The article"Putting Women Back in the Abortion Debate" by Ellen Willis makes a strong case for a fresh strategy in the abortion discussion that emphasizes the experiences and viewpoints of women. Her target audience is mostly individuals who are debating abortion, especially those who have historically been marginalized from the discussion, such as women and pro-choice activists. Willis' article aims to reframe the discussion by demonstrating how women's viewpoints and experiences are essential to comprehending the root of the issue.
The phrase "bringing women back in the argument" is one rhetorical device Willis employs to further her objective. This phrase is used frequently in the article to highlight the numerous points and theories that
…show more content…
She asserts that she can push herself and alter the shame and stigma around the problem by telling her own story and encourage others to do the same. Willis writes, "The shame and silence surrounding abortion is violence against women, a brutality that tends to further silence women," suggesting that these narratives are themselves a form of violence (Willis, 2007). Willis contributes to the de-stigmatization of the subject and fosters a more sympathetic and compassionate understanding of abortion by sharing both her own and other people's …show more content…
For example, she addresses the assumption that a fetus has a right to life by arguing that this right cannot be absolute, since it would lead to ridiculous consequences. She writes: "If the right to life is absolute, then no woman has the right to remove a fetus from her body, even if it is threatening her life. Clearly, this is an unreasonable conclusion" (Willis, 2007) . By employing logical reasoning, Willis is able to highlight the weaknesses in the anti-abortion arguments, as well as expand the reasoning he utilizes when addressing abortion, as well as persuade his audience that a more nuanced and empathic approach to abortion is needed.
Marian Faux is an author deeply engaged in writing about the basic personal matters of modern times. Her previous book, Childless by Choice, discussed the advantages and disadvantages of bearing children, and the effects that the legalization of abortion had on premature mothers. Yet, she channelled her visions of abortion into another book, Roe v Wade: The Untold Story of the Landmark Supreme Court Decision That Made Abortion Legal, where she not only, in depth, told the complete process of the Supreme Court case “Roe v Wade”, but also analyzed the worldwide aftermath of the decision, and the changes it brought in society. Prior to this effort, Faux attempted to summarize the subject of abortion into one book, in which, she claimed that “Abortion
When Gianna Jenson addresses the argument that abortion should be legal for support of women’s rights, she states “if legalizing abortion is about women’s rights, where were my rights as a female when my brain desperately tried to search for oxygen while the saline solution was supposed to kill me before I could even think.” This strong rebuttal to the argument makes the audience think, if abortion is in women’s rights, why isn’t the baby allowed those same basic rights, or even the right of survival? Again, Gianna puts the topic of standing up for your rights into perspective for the audience by saying, “how much are you willing to take and how much are you willing to risk to speak the truth in love and in graciousness, to stand up and at least be willing to be hated, or at the end of the day is it all about you, or me?” In other words, Jenson asks the audience how far they will go to stand up for what they believe in, because she went as far as delivering a speech about the topic to the public. This provokes the audience to wonder if their arguments were valid enough and if their personal thoughts are strong enough to be fought
A great number of women today are facing the issue unplanned pregnancies. Abortion is one of the most controversial issues in the world today. Valerie Tarico, the author of the article, “I Am Pro-Abortion, Not Just Pro-Choice: 10 Reasons Why We Must Support the Procedure and the Choice,” challenges to address issues that women face when going through an abortion. In her article, Tarico uses rhetorical strategies such as ethos, pathos and repetition to make her argument inducing. In her text, she addresses the common issues around abortion, arguing that abortion should be allowed, and is the right thing to do.
Rather than stating the argument, Willis poses it as a question, “Are the fetuses the moral equivalent of born human beings?” (Abortion Debate 76), thus showing how modern feminists can only support one side of the argument in their chosen stance, and cause limitations by doing so. In doing so, Willis shows how to some “extent… we objectify our enemy and define the terms of our struggle as might makes right, the struggle misses its point” (Ministries of Fear 210), which implies that feminists have completely missed the point of the argument by getting caught up in an answer. Rather than looking for a compromise or gray area, they exert their stance as the only solution that woman can have. Willis also shows how feminists fundamentally “see the primary goal of feminism as freeing omen from the imposition of so called ‘male values’, and creating an alternative culture based on ‘female values’”
She portrays the distressed women arriving at “she thought was a comprehensive health care provider near her home in Columbus, Ohio”. When arriving the doctors told her not to abort her baby, causing her to land in a crisis pregnancy center. These non-profit organizations work to “obstruct women’s access to abortion”. Meaghan Winter utilizes this anecdote to shed light on a disheartening situation, opening the reader’s eyes to what is truly happening to women across the globe. She employ pathological appeal by emphasizing the corner many women are metaphorically jammed in,” when providers like Planned Parenthood are shut down” and how “they leave low-income women with few alternatives for reproductive and preventive health care”.
