Abortion is the extraction of the human fetus from the mother's womb with an intention to end the life of that fetus prior to its natural birth. The controversy surrounding abortion is whether it should be legalized or not? In my opinion, abortion is morally and ethically wrong because it leads to violation of human rights. Life is precious and only it's Creator has the right to take it away.
I chose this issue for discussion to bring to light many of the hidden facts and arguments, of which people are unaware and not very sensitive today. Abortion is an issue lacking of humanity and moral value because of the various motives behind it. Abortion is the most extreme, permanent and devastatingly violent solution, for an unborn child. As said by former Surgeon General and a pediatrician Dr. Everett Koop, the most common reason for abortion is convenience.
Only three to five percent of all abortions performed are for reasons of rape, incest, the possibility of a deformed child, or severe threat to the life of the mother. Koop, has pointed out, the majority of partial birth abortions are not required by medical emergency.
According to researchers at the Alan Guttmacher Institute, of those obtaining abortions in , 30 percent were under age 20 and 79 percent were unmarried, which shows that abortions in the United States are most often sought as a "solution" to the problem of pregnancy outside of marriage. The major reason behind most of the abortions is mere inconvenience or unwantedness of the baby seems mean, insensitive and unreasonable. The main argument of the pro-choice view for legalized abortions has to do with a woman's right to privacy and her right to control her body.
The pro-choice viewers do not approve of governmental interference in personal matters like abortion. Certainly this right of privacy and choice is very important, but is it enough to override the fundamental right to life? The pro-life view believes that all living beings should be given equal protection under the law right from conception, i.
The right to life is the most basic and important right that we have and should be protected over the right to choose. Abortion is called a "choice".
What is really chosen is the killing of a human being. The large scale deaths that it resulted in forced the authorities and the world community to regard nuclear weapons more as weapons of mass destruction.
Looking at the things today there is great uncertainty that surrounds the world community. Delegates share tremendous diplomacy and look to make strategic allies with their back door policies, however the developments and the stress that the governments all around the world lay on nuclear weapons raises the eye brows of other major players.
While on one end of the spectrum the world community pledges of making the effective use of nuclear weapons that would exhibit a positive towards the humanity at large, the other end holds a rather negative connotation to it, which predominantly speaking is the terror, the establishment of power or in clear words the race to be on the top majorly in terms of power. With more and more countries being able to conceive different projects that would adequately nourish them with nuclear weapons, virtually a debate has made its way.
The debate broadly speaking talks about if these nuclear weapons act as a security or a threat. While the proponents of these term them to be a major breakthrough in making countries realize each other's value and respect them, the other side believes that it has widened the gap between the powerful and the less powerful.
The regular tests that these countries carry out remind their enemies of a possible attack and have created a sense of uncertainty among masses. However, would it be right to abandon all these? Would the destruction of nuclear weapons make the world a peaceful place to live in? Would it be justified to interrupt those who are in a transition stage towards nuclear weapons? Another most important question is that would it be possible to actually stop these from being developed in future?
All these questions lets one's mind get going all around but in a nutshell with lesser these weapons it is more likely that humanity would be at peace. Not having to worry about a bomb destroying the entire city or a community would certainly make people enjoy their lives to a much larger extent. In the past Republic of South Africa has set an example by destroying its nuclear weapons after having successfully made and tested it.
Other countries should also follow their course and should pledge that they will stay committed to make the humanity safe and not just their own country or state.
It is important that every one of us realize each other's important and respect them on basis of humanity and not on power status, for nuclear weapons have over the years proved to be a power determining factor rather than a securing one. When we hear the term politician the primary meaning that comes to our mind is that he may be a man of honor who may have a criminal record especially in the case of developing countries like India or Pakistan.
Another meaning which hits us is it may be a son of a king who has a right to rule because of the kingdom created by their forefathers as they were a ruling party of a certain area where they got elected because of the public's mercy. This kind of situation is common in many countries like Pakistan, especially after Pakistan got independence in The irony is that we see politicians begging for votes every time during elections, promising that they'll bring change, there are popular slogans being chanted and false hopes are created amongst the people.
Every time after elections all hopes are shattered when there is an eye opener and people realize that they have made a mistake and elected the wrong person. Moreover there is always the rigging in elections which overrules all efforts to bring about even a sort of democratic government.
It is the mango people that need to be protected from the evils of these politicians and maybe these people lack the ability to identify the right politician or is it the political seat itself which corrupts every individual every time they are given some power as a politician. If there is a lack in our own abilities, action can be taken to decide wisely when electing a politician.
However if it is the case of corrupting power that politicians have then I guess we can hang these politicians but if we accept that it is we that elected him or her then shouldn't we hang ourselves too?
It was the choice of people that the individual came into power and got corrupt hence we are ina way responsible as well. That individual was also someone from the society, from our culture, our background and has some what the same values as us. Hence his thought process is not much different from ours as he has evolved from us.
However when he has it all and turns into a corrupt politician who has millions of dollars in a Swiss bank account he is no longer the normal human amongst us who used to think about the basic necessities in life.
It is difficult to only blame one individual for the corruption, because it is hard to ignore that there is something wrong with the whole hierarchy. This whole political hierarchy consists of an individual who thinks about the betterment of the quality of life and he gets promoted and he thinks of this more extensively and finally he realizes that just being in the hierarchy makes you corrupt. Hence it is our own behavior that we should assess, like for example whenever we go to a local government officer to get our work completed on the grounds that we are from the public and he is a public servant don't we bribe him for our own ease and convenience?
Hence the corruption is not only in the hierarchy it is within us. We are the citizens that provoke or allow the government officials to get corrupt; we motivate them through our actions by giving them benefits which they cannot otherwise receive. Hence in conclusion it can be said that we first have to correct and mend our own ways by not being corrupt and then as a society try and work towards a common goal of socio economic betterment.
- The Controversial Issue of Abortion Abortion is a very controversial issue in society today. Some people think that abortion is a good idea to solve problems and that it is justified yet the Catholic Church would argue this .
The Controversial Issue of Abortion Abortion is a very controversial issue in society today. Some people think that abortion is a good idea to solve problems and that it is justified yet the Catholic Church would argue this .
Jun 11, · When you are given an assignment to write a controversial essay, you have to find the right topic. We hope our list of controversial essay topics will be helpful for you while choosing the issue for your writing. Essay on Abortion: A Social and Moral Issue. Abortion is one of the most controversial topics of this generation. Abortion is the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of a pregnancy.
1 Sample Essay #11 Abortion is the most controversial issue having no grounds of agreement among two polar aspects. The argument is life and death though. 3 sample controversial essays for you on 1. Should We Allow Minor Marriages? 2. Should we destroy all Nuclear Weapons? 3. Should we hand All Corrupt Politicians?