the Toulmin model. The final ingredient is qualification which asserts a boundary to the claim, warrant and backing. This essay is an attempt to utilize the Toulmin model of argument to analyze the various arguments submitted to question pro-choice versus pro-life. Is there a difference between the human and an animal? The author of this paper believes that the animal level belongs to some dogs and other animals that would eat or kill their own offspring immediately upon delivery. The human element in us is that we have a choice- a choice to eat or kill the child or to allow the child to live to develop into all that it was meant to become. The author of this paper claims that the mere fact that a sperm and an egg were allowed to germinate should be basis enough to allow the new life that is been conceived to live. What is the definition of life? Is it a fully developed baby or is it the actual fertilization of the egg? The pro-choice activists must claim that there is no life until the child has been delivered therefore removing the fetus or the fertilized egg from the uterus should cause no harm to any life form. Without a doubt, there is something skewed in that argument for what is the beginning of life is it fully developed baby or the division of cells due to the fertilization of the egg. The author of this paper posits that life begins from the fertilization of the egg. The fetus at one week of age has already begun to have some synapse movement. Therefore can an inanimate object begin to grow and multiply on its own? Definitely there is the need for the pro-choice activist to rethink their logic in the argument that life does not begin from conception but at another stage in the development of the fetus before it becomes a baby. An additional argument presented by the pro-choice advocates is that an individual who may be living in an impoverished environment has the right to remove the unwanted fetus. If all the impoverished mothers were to eliminate their children what then would be the condition of the labor force of this country. Many members of society were born in absolutely the lowest end of the social strata ye they have been able to rise from the shadow of their poor beginnings and become well established and productive citizens of our country. Obviously being poor is not an excuse for the termination of a pregnancy. If the argument of poverty does not hold then certainly one should be able to eliminate a fetus that through modern technological advancement of the ultra sound, the fetus is found to have a defect in its physical or mental development. You be judge should a mother who already has two children who are blind, two who are deaf and it is guaranteed that this child that she is carrying would also be deaf. Should she choose termination of this pregnancy seeing that she already has eight children or should she choose life? You be the judge. If you as a pro-choice advocate determine that such a life is of no use to this present age then think again because the great classical musician Beethoven was born to such a mother. For the thousands of mothers all over the world that have in fact brought forth children that have been found in the uterus to be physically or mentally challenged the author of this paper says well done. Certainly the world has been enriched with new knowledge and absolutely wonderful music due to the birth of Beethoven. Without such a life the exciting and thrilling music that has been created may have been non-existent. A fourth example proposed by the pro-choice supporter is that a victim of rape and abuse should be given the right to terminate the pregnancy. Obviously each individual has the right to choose but choosing the termination of life is not that concept called murder? Is not killing against the law? Does an individual have the right to kill another because they have violated or abused them? The courts of law in this country as well as those around the world certainly are no upholders of this order. Why then is it a matter of choice for the life that is unable to defend itself due to its vulnerability and tenderness be the one to take the brunt of an individual’s need for revenge and some sort of consolation. On a final note in this modern era there are some mothers who still believe that there is great negative stigma attached to pregnancy without marriage. If an individual is mature enough to have a sexual relation and has the mental capacity to decide to have sexual intercourse should not such an individual also have the mental fortitude to know that such an activity could lead to pregnancy? Such an individual should therefore either use protection against becoming pregnant or simply abstain from sex. The obvious result of unprotected sex should jug the individual to allow life to remain as it is minus the unnecessary burden of guilt and fear that grips the heart of every mother that would choose to terminate a pregnancy. Pro-choice or pro-life choose life because it is one of the absolute truths that the Supreme Being has promoted. References The Toulmin Model of Argumentation. http://www- rohan.sdsu.edu/~digger/305/toulmin_model.htm Read More