Persuasive Essay Guide

Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Caleb S.

Crafting a Convincing Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Published on: Feb 22, 2023

Last updated on: Nov 22, 2023

Persuasive Essay About Abortion

People also read

A Comprehensive Guide to Writing an Effective Persuasive Essay

200+ Persuasive Essay Topics to Help You Out

Learn How to Create a Persuasive Essay Outline

30+ Free Persuasive Essay Examples To Get You Started

Read Excellent Examples of Persuasive Essay About Gun Control

How to Write a Persuasive Essay About Covid19 | Examples & Tips

Learn to Write Persuasive Essay About Business With Examples and Tips

Check Out 12 Persuasive Essay About Online Education Examples

Persuasive Essay About Smoking - Making a Powerful Argument with Examples

Share this article

Are you about to write a persuasive essay on abortion but wondering how to begin?

Writing an effective persuasive essay on the topic of abortion can be a difficult task for many students. 

It is important to understand both sides of the issue and form an argument based on facts and logical reasoning. This requires research and understanding, which takes time and effort.

In this blog, we will provide you with some easy steps to craft a persuasive essay about abortion that is compelling and convincing. Moreover, we have included some example essays and interesting facts to read and get inspired by. 

So let's start!

On This Page On This Page -->

How To Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion?

Abortion is a controversial topic, with people having differing points of view and opinions on the matter. There are those who oppose abortion, while some people endorse pro-choice arguments. 

It is also an emotionally charged subject, so you need to be extra careful when crafting your persuasive essay .

Before you start writing your persuasive essay, you need to understand the following steps.

Step 1: Choose Your Position

The first step to writing a persuasive essay on abortion is to decide your position. Do you support the practice or are you against it? You need to make sure that you have a clear opinion before you begin writing. 

Once you have decided, research and find evidence that supports your position. This will help strengthen your argument. 

Check out the video below to get more insights into this topic:

Step 2: Choose Your Audience

The next step is to decide who your audience will be. Will you write for pro-life or pro-choice individuals? Or both? 

Knowing who you are writing for will guide your writing and help you include the most relevant facts and information.

Order Essay

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Step 3: Define Your Argument

Now that you have chosen your position and audience, it is time to craft your argument. 

Start by defining what you believe and why, making sure to use evidence to support your claims. You also need to consider the opposing arguments and come up with counter arguments. This helps make your essay more balanced and convincing.

Step 4: Format Your Essay

Once you have the argument ready, it is time to craft your persuasive essay. Follow a standard format for the essay, with an introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. 

Make sure that each paragraph is organized and flows smoothly. Use clear and concise language, getting straight to the point.

Step 5: Proofread and Edit

The last step in writing your persuasive essay is to make sure that you proofread and edit it carefully. Look for spelling, grammar, punctuation, or factual errors and correct them. This will help make your essay more professional and convincing.

These are the steps you need to follow when writing a persuasive essay on abortion. It is a good idea to read some examples before you start so you can know how they should be written.

Continue reading to find helpful examples.

Persuasive Essay About Abortion Examples

To help you get started, here are some example persuasive essays on abortion that may be useful for your own paper.

Short Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Persuasive Essay About No To Abortion

What Is Abortion? - Essay Example

Persuasive Speech on Abortion

Legal Abortion Persuasive Essay

Persuasive Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Persuasive Essay about legalizing abortion

You can also read m ore persuasive essay examples to imp rove your persuasive skills.

Examples of Argumentative Essay About Abortion

An argumentative essay is a type of essay that presents both sides of an argument. These essays rely heavily on logic and evidence.

Here are some examples of argumentative essay with introduction, body and conclusion that you can use as a reference in writing your own argumentative essay. 

Abortion Persuasive Essay Introduction

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Conclusion

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Pdf

Argumentative Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Argumentative Essay About Abortion - Introduction

Abortion Persuasive Essay Topics

If you are looking for some topics to write your persuasive essay on abortion, here are some examples:

  • Should abortion be legal in the United States?
  • Is it ethical to perform abortions, considering its pros and cons?
  • What should be done to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortions?
  • Is there a connection between abortion and psychological trauma?
  • What are the ethical implications of abortion on demand?
  • How has the debate over abortion changed over time?
  • Should there be legal restrictions on late-term abortions?
  • Does gender play a role in how people view abortion rights?
  • Is it possible to reduce poverty and unwanted pregnancies through better sex education?
  • How is the anti-abortion point of view affected by religious beliefs and values? 

These are just some of the potential topics that you can use for your persuasive essay on abortion. Think carefully about the topic you want to write about and make sure it is something that interests you. 

Check out m ore persuasive essay topics that will help you explore other things that you can write about!

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Facts About Abortion You Need to Know

Here are some facts about abortion that will help you formulate better arguments.

  • According to the Guttmacher Institute , 1 in 4 pregnancies end in abortion.
  • The majority of abortions are performed in the first trimester.
  • Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures, with less than a 0.5% risk of major complications.
  • In the United States, 14 states have laws that restrict or ban most forms of abortion after 20 weeks gestation.
  • Seven out of 198 nations allow elective abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
  • In places where abortion is illegal, more women die during childbirth and due to complications resulting from pregnancy.
  • A majority of pregnant women who opt for abortions do so for financial and social reasons.
  • According to estimates, 56 million abortions occur annually.

In conclusion, these are some of the examples, steps, and topics that you can use to write a persuasive essay. Make sure to do your research thoroughly and back up your arguments with evidence. This will make your essay more professional and convincing. 

Need the services of a professional essay writing service ? We've got your back!

MyPerfectWords.com is a persuasive essay writing service that provides help to students in the form of professionally written essays. Our persuasive essay writer can craft quality persuasive essays on any topic, including abortion. 

Frequently Asked Questions

What should i talk about in an essay about abortion.

When writing an essay about abortion, it is important to cover all the aspects of the subject. This includes discussing both sides of the argument, providing facts and evidence to support your claims, and exploring potential solutions.

What is a good argument for abortion?

A good argument for abortion could be that it is a woman’s choice to choose whether or not to have an abortion. It is also important to consider the potential risks of carrying a pregnancy to term.

Caleb S. (Marketing, Linguistics)

Caleb S. has been providing writing services for over five years and has a Masters degree from Oxford University. He is an expert in his craft and takes great pride in helping students achieve their academic goals. Caleb is a dedicated professional who always puts his clients first.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Get Help

Keep reading

Persuasive Essay About Abortion

We value your privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience and give you personalized content. Do you agree to our cookie policy?

Website Data Collection

We use data collected by cookies and JavaScript libraries.

Are you sure you want to cancel?

Your preferences have not been saved.

Human Rights Careers

10 Essential Essays About Women’s Reproductive Rights

“Reproductive rights” let a person decide whether they want to have children, use contraception, or terminate a pregnancy. Reproductive rights also include access to sex education and reproductive health services. Throughout history, the reproductive rights of women in particular have been restricted. Girls and women today still face significant challenges. In places that have seen reproductive rights expand, protections are rolling back. Here are ten essential essays about reproductive rights:

“Our Bodies, Ourselves: Reproductive Rights”

bell hooks Published in Feminism Is For Everyone (2014)

This essay opens strong: when the modern feminism movement started, the most important issues were the ones linked to highly-educated and privileged white women. The sexual revolution led the way, with “free love” as shorthand for having as much sex as someone wanted with whoever they wanted. This naturally led to the issue of unwanted pregnancies. Birth control and abortions were needed.

Sexual freedom isn’t possible without access to safe, effective birth control and the right to safe, legal abortion. However, other reproductive rights like prenatal care and sex education were not as promoted due to class bias. Including these other rights more prominently might have, in hooks’ words, “galvanized the masses.” The right to abortion in particular drew the focus of mass media. Including other reproductive issues would mean a full reckoning about gender and women’s bodies. The media wasn’t (and arguably still isn’t) ready for that.

“Racism, Birth Control, and Reproductive Rights”

Angela Davis Published in Women, Race, & Class (1981)

Davis’ essay covers the birth control movement in detail, including its race-based history. Davis argues that birth control always included racism due to the belief that poor women (specifically poor Black and immigrant women) had a “moral obligation” to birth fewer children. Race was also part of the movement from the beginning because only wealthy white women could achieve the goals (like more economic and political freedom) driving access to birth control.

In light of this history, Davis emphasizes that the fight for reproductive freedom hasn’t led to equal victories. In fact, the movements driving the gains women achieved actively neglected racial inequality. One clear example is how reproductive rights groups ignored forced sterilization within communities of color. Davis ends her essay with a call to end sterilization abuse.

“Reproductive Justice, Not Just Rights”

Dorothy Roberts Published in Dissent Magazine (2015)

Dorothy Roberts, author of Killing the Black Body and Fatal Invention , describes attending the March for Women’s Lives. She was especially happy to be there because co-sponsor SisterSong (a collective founded by 16 organizations led by women of color) shifted the focus from “choice” to “social justice.” Why does this matter? Roberts argues that the rhetoric of “choice” favors women who have options that aren’t available to low-income women, especially women of color. Conservatives face criticism for their stance on reproductive rights, but liberals also cause harm when they frame birth control as the solution to global “overpopulation” or lean on fetal anomalies as an argument for abortion choice.

Instead of “the right to choose,” a reproductive justice framework is necessary. This requires a living wage, universal healthcare, and prison abolition. Reproductive justice goes beyond the current pro-choice/anti-choice rhetoric that still favors the privileged.

“The Color of Choice: White Supremacy and Reproductive Justice”

Loretta J. Ross, SisterSong Published in Color of Violence: The INCITE! Anthology (2016)

White supremacy in the United States has always created different outcomes for its ethnic populations. The method? Population control. Ross points out that even a glance at reproductive politics in the headlines makes it clear that some women are encouraged to have more children while others are discouraged. Ross defines “reproductive justice,” which goes beyond the concept of “rights.” Reproductive justice is when reproductive rights are “embedded in a human rights and social justice framework.”

In the essay, Ross explores topics like white supremacy and population control on both the right and left sides of politics. She acknowledges that while the right is often blunter in restricting women of color and their fertility, white supremacy is embedded in both political aisles. The essay closes with a section on mobilizing for reproductive justice, describing SisterSong (where Ross is a founding member) and the March for Women’s Lives in 2004.

“Abortion Care Is Not Just For Cis Women”

Sachiko Ragosta Published in Ms. Magazine (2021)

Cisgender women are the focus of abortion and reproductive health services even though nonbinary and trans people access these services all the time. In their essay, Ragosta describes the criticism Ibis Reproductive Health received when it used the term “pregnant people.” The term alienates women, the critics said, but acting as if only cis women need reproductive care is simply inaccurate. As Ragosta writes, no one is denying that cis women experience pregnancy. The reaction to more inclusive language around pregnancy and abortion reveals a clear bias against trans people.

Normalizing terms like “pregnant people” help spaces become more inclusive, whether it’s in research, medical offices, or in day-to-day life. Inclusiveness leads to better health outcomes, which is essential considering the barriers nonbinary and gender-expansive people face in general and sexual/reproductive care.

“We Cannot Leave Black Women, Trans People, and Gender Expansive People Behind: Why We Need Reproductive Justice”

Karla Mendez Published in Black Women Radicals

Mendez, a freelance writer and (and the time of the essay’s publication) a student studying Interdisciplinary Studies, Political Science, and Women’s and Gender Studies, responds to the Texas abortion ban. Terms like “reproductive rights” and “abortion rights” are part of the mainstream white feminist movement, but the benefits of birth control and abortions are not equal. Also, as the Texas ban shows, these benefits are not secure. In the face of this reality, it’s essential to center Black people of all genders.

In her essay, Mendez describes recent restrictive legislation and the failure of the reproductive rights movement to address anti-Blackness, transphobia, food insecurity, and more. Groups like SisterSong have led the way on reproductive justice. As reproductive rights are eroded in the United States, the reproductive rights movement needs to focus on justice.

“Gee’s Bend: A Reproductive Justice Quilt Story From the South”

Mary Lee Bendolph Published in Radical Reproductive Justice (2017)

One of Mary Lee Bendolph’s quilt designs appears as the cover of Radical Reproductive Justice. She was one of the most important strip quilters associated with Gee’s Bend, Alabama. During the Civil Rights era, the 700 residents of Gee’s Bend were isolated and found it hard to vote or gain educational and economic power outside the village. Bendolph’s work didn’t become well-known outside her town until the mid-1990s.

Through an interview by the Souls Grown Foundation, we learn that Bendolph didn’t receive any sex education as a girl. When she became pregnant in sixth grade, she had to stop attending school. “They say it was against the law for a lady to go to school and be pregnant,” she said, because it would influence the other kids. “Soon as you have a baby, you couldn’t never go to school again.”