In the summer of 2013, Texas senator Wendy Davis stood on her feet for thirteen hours (with no restroom breaks) to fight against a bill that would close numerous abortion clinics in Texas. During the filibuster, Davis presented an important question: “What purpose does this bill serve? And could it be, might it just be a desire to limit women's access to safe, healthy, legal, constitutionally-protected abortions in the state of Texas?” (Bassett, “Wendy Davis …”). For centuries women have struggled for adequate access to birth control and resorted to abhorrent means of abortion when they face unwanted pregnancies.
Pamela Cross is an advocate and a public policy director. Her sponsorship to the Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA) has influenced her to become a representative for women’s equality, empowerment and sexual health education. In the article “Abortion in Canada: Legal but Not Accessible” (2009), Cross’s main objective is to spread her advocacy and thoughts on abortion to ensure social action towards supporting women’s rights. In addition, her article goes in depth with the many barriers that women face when accessing the medical procedure of abortion. Cross’s main argument in her article is: although abortion has been legalized for many years, services remain inadequate and uncertain about the procedure of abortion.
Rhetorical Analysis of “When Abortion Suddenly Stopped Making Sense” Imagine being presented with an unplanned child and you are analyzing the options; people all around you are screaming one of two choices. Those options are to keep the baby- your own flesh and blood- or get an abortion, both of which promote arguments within this country. Because of this controversial topic, people have been categorized into “pro life” and “pro choice” groups who support completely opposite values. In “When Abortion Suddenly Stopped Making Sense”, written and published in January 2016 in The National Review, Frederica Mathewes-Green successfully persuades citizens advocating for or against abortion about why she changed her perspective by utilizing personal
When it comes to abortion, a lot can be said. More specifically, author and philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson takes her own stand on abortion, saying it is morally permissible to get abortions. Morally, I disagree with her stance on this. The reason I think this way is because I feel that there were other options open to us, than the main one being abortion. These other options, I feel are better and have better outcomes for the child than abortion.
On the night of January 27, 1973, women across America celebrated their right to choose. and on the night of June 24, 2022, women across the world were devastated when their right to choose was taken away. Roe V. Wade was passed in the 70s as a right to an abortion and the right to privacy and in 2022 it was overturned and made it a state choice, instead of a woman’s. This article covers The passing of Roe V. Wade, the impact it had on women, and the overturning of Roe V. Wade Abortion was illegal in most states in the 1960s, often with no exceptions for cases of rape or threat to life.
Abortion has been one of the most controversial political topics worldwide throughout history. One of the biggest, if not the most significant argument in the longing debate of abortion versus morality. Deep diving into Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion, I will be breaking down and evaluating her analogies regarding abortion of why I agree she succeeds in showing what she intended for the defense of pro-choice abortion. First and foremost Thomson states right off the bat for the sake of argument despite her disagreement with the premise, she is going to agree that yes a fetus is a person from the moment of conception (Thomson 48). I feel it is essential to acknowledge this because in most instances this would make arguing a pro-choice
In today’s society, abortion is a controversial topic. Many people dispute if it is moral to eliminate the potential of the unborn fetus or if it is fair to force the parent to keep and raise the baby if the parent isn’t ready. In Sallie Tisdale’s We Do Abortions Here: A Nurse’s Story, the author uses imagery and internal conflict to recreate her experiences as a nurse employed at an abortion hospital. She does this to make her audience understand her and the people who work in abortion hospitals’ perspective.
Abortion remains one of the most controversial issues in our society today. Pro-life supporters are those who are against abortion and who believe abortion is in all cases wrong. Pro-choice supporters are those who are in favor of abortion and who believes that whatever a woman does with her body is her choice. Patricia Bauer and Don Marquis are both scholars who wrote in depth articles explaining their views on abortion in an effort to spur their audience into action. Even though the both share same views, they use different and strong rhetorical strategies, mainly logos, ethos, and pathos, to get their message across their audience and to show the effectiveness and seriousness of their arguments.
Before Roe v. wade the number of deaths from illegal abortions was around 5000 and in the 50s and 60s the number of illegal abortions ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. These illegal abortions pose major health risks to the life of the woman including damage to the bladder, intestines as well as rupturing of the uterus. The choice to become a mother must be given to the woman most importantly because it’s her body, her health, and she will be taking on a great responsibility. A woman’s choice to choose abortion should not be restricted by anyone; there are multiple reasons why abortion will be the more sensible decision for the female.
In “A Defense of Abortion,” Judith Thomson argues with a unique approach regarding the topic of abortion. For the purpose of the argument, Thomas agrees to go against her belief and constructs an argument based on the idea that the fetus is a person at conception. She then formulates her arguments concerning that the right to life is not an absolute right. There are certain situations where abortion is morally permissible. She believes that the fetus’s right to life does not outweigh the right for the woman to control what happens to her own body.