Flikkema 1
Haley Flikkema
Mr. Negley
English 1010, 3A
December 1, 2013
Pro-life or Pro-choice
Abortion is an ongoing controversy surrounding its legal and moral status. The debate on
whether abortion should be legal dates as far back as the late 1800s. Laws have been passed and
revoked regarding abortion. It cannot be decided whether it is constitutional or not to pass a law
protecting the embryo. Some agree that abortion is a choice (now called pro-choice); while others
believe that abortion is taking the life of a human being (now called pro-life). Pro-choice believe that it is
nobody’s choice, but the woman’s and that they should be able to make the decision without question,
whereas pro-life believe that abortion is wrong and immoral and that the law should legally protect
against abortion.
I was curious about this long-debated controversial topic of society and wanted to find out a
little bit more about it and gain some insight to both sides of the topic. I researched and found two
articles online, both handling the pro-life side of the argument. However, my purpose in writing this
paper is not to convince you that abortion is either right or wrong, rather to analyze the rhetoric the
authors use to prove their point. After reading and examining an article by Erika Bachiochi and an article
by Patrick Lee and Robert P. George, I found Bachiochi’s argument to be more persuasive than Lee’s and
George’s. Bachiochi includes a wider viewpoint, talks about more than one topic, and appeals to the
emotions. In the end I found her argument to be the most persuasive.
Flikkema 2
After some research I found an academic entry titled How Abortion Hurts Women: The Hard
Proof, written by Erika Bachiochi. Being the author of The Cost of “Choice”: Women Evaluate the Impact
of Abortion, Erika is an expert on the subject of abortion. She has written multiple articles and a book on
abortion. She did much research in her college life. Erika actually started out as a pro-abortion when she
started in college. As she became more informed and learned more about the topic, she changed her
mind. In this article Bachiochi’s intent is to inform the public of the causes of abortion and not why it is
wrong only morally, but in other aspects, such as health. She uses solid evidence and facts to back up
her claims.
Bachiochi starts out her article by telling what the topic is and why it has been a hot topic for
such a long time. She tells the readers that she used to be pro-choice until she actually knew what an
abortion could cause physically, psychologically, and emotionally. Bachiochi used the follow the 1970’s
feminist fallacy that abortion is necessary for women’s well-being and independence. She then explains
that she later realized that medical evidence, sociological data, and the lived experience of many women
tell a different story: Abortion harms women physically, psychologically, relationally, and culturally. She
provides many facts on how abortion is linked to health problems. One of the main points she gives is
that abortion can cause breast cancer. She also explains that many women, post-abortion, were not
informed of the health risks and mental problems it could cause after. She goes on to explain the
morality issue and talking about how many women rely on this easy process just so they can fall into a
temptation. She describes that America’s reliance has relieved us of the costs of having to create an
environment for women and their children, but in such a rich country, why? Erika ends her article with
saying how women, who have aborted, have sacrificed far more.
The second article I have chosen is written by two highly educated authors. The first of two is
Patrick Lee who is a medical researcher and a professor at Dalhousie University. He obtains a PhD in
Flikkema 3
biochemistry, earning him the title Dr. Lee. The second author, Robert P. George is the professor of
jurisprudence at Princeton University and also a visiting professor at Harvard Law School. He also spent
a year at Oxford University where he worked on his book Making Men Moral: Civil Liberties and Public
Morality, published by Oxford University Press in 1993. Patrick Lee and Robert P. George collaborated
and then in July of 2001, they wrote the article The Stubborn Facts of Science: Human Embryos are
Human Beings. In this article it discusses how an embryo is a living human being and why it is wrong to
abort an embryo.
The article begins with the authors talking about how they did a critique against another man,
Ronald Bailey, who tried to say that the embryo is not a human being. At first Lee and George point out
that facts and evidence Bailey failed to see when he said that the embryo are not self-integrating human
beings. They also point out that Bailey did not use scientific research, but instead philosophical
assertions. In another point Lee and George go on to argue Bailey’s point that brain function is the
criterion of life and you must have that to be a human being. They describe that a human is a person
with worth, dignity, and rights exists as long as the living human being exists. Another point they bring
up to argue Bailey’s point is that we were all once, human embryos, and came to be what we now are.
The authors end the essay by stating their belief that whether you are religious or not, you are forced to
know that the embryo is, in fact, a human being.
In How Abortion Hurts Women: The Hard Proof, the first article, Bachiochi supports her
argument by utilizing an appeal to emotions. Bachiochi states, “Research shows that teenagers with a
family history of breast cancer who have abortions before their 18th birthday have an incalculably high
risk of developing breast cancer” (Bachiochi 9). By targeting the emotions, it makes the point more
powerful. Breast cancer has devastating effects on many women around the world and by placing this
in her article she puts emotion into effect. One is more likely to feel sympathetic and supportive of the
Flikkema 4
argument if they feel something about it. Throughout the article, Bachiochi utilizes this strategy to aid
her in supporting her point.