“Underground Activists in Brazil Fight for Women’s Reproductive Rights”

Alejandra Marks Published in The North American Congress on Latin America (2021)

While short, this essay provides a good introduction to abortion activism in Brazil, where abortion is legal only in the case of rape, fetal anencephaly, or when a woman’s life is at risk. The reader meets “Taís,” a single mother faced with an unwanted pregnancy. With no legal options, she researched methods online, including teas and pills. She eventually connected with a lawyer and activist who walked her through using Cytotec, a medication she got online. The activist stayed on the phone while Taís completed her abortion at home.

For decades, Latin American activists have helped pregnant people get abortion medications while wealthy Brazilians enter private clinics or travel to other countries. Government intimidation makes activism risky, but the stakes are high. Hundreds of Brazilians die each year from dangerous abortion methods. In the past decade, religious conservatives in Congress have blocked even mild reform. Even if a new president is elected, Brazil’s abortion rights movement will fight an uphill battle.

“The Ambivalent Activist”

Lauren Groff Published in Fight of the Century: Writers Reflect on 100 years of Landmark ACLU Cases (2020)

Before Roe v. Wade, abortion regulation around the country was spotty. 37 states still had near-bans on the procedure while only four states had repealed anti-abortion laws completely. In her essay, Groff summarizes the case in accessible, engaging prose. The “Jane Roe” of the case was Norma McCorvey. When she got pregnant, she’d already had two children, one of whom she’d given up for adoption. McCorvey couldn’t access an abortion provider because the pregnancy didn’t endanger her life. She eventually connected with two attorneys: Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee. In 1973 on January 2, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that abortion was a fundamental right.

Norma McCorvey was a complicated woman. She later became an anti-choice activist (in an interview released after her death, she said Evangelical anti-choice groups paid her to switch her position), but as Groff writes, McCorvey had once been proud that it was her case that gave women bodily autonomy.

“The Abortion I Didn’t Want”

Caitlin McDonnell Published in Salon (2015) and Choice Words: Writers on Abortion (2020)

While talking about abortion is less demonized than in the past, it’s still fairly unusual to hear directly from people who’ve experienced it. It’s certainly unusual to hear more complicated stories. Caitlin McDonnell, a poet and teacher from Brooklyn, shares her experience. In clear, raw prose, this piece brings home what can be an abstract “issue” for people who haven’t experienced it or been close to someone who has.

In debates about abortion rights, those who carry the physical and emotional effects are often neglected. Their complicated feelings are weaponized to serve agendas or make judgments about others. It’s important to read essays like McDonnell’s and hear stories as nuanced and multi-faceted as humans themselves.

You may also like

persuasive essays on abortion rights

15 Root Causes of Climate Change

persuasive essays on abortion rights

15 Facts about Rosa Parks

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Abolitionist Movement: History, Main Ideas, and Activism Today

persuasive essays on abortion rights

The Biggest 15 NGOs in the UK

persuasive essays on abortion rights

15 Biggest NGOs in Canada

persuasive essays on abortion rights

The 15 Biggest NGOs in Australia

persuasive essays on abortion rights

15 Facts about Harriet Tubman

persuasive essays on abortion rights

International Women’s Day 101: History, Resources, Activities

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Human Rights Day: History, Themes, Resources and Activities

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Period Poverty 101: Definition, Facts, Ways to Take Action

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Desertification 101: Definition, Types, Causes and Effects

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Gender Discrimination 101: Meaning, Examples, Ways to Take Action

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Princeton Legal Journal

Princeton Legal Journal

persuasive essays on abortion rights

The First Amendment and the Abortion Rights Debate

Sofia Cipriano

Following Dobbs v. Jackson ’s (2022) reversal of Roe v. Wade (1973) — and the subsequent revocation of federal abortion protection — activists and scholars have begun to reconsider how to best ground abortion rights in the Constitution. In the past year, numerous Jewish rights groups have attempted to overturn state abortion bans by arguing that abortion rights are protected by various state constitutions’ free exercise clauses — and, by extension, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. While reframing the abortion rights debate as a question of religious freedom is undoubtedly strategic, the Free Exercise Clause is not the only place to locate abortion rights: the Establishment Clause also warrants further investigation. 

Roe anchored abortion rights in the right to privacy — an unenumerated right with a long history of legal recognition. In various cases spanning the past two centuries, t he Supreme Court located the right to privacy in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments . Roe classified abortion as a fundamental right protected by strict scrutiny, meaning that states could only regulate abortion in the face of a “compelling government interest” and must narrowly tailor legislation to that end. As such, Roe ’s trimester framework prevented states from placing burdens on abortion access in the first few months of pregnancy. After the fetus crosses the viability line — the point at which the fetus can survive outside the womb  — states could pass laws regulating abortion, as the Court found that   “the potentiality of human life”  constitutes a “compelling” interest. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) later replaced strict scrutiny with the weaker “undue burden” standard, giving states greater leeway to restrict abortion access. Dobbs v. Jackson overturned both Roe and Casey , leaving abortion regulations up to individual states. 

While Roe constituted an essential step forward in terms of abortion rights, weaknesses in its argumentation made it more susceptible to attacks by skeptics of substantive due process. Roe argues that the unenumerated right to abortion is implied by the unenumerated right to privacy — a chain of logic which twice removes abortion rights from the Constitution’s language. Moreover, Roe’s trimester framework was unclear and flawed from the beginning, lacking substantial scientific rationale. As medicine becomes more and more advanced, the arbitrariness of the viability line has grown increasingly apparent.  

As abortion rights supporters have looked for alternative constitutional justifications for abortion rights, the First Amendment has become increasingly more visible. Certain religious groups — particularly Jewish groups — have argued that they have a right to abortion care. In Generation to Generation Inc v. Florida , a religious rights group argued that Florida’s abortion ban (HB 5) constituted a violation of the Florida State Constitution: “In Jewish law, abortion is required if necessary to protect the health, mental or physical well-being of the woman, or for many other reasons not permitted under the Act. As such, the Act prohibits Jewish women from practicing their faith free of government intrusion and thus violates their privacy rights and religious freedom.” Similar cases have arisen in Indiana and Texas. Absent constitutional protection of abortion rights, the Christian religious majorities in many states may unjustly impose their moral and ethical code on other groups, implying an unconstitutional religious hierarchy. 

Cases like Generation to Generation Inc v. Florida may also trigger heightened scrutiny status in higher courts; The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993) places strict scrutiny on cases which “burden any aspect of religious observance or practice.”

But framing the issue as one of Free Exercise does not interact with major objections to abortion rights. Anti-abortion advocates contend that abortion is tantamount to murder. An anti-abortion advocate may argue that just as religious rituals involving human sacrifice are illegal, so abortion ought to be illegal. Anti-abortion advocates may be able to argue that abortion bans hold up against strict scrutiny since “preserving potential life” constitutes a “compelling interest.”

The question of when life begins—which is fundamentally a moral and religious question—is both essential to the abortion debate and often ignored by left-leaning activists. For select Christian advocacy groups (as well as other anti-abortion groups) who believe that life begins at conception, abortion bans are a deeply moral issue. Abortion bans which operate under the logic that abortion is murder essentially legislate a definition of when life begins, which is problematic from a First Amendment perspective; the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prevents the government from intervening in religious debates. While numerous legal thinkers have associated the abortion debate with the First Amendment, this argument has not been fully litigated. As an amicus brief filed in Dobbs by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Center for Inquiry, and American Atheists  points out, anti-abortion rhetoric is explicitly religious: “There is hardly a secular veil to the religious intent and positions of individuals, churches, and state actors in their attempts to limit access to abortion.” Justice Stevens located a similar issue with anti-abortion rhetoric in his concurring opinion in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) , stating: “I am persuaded that the absence of any secular purpose for the legislative declarations that life begins at conception and that conception occurs at fertilization makes the relevant portion of the preamble invalid under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Judges who justify their judicial decisions on abortion using similar rhetoric blur the line between church and state. 

Framing the abortion debate around religious freedom would thus address the two main categories of arguments made by anti-abortion activists: arguments centered around issues with substantive due process and moral objections to abortion. 

Conservatives may maintain, however, that legalizing abortion on the federal level is an Establishment Clause violation to begin with, since the government would essentially be imposing a federal position on abortion. Many anti-abortion advocates favor leaving abortion rights up to individual states. However, in the absence of recognized federal, constitutional protection of abortion rights, states will ban abortion. Protecting religious freedom of the individual is of the utmost importance  — the United States government must actively intervene in order to uphold the line between church and state. Protecting abortion rights would allow everyone in the United States to act in accordance with their own moral and religious perspectives on abortion. 

Reframing the abortion rights debate as a question of religious freedom is the most viable path forward. Anchoring abortion rights in the Establishment Clause would ensure Americans have the right to maintain their own personal and religious beliefs regarding the question of when life begins. In the short term, however, litigants could take advantage of Establishment Clauses in state constitutions. Yet, given the swing of the Court towards expanding religious freedom protections at the time of writing, Free Exercise arguments may prove better at securing citizens a right to an abortion. 

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

Read our research on: Immigration & Migration | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion: an argument for abortion rights featuring the rev. carlton veazey.

Since the Supreme Court’s historic 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade , the issue of a woman’s right to an abortion has fostered one of the most contentious moral and political debates in America. Opponents of abortion rights argue that life begins at conception – making abortion tantamount to homicide. Abortion rights advocates, in contrast, maintain that women have a right to decide what happens to their bodies – sometimes without any restrictions.

To explore the case for abortion rights, the Pew Forum turns to the Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, who for more than a decade has been president of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Based in Washington, D.C., the coalition advocates for reproductive choice and religious freedom on behalf of about 40 religious groups and organizations. Prior to joining the coalition, Veazey spent 33 years as a pastor at Zion Baptist Church in Washington, D.C.

A counterargument explaining the case against abortion rights is made by the Rev. J. Daniel Mindling, professor of moral theology at Mount St. Mary’s Seminary.

Featuring: The Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, President, Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

Interviewer: David Masci, Senior Research Fellow, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

Question & Answer

Can you explain how your Christian faith informs your views in support of abortion rights?

I grew up in a Christian home. My father was a Baptist minister for many years in Memphis, Tenn. One of the things that he instilled in me – I used to hear it so much – was free will, free will, free will. It was ingrained in me that you have the ability to make choices. You have the ability to decide what you want to do. You are responsible for your decisions, but God has given you that responsibility, that option to make decisions.

I had firsthand experience of seeing black women and poor women being disproportionately impacted by the fact that they had no choices about an unintended pregnancy, even if it would damage their health or cause great hardship in their family. And I remember some of them being maimed in back-alley abortions; some of them died. There was no legal choice before Roe v. Wade .

But in this day and time, we have a clearer understanding that men and women are moral agents and equipped to make decisions about even the most difficult and complex matters. We must ensure a woman can determine when and whether to have children according to her own conscience and religious beliefs and without governmental interference or coercion. We must also ensure that women have the resources to have a healthy, safe pregnancy, if that is their decision, and that women and families have the resources to raise a child with security.

The right to choose has changed and expanded over the years since Roe v. Wade . We now speak of reproductive justice – and that includes comprehensive sex education, family planning and contraception, adequate medical care, a safe environment, the ability to continue a pregnancy and the resources that make that choice possible. That is my moral framework.

You talk about free will, and as a Christian you believe in free will. But you also said that God gave us free will and gave us the opportunity to make right and wrong choices. Why do you believe that abortion can, at least in some instances, be the right choice?

Dan Maguire, a former Jesuit priest and professor of moral theology and ethics at Marquette University, says that to have a child can be a sacred choice, but to not have a child can also be a sacred choice.

And these choices revolve around circumstances and issues – like whether a person is old enough to care for a child or whether a woman already has more children than she can care for. Also, remember that medical circumstances are the reason many women have an abortion – for example, if they are having chemotherapy for cancer or have a life-threatening chronic illness – and most later-term abortions occur because of fetal abnormalities that will result in stillbirth or the death of the child. These are difficult decisions; they’re moral decisions, sometimes requiring a woman to decide if she will risk her life for a pregnancy.

Abortion is a very serious decision and each decision depends on circumstances. That’s why I tell people: I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice. And that’s an important distinction.

You’ve talked about the right of a woman to make a choice. Does the fetus have any rights?

First, let me say that the religious, pro-choice position is based on respect for human life, including potential life and existing life.

But I do not believe that life as we know it starts at conception. I am troubled by the implications of a fetus having legal rights because that could pit the fetus against the woman carrying the fetus; for example, if the woman needed a medical procedure, the law could require the fetus to be considered separately and equally.

From a religious perspective, it’s more important to consider the moral issues involved in making a decision about abortion. Also, it’s important to remember that religious traditions have very different ideas about the status of the fetus. Roman Catholic doctrine regards a fertilized egg as a human being. Judaism holds that life begins with the first breath.

What about at the very end of a woman’s pregnancy? Does a fetus acquire rights after the point of viability, when it can survive outside the womb? Or let me ask it another way: Assuming a woman is healthy and her fetus is healthy, should the woman be able to terminate her pregnancy until the end of her pregnancy?

There’s an assumption that a woman would end a viable pregnancy carelessly or without a reason. The facts don’t bear this out. Most abortions are performed in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Late abortions are virtually always performed for the most serious medical and health reasons, including saving the woman’s life.

But what if such a case came before you? If you were that woman’s pastor, what would you say?

I would talk to her in a helpful, positive, respectful way and help her discuss what was troubling her. I would suggest alternatives such as adoption.

Let me shift gears a little bit. Many Americans have said they favor a compromise, or reaching a middle-ground policy, on abortion. Do you sympathize with this desire and do you think that both sides should compromise to end this rancorous debate?

I have been to more middle-ground and common-ground meetings than I can remember and I’ve never been to one where we walked out with any decision.

That being said, I think that we all should agree that abortion should be rare. How do we do that? We do that by providing comprehensive sex education in schools and in religious congregations and by ensuring that there is accurate information about contraception and that contraception is available. Unfortunately, the U.S. Congress has not been willing to pass a bill to fund comprehensive sex education, but they are willing to put a lot of money into failed and harmful abstinence-only programs that often rely on scare tactics and inaccurate information.

Former Surgeon General David Satcher has shown that abstinence-only programs do not work and that we should provide young people with the information to protect themselves. Education that stresses abstinence and provides accurate information about contraception will reduce the abortion rate. That is the ground that I stand on. I would say that here is a way we can work together to reduce the need for abortions.

Abortion has become central to what many people call the “culture wars.” Some consider it to be the most contentious moral issue in America today. Why do many Catholics, evangelical Christians and other people of faith disagree with you?

I was raised to respect differing views so the rigid views against abortion are hard for me to understand. I will often tell someone on the other side, “I respect you. I may disagree with your theological perspective, but I respect your views. But I think it’s totally arrogant for you to tell me that I need to believe what you believe.” It’s not that I think we should not try to win each other over. But we have to respect people’s different religious beliefs.

But what about people who believe that life begins at conception and that terminating a pregnancy is murder? For them, it may not just be about respecting or tolerating each other’s viewpoints; they believe this is an issue of life or death. What do you say to people who make that kind of argument?

I would say that they have a right to their beliefs, as do I. I would try to explain that my views are grounded in my religion, as are theirs. I believe that we must ensure that women are treated with dignity and respect and that women are able to follow the dictates of their conscience – and that includes their reproductive decisions. Ultimately, it is the government’s responsibility to ensure that women have the ability to make decisions of conscience and have access to reproductive health services.

Some in the anti-abortion camp contend that the existence of legalized abortion is a sign of the self-centeredness and selfishness of our age. Is there any validity to this view?

Although abortion is a very difficult decision, it can be the most responsible decision a person can make when faced with an unintended pregnancy or a pregnancy that will have serious health consequences.

Depending on the circumstances, it might be selfish to bring a child into the world. You know, a lot of people say, “You must bring this child into the world.” They are 100 percent supportive while the child is in the womb. As soon as the child is born, they abort the child in other ways. They abort a child through lack of health care, lack of education, lack of housing, and through poverty, which can drive a child into drugs or the criminal justice system.

So is it selfish to bring children into the world and not care for them? I think the other side can be very selfish by neglecting the children we have already. For all practical purposes, children whom we are neglecting are being aborted.

This transcript has been edited for clarity, spelling and grammar.

Sign up for our Religion newsletter

Sent weekly on Wednesday

Table of Contents

Key facts about the abortion debate in america, public opinion on abortion, three-in-ten or more democrats and republicans don’t agree with their party on abortion, partisanship a bigger factor than geography in views of abortion access locally, do state laws on abortion reflect public opinion, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Persuasive Essay Writing

Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Cathy A.

Learn How to Craft a Compelling Persuasive Essay About Abortion With Examples!

Published on: Jan 12, 2023

Last updated on: Jan 29, 2024

persuasive essay about abortion

People also read

How to Write a Persuasive Essay: A Step-by-Step Guide

Easy and Unique Persuasive Essay Topics with Tips

The Basics of Crafting an Outstanding Persuasive Essay Outline

Ace Your Next Essay With These Persuasive Essay Examples!

Persuasive Essay About Gun Control - Best Examples for Students

Top Examples of Persuasive Essay about Covid-19

Learn How To Write An Impressive Persuasive Essay About Business

Make Your Point: Tips and Examples for Writing a Persuasive Essay About Online Education

Learn How To Craft a Powerful Persuasive Essay About Bullying

Craft an Engaging Persuasive Essay About Smoking: Examples & Tips

Learn How to Write a Persuasive Essay About Social Media With Examples

Craft an Effective Argument: Examples of Persuasive Essay About Death Penalty

Share this article

Writing an essay on abortion is a controversial and often difficult undertaking. 

But with the right approach, you can craft an effective persuasive essay that brings awareness to this complex issue. 

In this blog post, we’ll outline how to approach your research. You will also learn how to create a strong argumentative structure to support your stance. 

So without further ado, let's dig in to learn more about this.

On This Page On This Page -->

How to Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion?

Writing a persuasive abortion essay can be tricky. After all, abortion is an emotionally charged topic, and it can be hard to write objectively. 

But with careful planning and research, you can write an effective persuasive essay on abortion. 

Here are five steps to get you started. 

Step 1: Research Both Sides of the Issue

Before writing your essay, you should familiarize yourself with both sides.

 Read up on both pro-choice and pro-life arguments so that you have a comprehensive understanding of the debate. 

This will help ensure that your argument is well-informed and balanced.

Step 2: Choose a Stance and Develop Your Thesis Statement.

Once you've researched, decide which side of the debate you want. Construct a thesis statement that reflects this stance. 

This statement should be clear, concise, and specific enough to guide your essay.

Step 3: Support Your Argument With Evidence & Sources.

Now it's time to back up your thesis statement with evidence from credible sources such as scholarly articles or government reports. 

As much as possible, use facts rather than opinions when citing evidence to make your argument more convincing. 

Be sure to cite any sources used properly in either MLA or APA format so readers can easily find them. Check out this video explaining the importance of supporting your persuasive essays with evidence.

Step 4: Keep a Formal and Persuasive Tone Throughout Your Essay. 

When writing about such a sensitive subject, it’s important to maintain a formal tone throughout your essay.  

Avoid emotional language or personal anecdotes, as these can be biased or unprofessional.

Instead, focus on presenting logical arguments backed up by reliable evidence. 

This helps to create an argument that is compelling yet unbiased in presenting both sides of the issue.

Step 5: Make Sure You’ve Addressed Counterarguments & Objections. 

Before submitting your essay for grading or publication, take some time to reflect on potential counterarguments.

Address these issues directly, if necessary, to strengthen your argument’s validity and persuasiveness further. 

Read our extensive guide on crafting a persuasive essay , so that you know all ins and outs of crafting a perfect persuasive essay.

Tough Essay Due? Hire a Writer!

Tough Essay Due? Hire a Writer!

Outline of a Persuasive Essay on Abortion

Here is a detailed outline of a persuasive essay about abortion. Follow this to make sure your essays stand out.

Read our extensive blog on how to create a persuasive essay outline here!

Persuasive Essay About Abortion Examples 

Having different examples and points of view on an abortion essay is a great way to learn about this controversial issue. 

Here are a  few examples of persuasive essays about abortion that you can look at for more information.

Short Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Persuasive Essay About No To Abortion

What Is Abortion? - Essay Example

Persuasive Speech on Abortion

Legal Abortion Persuasive Essay

Persuasive Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Check out some more persuasive essay examples to learn more!

Example of Argumentative Essay About Abortion 

Reading samples of argumentative abortion essays can provide insight into different perspectives.

Argumentative essays seek to challenge existing beliefs as well as propose new ones. 

Here are a few examples of argumentative essays about abortion that you can look at for more information: 

Abortion Persuasive Essay Introduction

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Conclusion

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Pdf

Argumentative Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Abortion Persuasive Essay Topics

Here is a list of few topics that can inspire you for your next essay. Take a look at them.

  • Should abortion remain legal? 
  • Are there any circumstances where abortion should be illegal? 
  • Is there a moral obligation to have an abortion in certain situations? 
  • Why is the debate on abortion so contentious?
  • What are the psychological effects of abortion? 
  • How can society better support pregnant women who do not wish to have a baby? 
  • Should there be stricter regulations around access to abortion services? 
  • What are the long-term effects of abortion on a woman’s reproductive health? 
  • Could pro-choice and pro-life advocates come together to compromise on abortion policies? 
  • Does a woman’s right to choose trump the potential life of a fetus? 
  • What are some of the possible medical complications related to abortion? 
  • Can men have an opinion on abortion that is just as valid as a woman’s? 
  • Are there any alternatives to abortion that can be used in cases where the baby cannot survive? 
  • How has the legality of abortion affected women’s rights over the years?
  • What is the best way to reduce abortions without denying a woman her right to choose? 

Check out our comprehensive list of  persuasive essay topics . You might find the inspiration to write your next persuasive essay!

A Few Interesting Facts About Abortion 

Abortion is a highly controversial topic, and many different viewpoints exist.

Some people believe that abortion is morally wrong, while others believe that it is a woman's right to choose what happens to her body. 

There are many facts about abortion that both sides of the debate can agree on, however. Here are some key points

1. Globally, an estimated 56 million abortions are performed each year. 

2. In the US, about 1 in 4 pregnancies end in abortion. 

3. Most women who have abortions (78%) are unmarried, and 25% are younger than 20. 

4. About half of all abortions performed in the US are done in the first eight weeks of pregnancy. 

5. There is a direct correlation between the legal availability of abortion and decreased infant mortality rates. 

6. In countries where abortion is illegal, women are more likely to die during childbirth due to a lack of access to safe, medical abortions. 

7. Most women (75%) who have abortions do so because they cannot afford to care for a child. 

8. The most common reasons why a woman would choose to have an abortion are financial, relationship issues, and feeling unprepared for the responsibility of parenting. 

9. Most abortions in the US occur in clinics or doctor’s offices rather than hospitals. 

10. Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures available, with a low rate of complications (less than 0.3%). 

In the end, a persuasive essay is all about making your point convincingly. With the right evidence, logical reasoning, and engaging tone, you can make an argument for any topic you choose. 

If you’re still struggling to put your thoughts together or need help getting started, don’t worry. Trust our professional essay writer with your next essay.

CollegeEssay.org offers top essay writing service  that will take care of everything for you. We guarantee a high-quality persuasive essay writing service that will get you the grades you deserve. So what are you waiting for? 

Contact us today, and let our essay writer AI help you write the perfect essay about abortion!

Cathy A. (Marketing, Literature)

For more than five years now, Cathy has been one of our most hardworking authors on the platform. With a Masters degree in mass communication, she knows the ins and outs of professional writing. Clients often leave her glowing reviews for being an amazing writer who takes her work very seriously.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Get Help

Keep reading

persuasive essay about abortion

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Refunds & Cancellations
  • Our Writers
  • Success Stories
  • Our Guarantees
  • Affiliate Program
  • Referral Program
  • AI Essay Writer

Disclaimer: All client orders are completed by our team of highly qualified human writers. The essays and papers provided by us are not to be used for submission but rather as learning models only.

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Abortion — Women’s Rights: Abortions Should Be Legal

test_template

Women's Rights: Abortions Should Be Legal

  • Categories: Abortion Pregnancy

About this sample

close

Words: 2016 |

11 min read

Published: Mar 18, 2021

Words: 2016 | Pages: 4 | 11 min read

Table of contents

Abortion should be legal persuasive speech outline, abortion should be legal persuasive essay example, introduction.

