Since I can't sleep at the moment, I have a few nitpicks/suggestions:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by la petite moi
My paper on abortion:
So, I did my argumentative research paper on pro-choice. Give me your feedback by Wednesday night, if you please (or if you get through it all).
|
Quote:
|
One story by Susan X, describes Doctor Harvey Lothringer, who performed an illegal and brutal abortion on her when she was only 18 years old. She illustrates a picture of absolute horror, explaining how the doctor charged her a large sum of 400 dollars, would not allow her boyfriend stay with her while she was paralyzed with fear, scraped the lining of her uterus so much that she was later unable to menstruate for a year, and then used a German Shepherd to “dispose of the evidence” (Lest we…).
|
Just a suggestion, bu though a gruesome and vivid story, it seems to conflict with your repeated suggestion that the fetus is a cluster of cells and part of a woman's body. By assigning special significance to it's disposal, it almost seems like there would be an emotional attachment to it. But it is not rational to be as emotionally attached to clusters of cells like ones hair, nor is it especially compelling if the dog eats my toenail clippings. If in fact the fetus is simply part of the woman's body that is hers to dispose of, why would it matter how it's disposed? So what I'm saying is that although the rest of the anecdote is moving, this part seems inconsistent with the overall argument of the paper.
Quote:
|
In addition, pro-lifers are particularly fond of quoting the Bible in order to back the notion that abortion is murder; however, these biblical references are far from convincing. The Bible does not expressly address abortion, but it does not prohibit it. In fact, if any evidence can be drawn from the Bible it would imply that abortion is not at all like murder. An example of this is in Exodus 21, where a man is sentenced to death for killing a woman; however, if he hits a pregnant woman, causing her to miscarriage, he is only fined. Such a light punishment is contradictory to the belief that aborting a fetus is murder (Currie 26).
|
Bible version is necessary, since we're talking about translations of translations. Unless your quoting Currie directly, then it should be in quotation marks, but if possible, the primary source is probably the best. Also, you might want to address
Genesis: 38.9 the infamous passage where a man is killed for contraception, which is awfully close, and argued by some theologians to cover abortion.
Quote:
|
Not only does the Bible illustrate how murder and abortion should not be viewed in the same light, but so do other manuscripts of other mainstream religions. In the Talmud, a Jewish script, it is stated that “the fetus is as the thigh of its mother”; that is, it is only a part of her body. Although cautioning against having abortions on a whim, many American Jewish leaders concur that abortion and murder are simply not the same thing. As a Catholic theologian visiting an abortion clinic reports, “I have held babies in my hands, and now I held this embryo. I know the difference” (Currie 26). In fact, as a universal rule, even present laws in the United States do not identify a fetus as a “person,” and murder is defined as killing someone already born. Hence, the pro-lifer’s argument against abortion because it is murder is moot.
|
One issue is that the Talmud is completely incompatible with the Christian Bible. Another little nitpick would be "who is the theologian, and why does anyone care?" The Pope is considered to be the official leader of the Catholic Church, and if "while sitting on his throne" meaning with the agreement of the Cardinals, he is infallible, so if he says abortion is bad, and another says it's ok, it has very little impact. If you could explain who the theologian is and why he matters, it would help your argument.