Every year in January, protestors line the streets of Washington D.C. with signs that boldly exclaim, “Abortion is Murder”, “Right to Life”, and “Pro-Life.” The March for Life protest attracts approximately one quarter of a million people from across the country annually to demonstrate their disdain for abortion. Ever since the Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade in 1973, Americans and lawmakers alike remain in constant dispute over the moral and legal issues of early pregnancy termination.
Those opposed to abortion strongly believe that abortion negates the "Right to Life," and they consider it as morally reprehensible. On the other hand, pro-choice supporters debate that such statements merely embody religious beliefs and values. Pro-abortionists argue that the right to an abortion lies solely with the pregnant woman. Regardless of the endless tirades and diatribes from pro-choice defenders and their attempts to justify early pregnancy termination, I find abortion to be constitutionally illegal, immoral, and downright disgusting as many alternatives to the matter exist.
The Constitution of the United States of America holds a logical case for life. The nature and premise of its body hold the roots to the basic fundamentals of human existence: survive and reproduce.The Fifth Amendment preserves the right to life: “No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” (U.S. Constitution). Those who are pro-choice often debate that the decision for early pregnancy termination falls under the category of women’s rights. The importance of safeguarding the freedom of all United States citizens surfaces multiple times in the Constitution, yet this freedom of choice cannot be so infinite that it has priority over a helpless individual with no ability to defend its life. A pro-choice counter argument to this is that a fetus has zero rights and is not protected under the constitution, as it requires the mother’s womb for development and maturation. Doctors Andre and Velasquez from Santa Clara University postulate the difference between a fetus and a 3-month-old baby. They compare how the two individuals by themselves do not possess the capability for survival. If a mother were to terminate a fetus at seven weeks old, her actions would remain justified under the current laws for abortion in some states (Andre and Velasquez). However if she were to drown her child at 3 months old, the courts would intervene and the mother would face twenty-five years to life in a state prison. This pro-choice argument is a smokescreen for the uniformed population. A human being does not have the capability to support itself fully for many years after birth, so the termination of a fetus for any purpose other than a life-threatening condition to the mother is utterly unacceptable. Consequently, an unborn child has the same rights as living humans, thus making abortion constitutionally illegal.
Another argument that pro-choice...