  • Introduction to the abortion debate and the importance of autonomy over one's body

Types of Abortion

  • Explanation of spontaneous and medical abortions

Autonomy of Body

  • Discussion of the importance of women's autonomy and their right to make decisions about their bodies
  • Examination of laws limiting abortion rights

Pro-Choice Argument

  • Arguments in favor of pro-choice, emphasizing women's rights and the consequences of restricting abortion

Abortion and Resource Limitations

  • Exploration of how abortion can help people who lack the resources to raise children
  • Discussion of the societal impact of unwanted pregnancies

Dangerous Backroom Abortions

  • Explanation of the risks associated with limiting abortion services
  • Reference to historical unsafe abortion practices

Abortion as Murder

  • Presentation of the opposing view that considers abortion as morally wrong and equivalent to murder
  • Summary of key points in the abortion debate, advocating for women's right to choose and autonomy over their bodies

Works Cited:

  • Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2019). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution. UNESCO Publishing.
  • Gupta, K., & Batra, A. (2015). Corruption and economic growth: A global perspective. International Journal of Development Research, 5(5), 4363-4367.
  • Jain, A. K. (2001). Corruption: A review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(1), 71-121.
  • Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling corruption. University of California Press.
  • Kwantes, C. T., Boglarsky, C. A., & Pancer, S. M. (2006). The effect of culture on unethical conduct. Social Science Journal, 43(2), 295-300.
  • Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. (2016). Rasuah: Apa itu Rasuah? [Corruption: What is Corruption?]. https://www.sprm.gov.my/ms/pengetahuan-am/rasuah
  • Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The quest for good governance: How societies develop control of corruption. Cambridge University Press.
  • 15 effects of corruption. (2019). University of Kent. https://www.kent.ac.uk/integrityoffice/policies-and-procedures/bribery-and-corruption/preventing-corruption/15-effects-of-corruption
  • 5 ways to reduce corruption and places where it exists. (2016). The Star Online. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2016/09/12/five-ways-to-reduce-corruption-and-places-where-it-exists/
  • Transparency International. (n.d.). Corruption perceptions index.

Image of Dr. Oliver Johnson

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

  • 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
  • Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

author

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

  • Expert in: Social Issues Nursing & Health

writer

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1225 words

2 pages / 938 words

3 pages / 1556 words

2 pages / 1179 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Women's Rights: Abortions Should Be Legal Essay

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Abortion

The question of whether a fetus should be considered a person is at the heart of a complex and deeply divisive debate. This debate encompasses legal, philosophical, and ethical dimensions, and it has evolved significantly over [...]

The issue of abortion has been a subject of intense debate and legal scrutiny in Texas, reflecting a complex interplay of values, perspectives, and evolving laws. In this essay, we will examine the legal status of abortion in [...]

The debate surrounding whether Roe v. Wade should be overturned is one of the most contentious and polarizing issues in American society. The landmark Supreme Court decision in 1973 established a woman's legal right to access [...]

This essay provides an example of an argumentative essay that argues for the legalization of abortion. It emphasizes women's rights, reducing crime, and addressing pregnancies resulting from sexual assault. At the point [...]

In an ideal world, we would all have equal rights, treatment and opportunities regardless of who we are, the color of our skin or our gender. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and our differences can have a [...]

Abortion is a procedure to end a pregnancy so that it does not result in the birth of a child. In order to have an abortion, women take the abortion pill or have a surgical abortion to remove the emyo or fetus and placenta from [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

  • Instructions Followed To The Letter
  • Deadlines Met At Every Stage
  • Unique And Plagiarism Free

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Library homepage

  • school Campus Bookshelves
  • menu_book Bookshelves
  • perm_media Learning Objects
  • login Login
  • how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
  • hub Instructor Commons
  • Download Page (PDF)
  • Download Full Book (PDF)
  • Periodic Table
  • Physics Constants
  • Scientific Calculator
  • Reference & Cite
  • Tools expand_more
  • Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

Humanities LibreTexts

5.1: Arguments Against Abortion

  • Last updated
  • Save as PDF
  • Page ID 35918

  • Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob
  • Morehouse College & University of South Carolina Sumter via Open Philosophy Press

We will begin with arguments for the conclusion that abortion is generally wrong , perhaps nearly always wrong . These can be seen as reasons to believe fetuses have the “right to life” or are otherwise seriously wrong to kill.

5.1.1 Fetuses are human

First, there is the claim that fetuses are “human” and so abortion is wrong. People sometimes debate whether fetuses are human , but fetuses found in (human) women clearly are biologically human : they aren’t cats or dogs. And so we have this argument, with a clearly true first premise:

Fetuses are biologically human.

All things that are biologically human are wrong to kill.

Therefore, fetuses are wrong to kill.

The second premise, however, is false, as easy counterexamples show. Consider some random living biologically human cells or tissues in a petri dish. It wouldn’t be wrong at all to wash those cells or tissues down the drain, killing them; scratching yourself or shaving might kill some biologically human skin cells, but that’s not wrong; a tumor might be biologically human, but not wrong to kill. So just because something is biologically human, that does not at all mean it’s wrong to kill that thing. We saw this same point about what’s merely biologically alive.

image7.png

This suggests a deficiency in some common understandings of the important idea of “human rights.” “Human rights” are sometimes described as rights someone has just because they are human or simply in virtue of being human .

But the human cells in the petri dish above don’t have “human rights” and a human heart wouldn’t have “human rights” either. Many examples would make it clear that merely being biologically human doesn’t give something human rights. And many human rights advocates do not think that abortion is wrong, despite recognizing that (human) fetuses are biologically human.

The problem about what is often said about human rights is that people often do not think about what makes human beings have rights or why we have them, when we have them. The common explanation, that we have (human) rights just because we are (biologically) human , is incorrect, as the above discussion makes clear. This misunderstanding of the basis or foundation of human rights is problematic because it leads to a widespread, misplaced fixation on whether fetuses are merely biologically “human” and the mistaken thought that if they are, they have “human rights.” To address this problem, we need to identify better, more fundamental, explanations why we have rights, or why killing us is generally wrong, and see how those explanations might apply to fetuses, as we are doing here.

It might be that when people appeal to the importance and value of being “human,” the concern isn’t our biology itself, but the psychological characteristics that many human beings have: consciousness, awareness, feelings and so on. We will discuss this different meaning of “human” below. This meaning of “human” might be better expressed as conscious being , or “person,” or human person. This might be what people have in mind when they argue that fetuses aren’t even “human.”

Human rights are vitally important, and we would do better if we spoke in terms of “conscious-being rights” or “person-rights,” not “human rights.” This more accurate and informed understanding and terminology would help address human rights issues in general, and help us better think through ethical questions about biologically human embryos and fetuses.

5.1.2 Fetuses are human beings

Some respond to the arguments above—against the significance of being merely biologically human—by observing that fetuses aren’t just mere human cells, but are organized in ways that make them beings or organisms . (A kidney is part of a “being,” but the “being” is the whole organism.) That suggests this argument:

Fetuses are human beings or organisms .

All human beings or organisms are wrong to kill.

Therefore, fetuses are wrong to kill, so abortion is wrong.

The first premise is true: fetuses are dependent beings, but dependent beings are still beings.

The second premise, however, is the challenge, in terms of providing good reasons to accept it. Clearly many human beings or organisms are wrong to kill, or wrong to kill unless there’s a good reason that would justify that killing, e.g., self-defense. (This is often described by philosophers as us being prima facie wrong to kill, in contrast to absolutely or necessarily wrong to kill.) Why is this though? What makes us wrong to kill? And do these answers suggest that all human beings or organisms are wrong to kill?

Above it was argued that we are wrong to kill because we are conscious and feeling: we are aware of the world, have feelings and our perspectives can go better or worse for us —we can be harmed— and that’s what makes killing us wrong. It may also sometimes be not wrong to let us die, and perhaps even kill us, if we come to completely and permanently lacking consciousness, say from major brain damage or a coma, since we can’t be harmed by death anymore: we might even be described as dead in the sense of being “brain dead.” 10

So, on this explanation, human beings are wrong to kill, when they are wrong to kill, not because they are human beings (a circular explanation), but because we have psychological, mental or emotional characteristics like these. This explains why we have rights in a simple, common-sense way: it also simply explains why rocks, microorganisms and plants don’t have rights. The challenge then is explaining why fetuses that have never been conscious or had any feeling or awareness would be wrong to kill. How then can the second premise above, general to all human organisms, be supported, especially when applied to early fetuses?

One common attempt is to argue that early fetuses are wrong to kill because there is continuous development from fetuses to us, and since we are wrong to kill now , fetuses are also wrong to kill, since we’ve been the “same being” all along. 11 But this can’t be good reasoning, since we have many physical, cognitive, emotional and moral characteristics now that we lacked as fetuses (and as children). So even if we are the “same being” over time, even if we were once early fetuses, that doesn’t show that fetuses have the moral rights that babies, children and adults have: we, our bodies and our rights sometimes change.

A second attempt proposes that rights are essential to human organisms: they have them whenever they exist. This perspective sees having rights, or the characteristics that make someone have rights, as essential to living human organisms. The claim is that “having rights” is an essential property of human beings or organisms, and so whenever there’s a living human organism, there’s someone with rights, even if that organism totally lacks consciousness, like an early fetus. (In contrast, the proposal we advocate for about what makes us have rights understands rights as “accidental” to our bodies but “essential” to our minds or awareness, since our bodies haven’t always “contained” a conscious being, so to speak.)

Such a view supports the premise above; maybe it just is that premise above. But why believe that rights are essential to human organisms? Some argue this is because of what “kind” of beings we are, which is often presumed to be “rational beings.” The reasoning seems to be this: first, that rights come from being a rational being: this is part of our “nature.” Second, that all human organisms, including fetuses, are the “kind” of being that is a “rational being,” so every being of the “kind” rational being has rights. 12

In response, this explanation might seem question-begging: it might amount to just asserting that all human beings have rights. This explanation is, at least, abstract. It seems to involve some categorization and a claim that everyone who is in a certain category has some of the same moral characteristics that others in that category have, but because of a characteristic (actual rationality) that only these others have: so, these others profoundly define what everyone else is . If this makes sense, why not also categorize us all as not rational beings , if we are the same kind of beings as fetuses that are actually not rational?

This explanation might seem to involve thinking that rights somehow “trickle down” from later rationality to our embryonic origins, and so what we have later we also have earlier , because we are the same being or the same “kind” of being. But this idea is, in general, doubtful: we are now responsible beings, in part because we are rational beings, but fetuses aren’t responsible for anything. And we are now able to engage in moral reasoning since we are rational beings, but fetuses don’t have the “rights” that uniquely depend on moral reasoning abilities. So that an individual is a member of some general group or kind doesn’t tell us much about their rights: that depends on the actual details about that individual, beyond their being members of a group or kind.

To make this more concrete, return to the permanently comatose individuals mentioned above: are we the same kind of beings, of the same “essence,” as these human beings? If so, then it seems that some human beings can be not wrong to let die or kill, when they have lost consciousness. Therefore, perhaps some other human beings, like early fetuses, are also not wrong to kill before they have gained consciousness . And if we are not the same “kind” of beings, or have different essences, then perhaps we also aren’t the same kind of beings as fetuses either.

Similar questions arise concerning anencephalic babies, tragically born without most of their brains: are they the same “kind” of beings as “regular” babies or us? If so, then—since such babies are arguably morally permissible to let die, even when they could be kept alive, since being alive does them no good—then being of our “kind” doesn’t mean the individual has the same rights as us, since letting us die would be wrong. But if such babies are a different “kind” of beings than us, then pre-conscious fetuses might be of a relevantly different kind also.

So, in general, this proposal that early fetuses essentially have rights is suspect, if we evaluate the reasons given in its support. Even if fetuses and us are the same “kind” of beings (which perhaps we are not!) that doesn’t immediately tell us what rights fetuses would have, if any. And we might even reasonably think that, despite our being the same kind of beings as fetuses (e.g., the same kind of biology), we are also importantly different kinds of beings (e.g., one kind with a mental life and another kind which has never had it). This photograph of a 6-week old fetus might help bring out the ambiguity in what kinds of beings we all are:

image8.png

In sum, the abstract view that all human organisms have rights essentially needs to be plausibly explained and defended. We need to understand how it really works. We need to be shown why it’s a better explanation, all things considered, than a consciousness and feelings-based theory of rights that simply explains why we, and babies, have rights, why racism, sexism and other forms of clearly wrongful discrimination are wrong, and , importantly, how we might lose rights in irreversible coma cases (if people always retained the right to life in these circumstances, presumably, it would be wrong to let anyone die), and more.

5.1.3 Fetuses are persons

Finally, we get to what some see as the core issue here, namely whether fetuses are persons , and an argument like this:

Fetuses are persons, perhaps from conception.

Persons have the right to life and are wrong to kill.

So, abortion is wrong, as it involves killing persons.

The second premise seems very plausible, but there are some important complications about it that will be discussed later. So let’s focus on the idea of personhood and whether any fetuses are persons. What is it to be a person ? One answer that everyone can agree on is that persons are beings with rights and value . That’s a fine answer, but it takes us back to the initial question: OK, who or what has the rights and value of persons? What makes someone or something a person?

Answers here are often merely asserted , but these answers need to be tested: definitions can be judged in terms of whether they fit how a word is used. We might begin by thinking about what makes us persons. Consider this:

We are persons now. Either we will always be persons or we will cease being persons. If we will cease to be persons, what can end our personhood? If we will always be persons, how could that be?

Both options yield insight into personhood. Many people think that their personhood ends at death or if they were to go into a permanent coma: their body is (biologically) alive but the person is gone: that is why other people are sad. And if we continue to exist after the death of our bodies, as some religions maintain, what continues to exist? The person , perhaps even without a body, some think! Both responses suggest that personhood is defined by a rough and vague set of psychological or mental, rational and emotional characteristics: consciousness, knowledge, memories, and ways of communicating, all psychologically unified by a unique personality.

A second activity supports this understanding:

Make a list of things that are definitely not persons . Make a list of individuals who definitely are persons . Make a list of imaginary or fictional personified beings which, if existed, would be persons: these beings that fit or display the concept of person, even if they don’t exist. What explains the patterns of the lists?

Rocks, carrots, cups and dead gnats are clearly not persons. We are persons. Science fiction gives us ideas of personified beings: to give something the traits of a person is to indicate what the traits of persons are, so personified beings give insights into what it is to be a person. Even though the non-human characters from, say, Star Wars don’t exist, they fit the concept of person: we could befriend them, work with them, and so on, and we could only do that with persons. A common idea of God is that of an immaterial person who has exceptional power, knowledge, and goodness: you couldn’t pray to a rock and hope that rock would respond: you could only pray to a person. Are conscious and feeling animals, like chimpanzees, dolphins, cats, dogs, chickens, pigs, and cows more relevantly like us, as persons, or are they more like rocks and cabbages, non-persons? Conscious and feeling animals seem to be closer to persons than not. 13 So, this classificatory and explanatory activity further supports a psychological understanding of personhood: persons are, at root, conscious, aware and feeling beings.

Concerning abortion, early fetuses would not be persons on this account: they are not yet conscious or aware since their brains and nervous systems are either non-existent or insufficiently developed. Consciousness emerges in fetuses much later in pregnancy, likely after the first trimester or a bit beyond. This is after when most abortions occur. Most abortions, then, do not involve killing a person , since the fetus has not developed the characteristics for personhood. We will briefly discuss later abortions, that potentially affect fetuses who are persons or close to it, below.

It is perhaps worthwhile to notice though that if someone believed that fetuses are persons and thought this makes abortion wrong, it’s unclear how they could coherently believe that a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest could permissibly be ended by an abortion. Some who oppose abortion argue that, since you are a person, it would be wrong to kill you now even if you were conceived because of a rape, and so it’s wrong to kill any fetus who is a person, even if they exist because of a rape: whether someone is a person or not doesn’t depend on their origins: it would make no sense to think that, for two otherwise identical fetuses, one is a person but the other isn’t, because that one was conceived by rape. Therefore, those who accept a “personhood argument” against abortion, yet think that abortions in cases of rape are acceptable, seem to have an inconsistent view.

5.1.4 Fetuses are potential persons

If fetuses aren’t persons, they are at least potential persons, meaning they could and would become persons. This is true. This, however, doesn’t mean that they currently have the rights of persons because, in general, potential things of a kind don’t have the rights of actual things of that kind : potential doctors, lawyers, judges, presidents, voters, veterans, adults, parents, spouses, graduates, moral reasoners and more don’t have the rights of actual individuals of those kinds.

Some respond that potential gives the right to at least try to become something. But that trying sometimes involves the cooperation of others: if your friend is a potential medical student, but only if you tutor her for many hours a day, are you obligated to tutor her? If my child is a potential NASCAR champion, am I obligated to buy her a race car to practice? ‘No’ to both and so it is unclear that a pregnant woman would be obligated to provide what’s necessary to bring about a fetus’s potential. (More on that below, concerning the what obligations the right to life imposes on others, in terms of obligations to assist other people.)

5.1.5 Abortion prevents fetuses from experiencing their valuable futures

The argument against abortion that is likely most-discussed by philosophers comes from philosopher Don Marquis. 14 He argues that it is wrong to kill us, typical adults and children, because it deprives us from experiencing our (expected to be) valuable futures, which is a great loss to us . He argues that since fetuses also have valuable futures (“futures like ours” he calls them), they are also wrong to kill. His argument has much to recommend it, but there are reasons to doubt it as well.

First, fetuses don’t seem to have futures like our futures , since—as they are pre-conscious—they are entirely psychologically disconnected from any future experiences: there is no (even broken) chain of experiences from the fetus to that future person’s experiences. Babies are, at least, aware of the current moment, which leads to the next moment; children and adults think about and plan for their futures, but fetuses cannot do these things, being completely unconscious and without a mind.

Second, this fact might even mean that the early fetus doesn’t literally have a future: if your future couldn’t include you being a merely physical, non-conscious object (e.g., you couldn’t be a corpse: if there’s a corpse, you are gone), then non-conscious physical objects, like a fetus, couldn’t literally be a future person. 15 If this is correct, early fetuses don’t even have futures, much less futures like ours. Something would have a future, like ours, only when there is someone there to be psychologically connected to that future: that someone arrives later in pregnancy, after when most abortions occur.

A third objection is more abstract and depends on the “metaphysics” of objects. It begins with the observation that there are single objects with parts with space between them . Indeed almost every object is like this, if you could look close enough: it’s not just single dinette sets, since there is literally some space between the parts of most physical objects. From this, it follows that there seem to be single objects such as an-egg-and-the-sperm-that-would-fertilize-it . And these would also seem to have a future of value, given how Marquis describes this concept. (It should be made clear that sperm and eggs alone do not have futures of value, and Marquis does not claim they do: this is not the objection here). The problem is that contraception, even by abstinence , prevents that thing’s future of value from materializing, and so seems to be wrong when we use Marquis’s reasoning. Since contraception is not wrong, but his general premise suggests that it is , it seems that preventing something from experiencing its valuable future isn’t always wrong and so Marquis’s argument appears to be unsound. 16

In sum, these are some of the most influential arguments against abortion. Our discussion was brief, but these arguments do not appear to be successful: they do not show that abortion is wrong, much less make it clear and obvious that abortion is wrong.

  • Dissertation
  • PowerPoint Presentation
  • Book Report/Review
  • Research Proposal
  • Math Problems
  • Proofreading
  • Movie Review
  • Cover Letter Writing
  • Personal Statement
  • Nursing Paper
  • Argumentative Essay
  • Research Paper

How To Write A Persuasive Essay On Abortion?

Jared Houdi

Table of Contents

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Both sides of the discussion provide solid arguments, and both ideas have legs. And this makes the subject matter of abortion one of the best topics for persuasive essay .

The basics of a persuasive essay on abortion

The dictionaries define abortion as the termination of a pregnancy by removing embryo or fetus from the uterus before the end of its term. Miscarriage also falls under this description, however, when we talk about abortion, the first thing that comes to mind is the intended abolition of the unwanted pregnancy.

It is a tough topic for discussion, as the audience, on the whole, has an opinion concerning it already. The main task of the persuasive essay is to argue the audience into your point of view, but how on earth you can persuade a person who has developed an opinion based on personal experience?

Or how you can convince a devout believer of the truth of your words if you write about the necessity of legalization of abortions?

As you can see, the assignment is incredibly challenging, yet, not impossible. Teachers conceive this topic as one of the best ways to evaluate your ability to ram an argument home, so you will have to make every possible effort when writing this paper.

This subject matter deals with philosophical, religious, moral, medical, and ethical points. Thus, in order to create a compelling text, you will have to address all these aspects.

Core aspects of great abortion thesis statements

Abortion thesis statements are the quintessence of the papers so, usually, writers create them after thorough research of the issue and when the direction of the thought is already defined.

You can consider it as a very condensed outline as after reading a single thesis sentence, the reader can clearly see what you discuss in the text.

Thus, sometimes, the best time to write it is when the rough draft of the paper is almost ready.

Several steps should be taken to create a well-rounded thesis statement:

  • Profound research of the subject matter.
  • Time for crafting the best thesis .
  • Search for a sufficient amount of facts that support the main idea.
  • Check if your thesis is aligned with the rest of the text .

Here are some examples of thesis statements for a paper on abortion. You can use them as a source of inspiration for your own paper or as an example of how a great thesis should look like.

  • The dangers and consequences of the backstreet abortions that can lead to woman’s death make legalization of abortions indispensable to life.
  • The religious aspect is the only reason why people conceive abortion as a pro-choice and not a pro-life decision.
  • As soon as the consensus on whether a developing embryo is equated with human life is reached, all the debates over the moral and legal aspects of abortion will be over.
  • Psychological and physiological disorders that an unwanted pregnancy can cause justify the legalization of abortions.

The arguments for the persuasive essay on abortion is wrong

You can operate these arguments in a persuasive essay on abortion should be illegal:

  • The medical procedure is a risky one. The possible immediate and long-term consequences are sterility, heavy bleeding, damage of the cervix or womb.
  • Abortion is an irretrievable action so a woman can lament till her dying days. That may result in the clinical depression with gloomy implications up to suicide.
  • Abortion increases the chances of contracting breast cancer.
  • A woman who does not want to raise a child can give it up for adoption as many couples cannot have children for some reasons.
  • For most cases, the unwanted pregnancy is the result of neglect of the contraceptives. Why should unborn children suffer because of the irresponsibility of a woman?
  • Baby feels pain during the abortion, especially during the partial-birth abortion.
  • There are no religions that justify abortion.
  • Each and every life is valuable. But abortion values human’s life next to nothing.
Tip: When you write a persuasive essay on abortion pro-life, try to operate facts, not thoughts. Thus, you will sound more convincing.

How to support a persuasive essay on abortion pro-choice?

  • The complications of pregnancy can have the same or even worse consequences rather than abortion.
  • Abortion is justified if the fetus is diagnosed with heavy genetic defects.
  • If parents are mentally disabled or carry severe heritable diseases, and it is possible to say for sure that the embryo is a carrier of a disease too, abortion has to be legal.
  • The pregnancy as the result of a rape.
  • There is still no agreement concerning the balance of a fetus and a person, so it is improper to apply laws and ethical standards to a developing life as to a human.

These arguments may help you make a persuasive essay on why abortion should be legal more convincing.

Still, do not forget that it is essential to add an argument with an opposite point of view to your text and then confute it.

How to create a neutral argument for a paper on abortion?

It may seem that such a burning issue can have only two points of view: pro or against. However, it is possible to write a neutral, unbiased, and still persuasive paper that will argue others into your point of view.

Such arguments are based on the facts and logic, they do not plead for sympathy or demand carriage of feminist postulates or the right for private life, etc.

These are the arguments that search for a sound compromise. For example:

  • If the pregnancy endangers the woman’s life, abortion is acceptable.
  • Abortion is acceptable if a fetus has a terminal sickness.

On balance…

We hope that this article helped you to figure out how such papers should be written so you won’t be scared by persuasive essay topics on abortion anymore. Once you’ve chosen the direction of thoughts, nothing will prevent you from creating a top-notch paper!

Don’t feel like being inspired by the topic of abortion? Luckily, we have trained pro’s here, who can do both, cope with any kind of essay… and fit into the deadline. Hit the button to learn more!

1 Star

Writing a Speech About Yourself

persuasive essays on abortion rights

What To Write In School Uniform Research Paper?

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Structuring of an argumentative essay on euthanasia

The Harvard Crimson Logo

  • Editor's Pick

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line

persuasive essays on abortion rights

At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists

persuasive essays on abortion rights

‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam

persuasive essays on abortion rights

‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6

The Pro-Choice Argument

There are those who hold that contraception unfairly manipulates the workings of nature, and others who cannot see the fetus as a child until the umbilical cord is cut. Invoking an almost religious fervor on both sides of the issue, abortion is one of the most emotionally potent present political controversies. Motherhood is a powerful institution in American life, and both the "Pro-choice" (supporting a woman's right to choose) and the "Pro-life" (anti-abortion) forces see the other as attacking the foundations of the mother-infant bond.

Social analysis argues forcibly for the need for safe, legal and affordable abortions. Approximately 1 million women had abortions annually until the 1973 decision legalizing abortion, and abortion had become the leading cause of maternal death and mutilation (40 deaths/100,000 abortions compared to 40 deaths/100,000 live births according to National Abortion Rights Action league.) An estimated 9000 rape victims become pregnant each year (FBI 1973); 100,000 cases of incest occur yearly (National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect, 1978). Two-thirds of teenage pregnancies are not planned, because many do not have adequate access to contraceptives (NARAL). And the taxpayer price of supporting a child on welfare is far greater than that of a Medicaid abortion. But the issue that provokes such anger surrounds the fetus's right to life--its status as a potential human being. Anti-abortionist proponents usually take the position that conception is life and therefore abortion is murder and violates the rights of the unborn, or that there is an inherent value in life and abortion is murder because it destroys that value.

The Supreme Court decided in 1973 that the unborn fetus had no constitutional rights until the third trimester (24-28 weeks), as it is incapable of functioning independently from the mother until that time. Right-to-Lifers claim that because the fetus will develop into a human being, it demands the same paternalistic protection that is extended to animals, children and others subject to exploitation and maltreatment. The fetus must be accorded the same constitutional rights as its mother.

Two arguments delineate the problems in giving the fetus these equivalent rights. The first looks at individual rights as the products of a social doctrine. Animals and children are unavoidably present within a society, and to ensure that they remain functioning members of that society they must be protected from exploitation by other societal members. Different political platforms advocate different rights--the right to free medical care, the right to minimal taxation--but all demarcate the interaction of the individual within the group. A person's rights protect him from future harassment, but to actually obtain those rights he must already be a member of the group providing him with those protections. An Australian cannot lay claim to American rights until he is on American soil (or its equivalent). He may have a guarantee that should he enter the United States, he will be accorded many of those protections. But the guarantee depends on his entrance onto American territory. In analogous fashion, until the fetus is actually, not potentially, a member of society, it does not have constitutional rights.

One could object that the fetus in the womb is as signally present in society as the child in the crib, that each are equally members of society. Yet surely the conception of "member" involves some minimal interaction. The fetus reacts to society of the outside world solely through the medium of the mother. Strictly speaking, then, society has no legal responsibility to the fetus, but rather to the mother.

This seems like a rather harsh position, but we can distinguish between the rights of the fetus and the action that a mother might feel morally compelled to take. Consider the following situation: suppose you were to return home one day and find a stranger camped out in your living room and peacefully eating the ham sandwich you saved for dinner. You would be tempted to throw him out in the street. Almost everyone could agree that you had the right to eject him.

But suppose he told you that he could not live outside of your house; perhaps one of his enemies waits outside your door. Moreover, he informs you that he needs food and clothing and someone to talk to--he needs your presence much of the day. He becomes more demanding: you must work less, earn less, give up jogging.

Introduce a complication: your food is strictly rationed, or perhaps your heating, on subsistence level for a single person. If the stranger stays with you, your life will be seriously endangered. You might be very upset, but if it came down to the wire you would probably kick him out of the house. Again, most people would agree you were within your rights to do so.

The difficulty of course arises when it would be possible for you to support him and take care of him, but you would rather not. You might agree if the demand were only for an evening, but hesitate if it were for the rest of your life. Do rights then depend upon the time factor? You could claim a certain moral responsibility towards another human being. But it is hard to say that he has the right to force you to support him. You are not legally required to help an old lady across the street.

One counterargument declares that willing intercourse implies acceptance of a possible pregnancy--that in effect you invited the stranger in, that you knew what you were in for and that he now has the right to demand your help. But faulty contraception is like a broken window. When you return to your suite and find your stereo missing, do you accede the thief's right to take it because your window is easily pried open? The abortion issue thus forces a clarification of the nature of the individual and his social rights. Although we may feel morally constrained to protect the future child, the fetus does not have the right to force us to do so. In the traditional dichotomy of church and state, to restrict abortion is to legislate morality.

The staunchest opposition comes from those who hold absolutely that conception is life. But belief in the inherent value of life is not a trite axiom: it avows some faith in the quality of existence beyond the moral injunction "Thou shalt not kill." It becomes easy to see as hypocritical those anti-abortionists--particularly men--who condone extra-marital intercourse (or even intramarital intercourse) yet would refuse to financially and emotionally support the child conceived because of faulty contraception. The only morally consistent value-of-life position is to have intercourse only if one is willing to accept a child as a possible consequence, and participate in the quality of the child's life. This in part lies behind the Catholic prohibition of premarital sex.

As a personal doctrine few would reproach those who follow it. But pragmatics belie its application to all society, rape being the prime instance where the woman is not free to choose to become pregnant. The restriction of federal support to cases of rape, incest and probable death of the mother suggests an interesting quality-of-life argument: that potentiality is not absolute but must be prorated. Due to society's dread of incest, such a mother and her child would be spared a psychologically unbearable life. In case of danger to the mother's life we do not hear that the 'child' has potentially far more years of happy, productive life than the mother. Rather, the argument runs that the mother's life should not be sacrificed for the child who would bear such a tremendous burden.

Yet an unwanted child may be born into a household with an equally heavy psychological toll. If the potentiality of life thesis rests on an understanding of the inner qualities of life, then abortion is a necessity rather than a crime. Those who deny the right to an abortion under any circumstances fail to see that their argument undercuts itself. Abortion provides a unique understanding of the "inherent good" of existence. It is morally irresponsible to believe that a pregnancy must be brought to term even in case of the mother's death simply because it is a matter of nature and out of our hands when we have the medical means to save the mother. The case involves a comparison of the life-value of the mother and the child: the final decision must evaluate the process of existence--the value of life as it is lived. The inherent value of life cannot be an a priori constant if a choice is to be made between two lives.

Once the quality of life-as-it-is-lived is introduced into the argument, we can say that abortion provides the possibility of improving that quality. Motherhood is a remarkably special bond between mother and child, perhaps the most important relationship we ever have. It requires tremendous emotional capacities, and raising children should be one of the most conscious decisions we make. Many of those who have abortions when young have children later in life, when they are more emotionally and financially equipped to handle them. Contraception is at most 99 per cent safe, and abortion must be available to allow women the freedom to provide the optimum conditions for their child's growth.

According to a 1978 Clark University study, 83 per cent of Massachusetts supports the woman's right to choose. But the trend of recent legislation is distinctly anti-abortion, the result of an extremely well-organized and funded "Pro-life" movement (which some link to the New Right). On the federal level, the 1976-7 Hyde Amendment, a rider on the Labor-HEW appropriations bill, cut off federally funded abortions except in cases of rape, incest, and "medically necessary" instances, defined by the Supreme Court as long-lasting physical or psychological damage to the mother's health.

In 1977 this clause cut 99 per cent of all reimbursements (250,000-300,000 annually prior to the cut-off); this year "medically necessary" has been replaced by probable death of the mother. Military women are similarly restricted under the Dornan Amendment; the Young Amendment funds no abortions at all for Peace Corps women. Employers may refuse to include abortion coverage in their company health plan under the Beard Amendment. Fifteen states have called for a constitutional convention to introduce the prohibition of all abortions: 19 more would fulfill the requisite number of 34.

In Massachusetts the Doyle Bill would cut off state funds in the same manner as the Hyde Amendment. Formerly an adjunct to the budget it was passed and signed as a bill this year. Appealed by MORAL (the Massachusetts Organization for the Repeal of Abortion Laws), the bill is under injunction and pending review by the Federal District Court on the basis of a Supreme Court decision that all medically necessary services must be available to the poor. As of last May, hospitals are no longer required to perform abortions upon demand except in case of probable death to the mother. Legislation restricting abortions to hospitals with full obstetrical care (rather than women's health clinics), now before the Massachusetts House, could place the woman in a double bind. Also under Massachusetts debate is an "Informed Consent" bill which essentially amounts to harrassment: the bill requires spouse and parental notification, with consent of parents or courts for minors, full information concerning the viability and appearance of the fetus, description of the aborting technique, anad a 24-hour waiting period after the 'information session' before the abortion could be obtained.

There is a real danger that anti-abortion legislation could become increasingly more restrictive. It already discriminates against women in lower economic brackets. The power of the pro-life people should not be underestimated: they have targeted 12 Congressmen for defeat in 1980, among them Morris Udall and Birch Bayh. We need to inform our politicians of their pro-choice constituency and reverse the further tightening of the over-restrictive and discriminatory legislation.

Tanya Luhrmann '80-3 is working for Abortion Rights Action Week.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

  • Skip to main content
  • Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Shots - Health News

  • Your Health
  • Treatments & Tests
  • Health Inc.
  • Public Health

Reproductive rights in America

Abortion pills that patients got via telehealth and the mail are safe, study finds.

Selena Simmons-Duffin

Selena Simmons-Duffin

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Access to the abortion drug mifepristone could soon be limited by the Supreme Court for the whole country. Here, a nurse practitioner works at an Illinois clinic that offers telehealth abortion. Jeff Roberson/AP hide caption

Access to the abortion drug mifepristone could soon be limited by the Supreme Court for the whole country. Here, a nurse practitioner works at an Illinois clinic that offers telehealth abortion.

In March, the Supreme Court will hear a case about mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions. A key question in that case is: Was the Food and Drug Administration correct when it deemed the drug safe to prescribe to patients in a virtual appointment?

A study published Thursday in Nature Medicine looks at abortion pills prescribed via telehealth and provides more support for the FDA's assessment that medication abortion is safe and effective.

Researchers examined the electronic medical records for more than 6,000 patients from three providers of abortion via telehealth. They also conducted an opt-in survey of 1,600 patients.

Some abortion patients talked to a provider over video, others used a secure chat platform, similar to texting. If patients were less than 10 weeks pregnant and otherwise found to be eligible, the providers prescribed two medications: mifepristone, which blocks a pregnancy hormone called progesterone, and misoprostol, which causes uterine contractions. Patients got both medicines via mail-order pharmacy.

Research at the heart of a federal case against the abortion pill has been retracted

Shots - Health News

Research at the heart of a federal case against the abortion pill has been retracted.

"Then 3 to 7 days later, there was a clinical follow up," explains the study's lead author, Ushma Upadhyay of the University of California – San Francisco. "The provider checked in with the patient. 'Did you receive the medications? Did you take the medications?' They asked about symptoms. And then there was a clinical follow-up four weeks after the original intake."

The researchers found that the medication was effective – it ended the pregnancy without any additional follow-up care for 97.7% of patients. It was also found to be safe – 99.7% of abortions were not followed by any serious adverse events. The safety and efficacy was similar whether the patients talked to a provider over video or through secure chat.

"These results shouldn't be surprising," Upadhyay says. "It's consistent with the over 100 studies on mifepristone that have affirmed the safety and effectiveness of this medication."

The results also echo international research on telehealth abortion and studies of medication abortion dispensed in a clinic with an in-person appointment, she notes.

Rishi Desai of Harvard Medical School is a medication safety expert who was not involved in the study. He says it was "well-conducted," especially considering it can be difficult to track patients who only connect with providers remotely.

"I would say that this study provides reassuring data regarding safety of the medications, and this is very much in line with what we have seen in many previous studies," he says. "So it's good to see that safety findings hold up in this setting as well."

Still, whether mifepristone is safe and whether FDA has appropriately regulated how it is prescribed is a live legal question right now.

An anti-abortion rights group sued FDA in 2022, arguing that mifepristone is not safe and was improperly approved in 2000. Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a district court judge appointed to the federal bench by President Trump, ruled that mifepristone should be pulled from the market nationwide. Although his decision didn't take effect pending appeals, the appeals court ruled against the FDA in part, specifically rolling back telehealth abortion access. That is also on hold for now.

The Supreme Court hears arguments in the case on March 26. The decision could affect access to medication abortion nationwide and set a new precedent on challenges to the FDA's authority.

Recently, there's been a flurry of mifepristone research news. Last week, a paper that raised safety concerns about mifepristone was retracted . This study, released Thursday, affirms the FDA's position that the medicine can be safely prescribed remotely.

Upadhyay says she's been working on this research for years and that the timing of its publication weeks before the Supreme Court arguments is coincidental.

"I don't know if they can enter new evidence into the case at this point," she says. "But I do hope it impacts the perception of how safe this medication is."

  • abortion pill
  • mifepristone
  • Abortion rights
  • Supreme Court

Find anything you save across the site in your account

A High School Teen’s Powerful Graduation Speech About Abortion Rights Is Going Viral

By Christopher Rosa

A High School Teen's Powerful Graduation Speech About Abortion Rights Is Going Viral

Paxton Smith, the 2021 valedictorian of Lake Highlands High School in Dallas, gave an impassioned graduation speech about abortion rights that's going viral. 

For those unfamiliar with what's happening in Texas: The state's governor, Greg Abbott, just signed into law the “heartbeat bill,” which, per The Texas Tribune , bans abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, when most women don't even realize they're expecting. 

Smith had originally planned to talk about television and media during her speech but instead used the platform to shed light on the “heartbeat bill.” 

“In light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in this state,” Smith said, per Vox . “Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Six weeks. That’s all women get.”

According to Vox, the “heartbeat bill” not only bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy but allows people to sue anyone who “aids and abets” one of these illegal procedures. 

Smith's speech has exploded on TikTok, racking up more than 210,000 views. It was reposted to Twitter, where it's been viewed more than 2 million times. “In Texas, Lake Highlands High School valedictorian, Paxton Smith, switched out her approved speech to talk about abortion rights,” the tweet reads. 

This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

According to Advocate magazine, a local Highlands publication, Smith's decision to change her speech on the fly was not supported by her school district. “The content of each student speaker’s message is the private, voluntary expression of the individual student and does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position, or expression of the District or its employees,” RISD school board president Karen Clardy said. “What the student did was unexpected and not supported by LHHS or RISD. We are going to review student speech protocols in advance of next year’s graduations to prevent something like this from happening again.”

