Abortion is one of the most, if not the most, complex issues in modern America. I often find myself straddling the fence when it comes to this issue, so I took a look at the websites of the leading organizations on each side, NARAL-Prochoice America and National Right to Life. Immediately upon glancing at each site, their displays were quite contrasting. NARAL almost had the layout of a school website: professional and organized. National Right to Life's website, on the other hand, to me, looks somewhat unprofessional, a step above blogging. Its layout is not very appealing, but all of the white on the website is probably meant to resemble a theme of life. I guess it's contradictory that I say that, because on their home page is a disgusting list of abortion methods that doctors use. It makes me reconsider my viewpoints. Overall though, I like NARAL's website more, and I also believe that they go more in depth on their side of Abortion. National Right to Life has noticeably less information, and to compensate they give you a list of several websites. I don't think many people want to go searching all over the Internet for pro-life information; rather, they would look at one website that goes in depth, like NARAL. Although there are less subtopics on NARAL, their information is more detailed and more accessible for information-seekers. Therefore, because of their organization and detail, I believe that NARAL seems to be winning the debate on abortion. I also believe that Illinois is headed in the right direction when it comes to abortion. There are still a few laws though that I do not support and would rather have abolished, such as TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) and spousal consent.
As a seventeen-year-old high school student, I think of abortion as a personal issue rather than a political issue. The only thing that makes it political is the government's choice to permit or prohibit it. I believe the government shouldn't even be involved in something as personal as abortion, so I guess I call myself pro-choice. Like I have said in previous posts, the more government becomes involved in an individual's personal life, the more inclined they are to be even more involved. This is America, a country of freedom, a glorious place where individuals can make their own decisions (as it should always be). It is a pregnant woman's decision whether or not to abort her unborn child that resides within her individual self. However, after taking a look at the second/third trimester abortion methods on the National Right to Life site, it makes me wishy-washy on my viewpoints...is this moral? What constitutes life? When the fetus develops its nervous system, or when it is a cell, the smallest building block of life? This question of morality is substantial because, though people will claim that these arguments are religious, our society has developed a sense of right and wrong from religion or from elders that have been religiously educated. However, in the end, it is still up to the individual to make the decision and she will have to live with the consequences for the rest of her life. I also believe that since a pregnant teenager planning to abort is still a dependent to her parents, she is obligated to inform them, but her parents cannot make the decision for her; she is an individual. The same goes with the father being notified of the abortion. Since she is the one with the baby inside of her, it is the mother's choice whether or not to notify the father of the abortion, and the father cannot decide whether or not she should follow through with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment