Why Abortion Is Wrong: A Pro-Life Moral Argument
This essay presents a pro-life moral argument against abortion, contending that human life begins at the moment of fertilization and that the unborn child possesses an independent right to life. Drawing on the views of embryologist Fritz Baumgartner and Pope John Paul II, the paper challenges the position that a woman's bodily autonomy justifies terminating a pregnancy. It also engages with John Finnis's argument that the unborn child's body is distinct from the mother's. The essay further critiques pro-choice rhetoric, arguing that language such as "fetus" and "choice" obscures the moral reality of abortion, and that Roe v. Wade validates what the author considers a morally indefensible act.
- Introduction: Abortion as a Moral Question: Thesis: abortion is morally wrong, takes a life
- When Does Life Begin?: Life begins at fertilization, supported by science and religion
- The Rights of the Unborn Child: Unborn child has distinct body and independent rights
- Pro-Choice Rhetoric and Moral Evasion: Pro-choice language obscures moral reality of abortion
- Conclusion: Abortion debate is moral, not merely legal
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The essay takes a clear, consistent thesis from the outset and defends it throughout without wavering, making the argument easy to follow.
- It incorporates multiple external authorities — a scientist, a religious leader, and a legal philosopher — to support its claims from different angles.
- The paper directly engages with the opposing "bodily autonomy" argument and attempts to refute it on its own terms, demonstrating awareness of counterarguments.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the technique of turning an opponent's argument against itself. When addressing the pro-choice claim that "a woman's body belongs to her," the author uses John Finnis's reasoning to argue that this principle actually supports the unborn child's separate claim to bodily autonomy, not the mother's right to terminate. This is a classic philosophical rebuttal strategy known as a "tu quoque" or self-defeating argument critique.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens with a provocative claim and a statement of thesis. It then builds its case across three main content sections: the scientific and religious basis for life beginning at fertilization, the legal and philosophical rights of the unborn, and a critique of pro-choice language and reliance on Roe v. Wade. It closes with a brief restatement of the moral stakes. Citations follow MLA-style Works Cited format.
Introduction: Abortion as a Moral Question
Abortion is a morally serious act — one that, in my view, takes the life of another human being. The conviction of Scott Roeder serves as a stark reminder of how passionately people on both sides of this debate hold their convictions. Roeder was a staunch believer in the pro-life cause, and while his methods were wrong, his core belief in the value of human life reflects a position I share. Just because an unborn child cannot be seen or cannot speak up for itself does not mean it has no right to live. The baby is alive — if it were not, there would be no need to end its life. This debate is ultimately a moral one, not merely a legal one.
When Does Life Begin?
I believe that life begins at conception — not at three months or six months into a pregnancy. Dr. Fritz Baumgartner supports this view, stating: "There is no more appropriate moment to begin calling a human 'human' than the moment of fertilization. And don't let anyone tell you otherwise, because it would be a degradation of factual embryology to say it would be any other moment" (Baumgartner). Former Pope John Paul II also affirms this position, writing that no one could be imagined as "more absolutely innocent" than the unborn (Giovanni). He further describes unborn babies as defenseless, "even to the point of lacking that minimal form of defense" (Giovanni).
Life is sacred, and it begins with the union of sperm and egg. Pro-abortion advocates prefer to use clinical terms such as "fetus" or "viable tissue," but the organism in question is nonetheless alive. If every person has rights, then the unborn baby must have the same right to life as the mother who carries it.
The Rights of the Unborn Child
I believe the baby — born or unborn — has rights. Pro-abortion supporters often rely on the argument that a woman's body belongs to no one but herself. That is true; her body does belong to her. However, that fact does not give her the right to end the life of another body growing inside her. As philosopher John Finnis argues, the baby in the womb possesses its own body — it is "the child's body and not the woman's" (Finnis). That body may depend on the mother's body for protection and growth, but it does not belong to her.
Finnis further argues that pro-abortion positions amount to "mere (understandable) bias, mere (understandable) self-interested refusal to listen to the very same claim ('This body is my body') when it is made by or on behalf of another person" (Finnis). In other words, the "my body, my choice" argument ultimately undermines itself: the mother owns her body, not the baby's. The pro-abortion position borrows the language of bodily autonomy only when it is convenient, while ignoring the unborn child's equally valid claim to its own body.
Conclusion
The abortion debate is fundamentally a moral question, not a legal one. Laws can permit what morality condemns. Whether one relies on the science of embryology, the philosophy of bodily rights, or a basic moral intuition about the value of innocent life, the conclusion remains the same: the unborn child is a human being with a right to live, and abortion denies that right.
Works Cited
Baumgartner, Fritz. "Life Begins at the Beginning." Pro-Life America, 2005, www.prolife.com/lifebegins.html. Accessed 29 Jan. 2009.
Finnis, John. "The Rights and Wrongs of Abortion: A Reply to Judith Thomson." JSTOR Resource Database, 1973, www.jstor.org. Accessed 29 Jan. 2009.
Giovanni, John Paul. "Abortion Is Immoral." Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center, 1995, galenet.galegroup.com. Accessed 29 Jan. 2009.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.