That being said, Smith's father, Russell, fully supported her actions. “It was something that she felt was important, and she had the nerve, determination, and boldness to put herself out there and say her piece,” he said, according to Advocate . “So few people demonstrate this level of maturity and poise, regardless of age.”

Read her full speech, according to Advocate magazine, below: 

As we leave high school we need to make our voices heard. I was going to get up here and talk to you about TV and content and media because those are things that are very important to me. However, in light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in this state.

Recently the heartbeat bill was passed in Texas. Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortions that take place after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. Six weeks. Most women don’t even realize they’re pregnant by then. And so, before they have the time to decide if they are emotionally, physically, and financially stable enough to carry out a full-term pregnancy, before they have the chance to decide if they can take on the responsibility of bringing another human into the world, the decision has been made for them by a stranger. A decision that will affect the rest of their lives.

I have dreams, hopes, and ambitions. Every girl here does. We have spent our whole lives working towards our futures, and without our consent or input, our control over our futures has been stripped away from us. I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail me, that if I’m raped, then my hopes and efforts and dreams for myself will no longer be relevant. I hope you can feel how gut-wrenching it is, how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken from you.

And I’m talking about this today, on a day as important as this, on a day honoring the students’ efforts in 12 years of schooling, on a day where we’re all brought together, on a day where you will be the most inclined to hear a voice like mine, a woman’s voice, to tell you that this is a problem. A problem that can’t wait. I refuse to give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights. A war on the rights of your sisters, a war on the rights of your mothers, a war on the rights of your daughters.

By Kathleen Walsh

By Georgia Day

By Emily Tannenbaum

We cannot stay silent.

70 Men Ages 5-75: How Do You Define Success?

By Talia Abbas

There’s Now a Cheaper Way to (Legally) Stream Friends and Gossip Girl

By Elizabeth Logan

Your Horoscope for the Week Ahead

By Astro All-Starz

  • Share full article

Advertisement

The Morning

A new abortion access strategy.

Doctors in a handful of blue states are using shield laws to provide abortions to women in red states.

A hand with a blue glove reaches for a prescription bottle near a black tray with white pills on it.

By Pam Belluck

Doctors in a handful of blue states have found a way to provide abortions to women in red states where it is banned or restricted. They are doing it with a new tool: laws that protect them from prosecutors elsewhere.

These telemedicine shield laws block officials in red states who might prosecute or sue the abortion providers in Massachusetts, New York, California, Vermont, Colorado and Washington State. Those states won’t extradite doctors. They won’t turn over records. They won’t aid in any investigation. It’s a sharp break from the usual pattern of interstate cooperation, as I report in a news story today .

I’ve been covering abortion for over a decade. Since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and triggered a wave of bans in conservative states, abortion rights advocates have worked to preserve access. They’ve used mobile clinics across the border from red states — and funds that cover the cost of travel to places where abortion is legal. In today’s newsletter, I’ll talk about one of the newest approaches.

The providers started mailing abortion pills under the shield laws just last summer. But their reach has surprised even some advocates. They’ve already prescribed and mailed abortion pills to tens of thousands of women in Texas, Idaho and other places that banned abortion after the high court’s 2022 decision. Patients find them online and fill out forms about their medical history. Providers then evaluate whether patients are eligible. They can be up to 12 weeks’ pregnant and must have no disqualifying medical issues like an ectopic pregnancy or a blood-clotting disorder.

Being able to receive abortion medication at their homes by mail saves patients the time, money and difficulty of traveling to a state where abortion is legal. It also avoids the weekslong wait for pills ordered from overseas. Shield law services charge $150 or $250, but they allow poorer patients to pay less or even nothing.

Abortion opponents in conservative states are outraged. The shield laws are “really trying to completely sabotage the governing efforts of their neighboring states,” said John Seago, the president of Texas Right to Life. “It can’t stand, and we can’t be content with this new development.”

The practice has not yet been challenged in court, but observers think it’s only a matter of time. Law enforcement officials in anti-abortion states may be waiting for a case they think will be persuasive. A senior government official in a conservative state told me about one possible strategy: State officials could first file charges or a complaint against a provider in a blue state. Then, when that state refused to cooperate, a red state could sue the shield-law state itself, claiming that the Constitution’s full faith and credit clause prevents one state from interfering with another’s laws.

States with abortion bans will also watch a lawsuit the Supreme Court will hear next month, in which opponents of abortion have sued the Food and Drug Administration to try to bar abortion pills. (My colleague Emily Bazelon has written for The Morning about how much of the abortion struggle now revolves around pills .) If the justices uphold an appeals court ruling , patients might need in-person doctor visits to obtain the medications.

Doctors tread cautiously

Regardless of the court’s decision in that case, some shield-law providers say they intend to find a way to continue.

Still, they are taking precautions. Most shield-law providers have decided not to travel to states with abortion bans, and some have established trusts to protect their assets from civil suits. Some identify themselves publicly, but others fly under the radar.

I visited one Massachusetts operation in a tiny office behind an unmarked door and watched as Carol, a reproductive health consultant who asked to be identified by her middle name, carefully packaged the two abortion medications, mifepristone and misoprostol. She put them into plain envelopes lined with bubble wrapping so they don’t rattle when they are mailed to patients. I accompanied her to the post office, where she mailed dozens of envelopes across the country.

“We’re a free country,” said Lauren Jacobson, a nurse practitioner at the Massachusetts clinic who sometimes writes 50 prescriptions a day. “So let’s put that to test. Here we are and we’re not going to be intimidated, and we have our states backing us.”

A major Alabama health system paused most I.V.F. procedures after the state’s Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are children, citing antiabortion language in the state constitution.

“ Embryos, to me, are babies ,” Nikki Haley said in response to the ruling.

THE LATEST NEWS

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority seems poised to block a Biden administration plan to reduce air pollution . It would be another blow to the E.P.A.’s power.

President Biden canceled another $1.2 billion in student debt for about 150,000 borrowers. In total, his administration has canceled $138 billion of such debt.

Biden is considering taking executive action to stop migrants who illegally enter the U.S. from claiming asylum at times when the border is overwhelmed.

Biden’s brother James told members of the House that the president wasn’t involved in his business deals , rebutting Republican allegations.

Ron DeSantis said he didn’t want to be Donald Trump’s running mate and lamented Trump’s electoral “baggage” in a private call with supporters.

A prosecutor in Arizona refused to extradite a murder suspect to New York City , saying Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, was too lenient on crime.

Israel-Hamas War

An Israeli organization for survivors of sexual abuse concluded that Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack “ included brutal acts of violent rape , often involving threats with weapons” and often in front of an audience.

At the U.N.’s highest court, the U.S. defended Israel’s decades-long occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Other nations continued to criticize Israel’s conduct in Gaza.

China is using private companies in campaigns to hack foreign governments in Asia and monitor ethnic minorities at home.

Silicon Valley venture capitalists, faced with increasing scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers, are limiting their investments in Chinese start-ups .

China is trying to develop more-advanced artificial intelligence than the U.S. has. One problem: Its A.I. systems still depend on American technology .

More International News

The success of candidates aligned with the expelled leader Imran Khan in Pakistan’s elections shattered the illusion of the generals’ grip on politics.

Britain wants more nuclear plants as a way to help tackle climate change. Delays and soaring costs are complicating the effort.

The U.S. and Europe have championed a new pipeline to bring gas to Bosnia and cut supplies from Russia. But feuding ethnic groups have stalled the project .

People are turning to news influencers on Instagram , even as the platform tries to de-emphasize “political content.”

The head of Boeing’s 737 Max program is leaving the company . The jets have been plagued by problems, most recently when a door plug blew off in flight.

Nvidia, maker of computer chips that power A.I. systems, reported booming profits .

Stocks in Japan rose to a record high , spurred in part by greater foreign investment and increased shareholder rights.

The I.R.S. will crack down on corporate executives who use company jets for personal travel .

BuzzFeed is selling Complex , a media start-up known for coverage of streetwear and pop culture, to pay off more than $60 million in debt.

Yale will once again require standardized test scores for admissions , becoming the second Ivy League university to abandon test-optional policies that were embraced during the pandemic.

The University of Arizona, in Tucson, is facing a $177 million shortfall . Local residents, many of whom work for the school, worry that budget cuts could lead to layoffs.

Other Big Stories

Extreme weather is forcing animal refuges across the country to relocate.

A private spacecraft, Odysseus, will attempt to land on the moon today . It would be the first private spacecraft to do so. CNN explained why, decades after the Apollo missions, it’s still so difficult.

A bill to abolish daylight saving time in Oregon failed in the State Senate.

Learn the lessons of a 17th-century heretic : Combating irrational ideas like racism takes reason, not dogma, Ian Buruma writes.

Amazon’s assertion that the National Labor Relations Board is unconstitutional amounts to an attack on the entire labor movement , David Firestone argues.

Ezra Klein believes Democrats should walk away from Biden. His podcast explains how they could pick a different nominee .

Here is a column by Thomas Edsall on white working-class voters .

MORNING READS

Wild skating: Adventure seekers dared to test the frozen lakes of Alaska .

“The Great Compression”: With housing prices soaring, the era of the 400-square-foot subdivision house is upon us.

Carrying stones: A missing Scottish trophy will be awarded again after 95 years .

Never happier: Some older Americans have given up on romantic love and are relishing being on their own .

Social Q’s: “My brother’s ex-wife won’t return a family heirloom . Help.”

New Orleans: Wildlife authorities seized a man’s pet opossum. Thousands have backed a petition to reunite man and marsupial .

Lives Lived: Charles Stendig, an importer, traveled to factories throughout Europe, sometimes behind the Iron Curtain, to introduce avant-garde and modern furniture to American living rooms. He died at 99 .

College football: Officials are already discussing expansion of the College Football Playoff — which broadened to 12 teams for the upcoming season — to either 14 or 16 in 2026.

Men’s college basketball: St. John’s coach Rick Pitino apologized for criticizing his players over the weekend, saying they “have never failed” him.

Advice: In an interview, W.N.B.A. legend Sue Bird encouraged Iowa star Caitlin Clark to turn pro after the season and said Clark could be an All-Star in her rookie year.

ARTS AND IDEAS

Native objects: The U.S. now requires museums to get consent from tribes before exhibiting certain cultural items from Native groups. As a result, museums across the country are removing objects from cases, covering displays and closing entire halls.

See how this looks at one museum in Chicago.

More on culture

Alex Cooper, host of the podcast “Call Her Daddy,” has been building a media company with Matt Kaplan, a film producer and her fiancé. Read more about it .

The essayist Leslie Jamison has become known for her careful balancing acts of self-exposure in her writing.

THE MORNING RECOMMENDS …

Assemble garlicky shrimp and white beans on a sheet pan for a quick meal.

Use the best headphones .

Eat like a nutritionist does ( when she’s off the clock ).

Try a 3-D printer .

Here is today’s Spelling Bee . Yesterday’s pangram was flighty .

And here are today’s Mini Crossword , Wordle , Sudoku and Connections .

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow.

Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox . Reach our team at [email protected] .

Pam Belluck is a health and science reporter, covering a range of subjects, including reproductive health, long Covid, brain science, neurological disorders, mental health and genetics. More about Pam Belluck

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Poll: Americans Favor This Common-Sense Abortion Limit By a Double-Digit Margin

Guy Benson

Since the rightful fall of Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs decision, pro-lifers have been on something of a losing streak.  Yes, governors who've signed anti-abortion legislation have gone on to win strong re-election victories -- but pro-abortion activists have worked to place referenda on statewide ballots, and they've been winning those battles, including in traditionally red states.  The way they've managed to do so is by heavily outspending the opposing side in pushing advertising that frames these up-or-down ballot measures as urgent opportunities to prevent total abortion bans.  Unfortunately, the actual fine-print verbiage of what they've presented has been quite radical, effectively wiping out and boxing out any meaningful pro-life protections, including popular ones.  But that's not how they've been marketed to voters. 

