Abortion

1. The National Right to Life Website definitely had more information on it than the NARAL- Prochoice America one had. The NRLC website had many statistics about abortion as well as detailed information as to how abortions are performed. The NRLC website started off by explaining that about 93% of all induced abortions are done for an elective reason, meaning that there was no medical risk to the expectant mother and the abortion was merely done for social reasons. The NRLC website was definitely better than the NARAL website because it made me feel bad when I was reading it. They talked about dismembering the body of the fetus and explained, in vivid detail, how an abortion is carried out and what the different procedures are like. They explained that when an abortion is done, the baby's heart is already beginning to beat and that depending on how far in the pregnancy the abortion is performed, a baby may have identifiable arms and legs, display measurable brain waves, and their fingers and genitals may already be appearing. They explained that there are about 3,000 Crisis Pregnancy Centers throughout the United States. At these centers, there are volunteers that are there to help women that have an unplanned pregnancy and can offer them assistance and support in some of the financial aspects of taking care of a baby.

The NARAL website had much less detail than the NRLC website did. The NARAL website had information on what pro-life activists are doing to pro-choice activists to try to eliminate the possibility of the pro-choice people having an abortion. Some of these tactics include being violent and intimidating doctors and patients, banning safe abortion methods, passing laws that jeopardize a woman’s health and safety, or having Crisis pregnancy Centers that intentionally mislead women. The NARAL website does offer some advice on how to combat these tactics, but it also heavily supports improving access to birth control and having better sex education to help lower the amount of abortions.

It definitely seems as if the NRLC website is winning the debate. They definitely seem to be on the offense while the NARAL seems to be on the defense. The NRLC is giving reasons why abortion is bad and why it shouldn't be allowed, while the NARAL website was simply stating what pro-life activists were doing to inhibit abortion and how it was unfair and against the Roe v. Wade ruling. I definitely wouldn't say that this information changed my opinion on abortion, but it definitely gave me more information that I hadn't known. While I knew that abortion was a big decision, I didn't really realize how having an abortion is actually killing the baby and tearing its limbs apart. I still think that it should be the women's choice, because ultimately they are the one that is carrying the baby for nine months and caring for it after its birth, but it is definitely shocking for me to realize how detrimental it can be to the fetus and what an abortion actually does.

2. Personally, I am pro-choice. I think that it is the right of a female to decide what she wants to do with the baby. While there are definitely other options besides parenting, carrying a baby for 9 months, as well as visiting the doctor and going through childbirth, are events that can change a woman’s life. Being pregnant is not a “no big deal” situation that can simply be ignored. A person that becomes pregnant needs to change their entire lifestyle, the way they eat, and possible how much they can work just to suit the needs of the growing baby inside of them. While abortion may be a gruesome procedure, I believe that it is up to the discretion of the mother if she believes that she is ready to have a child, and if not, she has the right to terminate the pregnancy before she must go through with it. I think that a parent should have the right to know if their daughter is having an abortion but should not have the right to consent to it. Up to a certain age, I think it is appropriate for the parents to be notified about the abortion because they should know what is going on with their daughter and that she is going through a major procedure. I do not think that they should have the right to consent to it because again, it is not them that is going to have to go through the pregnancy. The parents may say that they can take care of the kid and let the new mom go back to school or pursue her previous life plans, but it is not the parents that are going to have the bay growing inside of them for nine months. A women can want an abortion and feel that she is not ready to carry a baby, but if her parents are extreme pro-life activists, this should not limit her ability to go through the procedure that she would like to go through.

3. I definitely think that if the mother and father do not speak to each other, every effort must be made to at least notify the father about the abortion. While he may truly want to have a baby and promise to dedicate himself to caring for the baby, he is not the one that is going to be going through the nine months of pregnancy, and therefore should not have the ability to consent or not. The father is not the one that is going to have the baby growing inside of him for nine months, so I think that it is unfair for him to have a say in the decision as to if the woman gets an abortion or not. Ideally, the mother and father will be stable and supportive of each other, but when this is not the case, it is not up to the father to decide what happens. If the father truly wants a baby, I think that this is a conversation that should happen well before the woman becomes pregnant so that when it does happen, it is something that they both want and have planned to have with each other.

4. I definitely disagree with Illinois’ positions on abortion. Illinois definitely seems to be pro-life, and being pro-choice, I definitely am opposed to the state laws and opinions. I think that the woman should have a choice on what they should do if they become pregnant. On the NARAL website, it says that Illinois has expressed “its intent to restrict the right to choose to the greatest extent possible.” This really bothers me because it shows that the state is trying everything they can to limit abortions.

In A Heartbeat-- Post 1

For my outside reading assignment, I have decided to read the book In A Heartbeat written by Sean and Leigh Ann Tuohy. Those names may sound a little bit familiar to you, and if they do, it is because you saw the movie The Blind Side. Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy are the adoptive parents of NFL player Michael Oher, and this book is their story of how they came about adopting Michael and the journey that they took. I decided to read this book because of my love for the movie. I instantly developed a love for The Blind Side after I saw it, so I decided that I wanted to read the book by the Tuohys to get an inside view at their perspective and why they decided to take in a homeless black man. When reading the prologue to this book, I was taken aback by the way in which the Tuohys described American's and put the act of charitable giving in perspective. The Tuohys began to think about making a difference and how many people do things because it will give them positive attention, will make them look good to others, or, as they say it, "Gives us more points on our Visa card." While hard to hear, this is unfortunately true for many of Americans. Although 89% of American households give to charity, many of the people who give to charity do so for the sole reason of getting attention from others, which brings the average to only 1.9% of total household income being donated to charity. When put into perspective, this is a very low percentage. The Tuohys decided to take a different approach to giving to charity.  They decided to "do small things with great love. If [they] could do that, little opportunities to give might grow beyond [their] wildest dreams." This is the mentality that needs to be spread across the country to so many more people.