IndexPros and cons of abortionReflectionConclusionWorks citedPros and cons of abortionTo discuss the topic of pros and cons of abortion, this essay explores the heated debate surrounding the practice of terminating a pregnancy. Abortion has always been practiced since ancient times, giving rise to the idea of ​​removing a fetus from a woman's body. Years pass and the pro-life and pro-choice arguments hit society, causing a gigantic fire. Women started to be raped and did not want to have their rapist's child, which led people to argue that it is murder to kill that child before its birth, but others argue that because it is that woman's body that is what really matters in the end. of the day. The importance of this issue lies in the fate of the unborn child. Yes, that baby will die, but a woman has a right to what happens to her body and no one should be able to take that away from anyone. Furthermore, this depends on the case in question. Was it consensual sex or violent, unwanted rape? Abortion has created the obvious case of people building abortion clinics, considering it a medical state at hand. Some states and countries have banned these clinics around the world because the majority of the population is pro-life and believes that killing that child is murder or against their religion or just wrong in their eyes. This leads to pro-life rioters in front of abortion clinics leading to violence against those doctors and victims in various ways. In a recent New York Times op-ed, author Katha Pollitt lays out her perspective on these issues facing clinics. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay In this article, Katha explains the amount of violence outside of abortion clinics. She cites Planned Parenthood, which helps women around the world with their reproductive health issues free of charge, including receiving condoms, birth control, HIV/STD testing, pregnancy tests, abortions and more. However, recently the videos and support have led to harassment, violent threats, and worse. These threats have always been there, but they have increased to the extreme. Due to the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade in 1973, the government deemed it unconstitutional to have an abortion just to save the mother's life. That's when they legalized abortion altogether, but beforehand the United States allowed states to determine whether or not abortion was legal in that state or not. With the legalization of abortion, over 6,000 acts of violence have occurred, including murders, attempted murders, bombings and more. Katha also mentions how anti-abortion leaders describe abortion as something out of the Holocaust of World War II and as a capital crime. Because of the attacks on clinics, those that are allowed to remain open must have armed security, metal detectors and emergency drills to prevent angry mobs from entering. In my opinion, the strength of this argument are the points raised. Katha brought evidence of almost all the points that needed to be brought and confirmed. His strong ideas really drive home the point and put the icing on the cake for pro-choice people. Your article is compelling, and that's what makes it worthwhile. The examples of other issues around the world, such as Muslim and Black Lives Matter groups, connect to the issue and help people truly understand what is being said and can even possibly relate to it. Katha helps point people in the favorable directionto choice in this powerful article, forcing readers to face the facts about what is happening and to open their eyes to the problems plaguing these women and these doctors. His statement at the end of the article is what makes the entire article “Do we want to live in a country where extremists use violence to deny women legal healthcare…?” This statement is what brings it all together demonstrates his belief that violence is defiantly not the answer and this is what is unfortunately happening all over the world. He feels that his opinions are right in his mind. She is confident in what she is writing and shows the downsides of being pro-choice and trying to help these innocent women, and what the consequences are for clinic employees. The weakness highlighted in this article is Katha's attack on pro-life. He basically calls out pro-choice leaders and people and shuts them all down as if their opinions are completely wrong. She talks about how violence against people and pro-choice clinics are bad, but in this article she is obviously attacking pro-life people when she could have clearly shown both sides of the issue and still made her point. I understand what he's saying about how they shouldn't attack these clinics and the victims, which is true because nobody likes violence, but at the same time he's blaming these people and if I were pro-life, I know I would find this article offensive and I would get angry, so what's to say pro-life people won't find this article threatening? Katha also does not provide sufficient evidence from this side of the argument. There are no quotes from these anti-abortion leaders in the article to support what it says about them. If it brought more evidence, it would be more convincing and less offensive to pro-life believers and would give the reader more food for thought. I think this article would cause even more riots than you explain. Reflection I am pro-choice, although I agree with the idea that killing a child is wrong, it is the woman's choice because of her constitutional rights and her body. His body, his decision. So I have the same views as the author of this article, however I am not as violent when it comes to pro-life riots. Yes, I don't like violence and I believe it can be resolved in a better way, however I can't blame them for not wanting to kill a child. It is understandable not to want to kill an innocent fetus. If I had written this article, I would have considered the other side of the coin, so at the end of the article my point is made and it is up to the reader to determine what he wants to think, because it is a "free country" ” so I would like people to finish l 'article feeling like they could consider and choose a position, not so much of what Katha did where I almost felt like I had to be pro-choice or whatever. The article seemed slightly threatening to people who stand up for what they believe in, which is anti-abortion. We cannot help that some people believe in God, choose to be vegan, and choose to believe in the fight against abortion. This is life, and hate crimes happen everywhere and I see this article as more of a hate crime against those who believe against abortion. Even if this wasn't his intent, it still seemed that way without the other party's evidence and reasoning. I believe that the violence that is taking place is unacceptable and that women should have the right to choose and that if people want to resolve this issue, then violence is not the answer. Please note: this is just an example. Get a personalized document from ours now, 30(2), 254-256.