The misleading messaging has been persuasive and the funding behind these pushes has overwhelmed the under-resourced and ultimately unpersuasive counter-argument.  After Ohio passed its extreme version of this plebiscite last November , Sen. JD Vance analyzed the outcome.  The whole mini essay is worth a read, but I've emphasized a few particular points:

For pro lifers, last night was a gut punch. No sugar coating it. Giving up on the unborn is not an option. It's politically dumb and morally repugnant. Instead, we need to understand why we lost this battle so we can win the war. I was very involved in the "no" campaign for issue 1, so let me share a few insights. First, we got creamed among voters who disliked both Issue 1 and also Ohio's current law (heartbeat bill). We saw this consistently in polling and in conversations. "I don't like Issue 1, but I'd rather have that extreme than the other extreme." This is a political fact, not my opinion. Second, we have to recognize how much voters mistrust us (meaning elected Republicans) on this issue.  Having an unplanned pregnancy is scary. Best case, you're looking at social scorn and thousands of dollars of unexpected medical bills. We need people to see us as the pro-life party, not just the anti-abortion party. Third, as Donald Trump has said, "you've got to have the exceptions." I am as pro life as anyone, and I want to save as many babies as possible. This is not about moral legitimacy but political reality. I've seen dozens of good polls on the abortion question in the last few months, many of them done in Ohio. Give people a choice between abortion restrictions very early in pregnancy with exceptions, or the pro choice position, and the pro life view has a fighting chance. Give people a heartbeat bill with no exceptions and it loses 65-35.  (The reason we didn't lose 65-35 last night is that some people who hate "no exceptions" restrictions will still refuse to vote for things like Issue 1). Fourth, we've spent so much time winning a legal argument on abortion that we've fallen behind on the moral argument. I talked to so many decent people who voted yes on Issue 1, and their reasons varied. Some described themselves as "pro life" but hated the lack of a rape exception in Ohio law.  Some were worried that Ohio law would prevent them from addressing an ectopic pregnancy, or a late term miscarriage. Some didn't understand the "viability" standard in Issue 1, and thought that of course you should be able to abort a "non-viable" pregnancy as that would be a danger to the mother.  You can criticize the propaganda effort on the other side for lying to people about these issues or confusing the populace, but it suggests we have to do a much better job of persuasion.  And I'm not just talking about 30 second TV commercials--I'm talking about sustained, years long efforts to show the heart of the pro life movement. Fifth, money. We got outspent big time on Issue 1, and across the country. Republicans are almost always outspent by Democrats. Relatedly, Democrats are better at turning out in off year elections. The national party should be focused on two, and only two issues: how to juice turnout in off year elections and how to close the finance gap with Democrats. A lot of people put their heart and soul into this campaign. The local right to life organizations in Ohio, The Center for Christian Virtue, SBA, Governor Dewine, and so many others. I tip my hat to them. A lot of people are celebrating right now, and I don't care about that. I do care about the fact that because we lost, many innocent children will never have a chance to live their dreams. There is something sociopathic about a political movement that tells young women (and men) that it is liberating to murder their own children. So let's keep fighting for our country's children, and let's find a way to win.

Recommended

persuasive essays on abortion rights

That first insight is very important. We've been tracking polls for years showing that Americans broadly support quite a few abortion limitations and restrictions. They oppose the inhumane and extreme position of national Democrats: Abortion on demand, for any reason, through all nine months of pregnancy, funded by taxpayers. Even President Biden recently seemed to intuit that voters don't want that, even though it's his official position. But if voters are given the choice between something that's sold to them as a moderate pro-choice policy and something that they see as an overly-prohibitive anti-abortion policy, they'll choose the former, pretty decisively. Pro-lifers need to understand that reality and adjust to it -- or keep losing. Such losses aren't just demoralizing political setbacks; they have real impacts on innocent lives, the preservation of which is the whole purpose of the pro-life movement. A national poll out this week once again underscores that Americans haven't suddenly turned into hardcore pro-late-term-abortion zealots. If you put a European-style consensus policy in front of them, like this one, they're likely to support it. By a double-digit margin, voters favor a ban on most abortions after four months:

YouGov Poll: Do you Support or Oppose a national ban on abortions after 16 weeks of pregnancy? Support 48% Oppose 36% — Male: 49-33 Female: 47-39 18-29 y/o: 52-33 White: 49-37 Black: 46-28 Hispanic: 47-34 Dem: 35-50 GOP: 67-23 Indie: 43-33 — 538: #4 | 2/18-20 | N=1,560 pic.twitter.com/ClL5psk8tc — InteractivePolls (@IAPolls2022) February 21, 2024

Pluralities or majorities of men, women, young people, white voters, black voters, Hispanic voters, Republicans and independents support this idea.  I'd guess that if some popular exceptions were added into the question wording, and if it were framed as four months (versus 16 weeks ), the numbers would be higher.  Perhaps substantially so.  Democrats rarely want to answer if there are any limits they'd support on abortion because their activist and donor class demands a degree of barbaric radicalism that is anathema to most people.  So they hide behind slogans and distortions of mainstream pro-life views in order to deflect the conversation into a more favorable realm for them.  They are aided in this, of course, by a 'news' media that is exceptionally biased and extreme on the issue.  Pro-lifers can complain about this, and fight amongst themselves over purity tests, or they can figure out which of their views are most palatable to their fellow citizens and lead with those.  Lives are literally at stake.  I'll leave you with a humble suggestion that regardless of how you feel about this substantively , this is not the way to win the hearts-and-minds battle anywhere, even in a place like Alabama:

The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are children and that a person can be held liable for destroying them. Reproductive rights advocates say the case could have implications for fertility treatments such as IVF. pic.twitter.com/PqoJqJhROb — TODAY (@TODAYshow) February 20, 2024

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

persuasive essays on abortion rights

Trending on Townhall Videos

  • Speaker Johnson Responds to Biden's Executive Order News
  • Biden's Border Crisis Is Now on Full Display in Times Square Billboard
  • Ted Cruz Reveals Why the Mainstream Media Is Willing to Call Out Joe Biden
  • Donald Trump’s Chances of Winning Are Better Than Ever

persuasive essays on abortion rights

IMAGES

  1. ⇉Persuasive about abortions Essay Example

    persuasive essays on abortion rights

  2. ⇉Abortion Persuasive Speech Essay Example

    persuasive essays on abortion rights

  3. ≫ Legalization of Abortion Free Essay Sample on Samploon.com

    persuasive essays on abortion rights

  4. Opinion

    persuasive essays on abortion rights

  5. Opinion

    persuasive essays on abortion rights

  6. Opinion

    persuasive essays on abortion rights

COMMENTS

  1. Persuasive Essay About Abortion: Examples, Topics, and Facts

    1. How To Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion? 2. Persuasive Essay About Abortion Examples 3. Examples of Argumentative Essay About Abortion 4. Abortion Persuasive Essay Topics 5. Facts About Abortion You Need to Know How To Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion?

  2. 10 Essential Essays About Women's Reproductive Rights

    In their essay, Ragosta describes the criticism Ibis Reproductive Health received when it used the term "pregnant people.". The term alienates women, the critics said, but acting as if only cis women need reproductive care is simply inaccurate. As Ragosta writes, no one is denying that cis women experience pregnancy.

  3. The First Amendment and the Abortion Rights Debate

    Sofia Cipriano Following Dobbs v. Jackson's (2022) reversal of Roe v. Wade (1973) — and the subsequent revocation of federal abortion protection — activists and scholars have begun to reconsider how to best ground abortion rights in the Constitution. In the past year, numerous Jewish rights groups have attempted to overturn state abortion bans by…

  4. Opinion

    Opinion Columnist A striking thing about the American abortion debate is how little abortion itself is actually debated. The sensitivity and intimacy of the issue, the mixed feelings of so many...

  5. Opinion

    The essay by Tish Harrison Warren on the difficult abortion issue was the most insightful and heartfelt discussion of abortion ever. The fact that she has counseled women in crisis and...

  6. To Be Pro-Choice, You Must Have the Privilege of Having Choices

    In 2021 alone, over 100 anti-abortion bills that restrict or ban abortions were passed in 19 states. This summer, the Supreme Court could deliver a lethal blow to Roe v. Wade.

  7. Key facts about abortion views in the U.S.

    By Carrie Blazina A woman receives medication to terminate her pregnancy at a reproductive health clinic in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on June 23, 2022, the day before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which had guaranteed a constitutional right to an abortion for nearly 50 years. (Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

  8. The Rhetoric That Shaped The Abortion Debate : NPR

    By Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel. Hardcover, 352 pages. Kaplan Publishing. List Price: $26. Read an Excerpt. Before the Supreme Court struck down many state laws restricting abortion in the ...

  9. Views on whether abortion should be legal, and in what circumstances

    1. Americans' views on whether, and in what circumstances, abortion should be legal As the long-running debate over abortion reaches another key moment at the Supreme Court and in state legislatures across the country, a majority of U.S. adults continue to say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

  10. Pro-Choice Does Not Mean Pro-Abortion: An Argument for Abortion Rights

    Opponents of abortion rights argue that life begins at conception - making abortion tantamount to homicide. Abortion rights advocates, in contrast, maintain that women have a right to decide what happens to their bodies - sometimes without any restrictions.

  11. Definitive Guide to Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion

    1. Right to privacy and autonomy over body. 2. The outcomes of banning abortion are worse than allowing it. 3. Women will seek unsafe abortions if banned. B. Pro-life Argument. 1. Abortion is the taking of innocent life.

  12. Women's Rights: Abortions Should Be Legal

    Examination of laws limiting abortion rights; Pro-Choice Argument. Arguments in favor of pro-choice, emphasizing women's rights and the consequences of restricting abortion ... While some people consider it a murder, this persuasive essay will prove that abortion laws need to remain intact because individuals have autonomy of body, it helps ...

  13. 5.1: Arguments Against Abortion

    5.1.5 Abortion prevents fetuses from experiencing their valuable futures. We will begin with arguments for the conclusion that abortion is generally wrong, perhaps nearly always wrong. These can be seen as reasons to believe fetuses have the "right to life" or are otherwise seriously wrong to kill.

  14. Abortion Persuasive Essay

    Right to Decide Conclusion Abortion is a contentious topic that has generated heated debate and sparked political controversies for decades. On one side, some argue that abortion is a fundamental right that allows women to control their bodies and make informed decisions about their reproductive health.

  15. How to Write an Abortion Argumentative Essay? + FREE Sample

    How to Write an Abortion Argumentative Essay? Benjamin Oaks 20.9K Updated: 5/19/2021 Table of Contents 5 Successful Abortion Essay Writing Tips Tip 1 - Create the Paper Structure Tip 2 - Outline Your Work Tip 3 - Plan Your Time Wisely Tip 4 - Find Good Sources Tip 5 - Read Abortion Essays Examples Do's and Don'ts of Abortion Essay Writing DO'S

  16. Abortion Has Never Been Just About Abortion

    Guest Essay. Abortion Has Never Been Just About Abortion. Sept. 15, 2021. ... On the other side, abortion rights proponents contend, in the words of the Center for Reproductive Rights: ...

  17. Persuasive Essay about Abortion

    In 1959, the American Law Institute proposed model penal code state abortion laws: legalizing abortion for the mother's mental or physical health, pregnancy due to rape or incest, and fatal deformity. 8 years later the first abortion laws are passed in four different states: Colorado, California, Oregon, and North Carolina.

  18. How To Write A Persuasive Essay On Abortion?

    The basics of a persuasive essay on abortion Core aspects of great abortion thesis statements The arguments for the persuasive essay on abortion is wrong How to support a persuasive essay on abortion pro-choice? How to create a neutral argument for a paper on abortion? On balance…

  19. Persuasive Essay on Abortion

    Persuasive Essay on Abortion Cite This Essay Download In what circumstances, if any, is abortion morally impermissible? In this essay, I will argue that abortion is morally permissible in all circumstances. The fundamental issue of when human life begins is one that determines the opinions of whether abortion is morally permissible or not.

  20. The Pro-Choice Argument

    Approximately 1 million women had abortions annually until the 1973 decision legalizing abortion, and abortion had become the leading cause of maternal death and mutilation (40 deaths/100,000 ...

  21. A Promising New Path to Protect Abortion Access

    Supporters of reproductive rights also went on the offensive in 2022, advancing measures to proactively secure access. In November, voters in California and Vermont embraced amendments enshrining ...

  22. Abortion pills prescribed via telehealth are safe and effective, study

    An anti-abortion rights group sued FDA in 2022, arguing that mifepristone is not safe and was improperly approved in 2000. Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a district court judge appointed to the federal ...

  23. A High School Teen's Powerful Graduation Speech About Abortion Rights

    June 2, 2021. YouTube. Paxton Smith, the 2021 valedictorian of Lake Highlands High School in Dallas, gave an impassioned graduation speech about abortion rights that's going viral. For those ...

  24. Persuasive Essay on Abortion

    Persuasive Essay On Abortion Many individuals fail to understand the sheer magnitude of bloodshed, tribulation, and despair legalized abortion has initiated into the human experience - both in the United States and worldwide. Far more human lives have been violently ended by this immoral decision than any other war or genocide in history.

  25. A New Abortion Access Strategy

    By Pam Belluck. Feb. 22, 2024, 6:37 a.m. ET. Doctors in a handful of blue states have found a way to provide abortions to women in red states where it is banned or restricted. They are doing it ...

  26. Poll: Americans Favor This Common-Sense Abortion Limit By a Double

    Since the rightful fall of Roe v.Wade in the Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs decision, pro-lifers have been on something of a losing streak. Yes, governors who've signed anti-abortion legislation have ...