One of the strongest devices an author can use is facts. In this argument, Bachiochi proves her
points very well by using multiple credible sources throughout the course of her argument. For example
Bachiochi states, “The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) approximates that one
woman in 100,000 dies from complications associated with first-trimester abortions. A 1997 Study
reported in Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, however, found maternal deaths from abortion to be
grossly underreported to the CDC –probably because such reporting is entirely voluntary” (Bachiochi
11). By providing evidence from government sources, Bachiochi is showing the readers that abortion
really does cause complications. This helps the readers to think abstractly about the subject. It helps in
persuading the readers on her argument that abortion causes health complications. By the use of this
credible source, Bachiochi makes her argument all the more stronger.
In the second article, one of the most obvious rhetorical choices is Lee and George’s
sophisticated tone. They make many scientific statements and utilize complicated vocabulary. In one
example George states, “Unlike a corpse – which is merely the remains of what was once a human
organism but is now dead – an embryo is a unified, self-integrating human organism”. The usage of his
academic tone and education is persuasive to the reader. The reader is more likely to believe what is
being stated if the author sounds like they know what they are talking about. In this specific example the
reader is able to see that an embryo is an actual human being and it will help lead them to the fact that
abortion is wrong. The article consistently obtains this sophisticated tone and education used by Lee and
George, which helps the reader feel more convinced.
Another interesting way Lee and George portray their point is through the sentence structure.
The way the sentences are set up, it creates the sophisticated tone, another rhetorical choice used here.
Flikkema 5
George and Lee state, “Like sperm and ova, somatic cells, though they themselves are not distinct, selfintegrating human organisms (but are rather parts of other, larger human organisms), can contribute
constituents to a process that brings into being a new, distinct, self-integrating human organism – a
human embryo”. The way he sets up this sentence step by step, explaining that an embryo is a human,
instead of simply stating that an embryo is a human without evidence, it is believable. Lee’s and
George’s use of sentence structure further strengthens the point because it makes the article flow in
such a way that the reader is likely to be convinced.
While the author of one article, Erika Bachiochi, and the two others of another article, Patrick
Lee and Robert P. George both use logical reasoning and facts to persuade the reader, Bachiochi’s logic
is stronger. Lee’s and George’s argument focuses on the point that the embryo is a human being and is
therefore wrong to abort, whereas Bachiochi provides not only how it is wrong, but the effect it has on
the woman’s health. For example, “Women who have had abortions suffer an increased risk of anxiety,
depression, and suicide” (Bachiochi 7). Another example is when she talks about the risk of cancer. “The
more hotly contested link -though one supported by numerous epidemiological studies and breast
physiology -is that abortion itself can cause breast cancer” (Bachiochi 10). Bachiochi makes her
argument more persuasive by appealing to what is important to the woman rather than simply focusing
on the embryo issue.
Another way Bachiochi’s argument is stronger than Lee and George’s is her use of emotion. It is
more likely for the reader to be swayed if they feel some sort of emotion on the topic as opposed to just
getting facts. For example, Lee and George state, “Unlike a corpse -which is merely the remains of what
was once a human organism but is now dead -an embryo is a unified, self-integrating human organism”
(Lee & George 5).This does not appeal to the emotions. It is simply stating a fact of life. In Bachiochi’s
article she is more effective by her use of emotion. For example, she states “A study published in a
Flikkema 6
recent edition of the Journal of Anxiety Disorders found that women who aborted their unintended
pregnancies were 30 percent more likely to subsequently report all the symptoms of generalized anxiety
disorder than those women who had carried their unintended pregnancies to term” (Bachiochi 7).
Because Bachiochi has made an appeal to the woman’s emotions, the reader will feel more persuaded
by her argument.
Every individual has their own thoughts, or beliefs and morals about the world. Perhaps some of
these thoughts are based off of what their peers think and believe. The topic I have analyzed, abortion,
is very controversial and has been an indecisive subject for centuries. Each person is able to form their
own thought and take a stand on the right or wrong of abortion. However, in reality not many have
done their research. Many form an opinion based on what the vast majority around them agrees on.
Wanting to know more about the topic myself, I did my research and found two academic articles
discussing the topic. The point of these articles was to persuade the reader to take the same stand as
them. The author’s achieve their purpose through the rhetoric they use. It is important to be able to
analyze rhetoric to give you a clear understanding of what you are researching. It helps you realize the
importance of writing and the way it is done.