Those who are pro-choice sometimes claim that creating legislation to protect the unborn means imposing personal morals on the public at large.
This point may initially sound as if it has merit, until one looks at the issue closer.
One of the great things about democracy is that each person is able to adhere to his or her own set of beliefs and morals, without interference from the government.
However, having one’s own personal code of morals does not provide an exemption from the most basic morals that have been agreed upon in society.
The fact that taking an innocent life is wrong is not that novel of an idea, nor one exclusive to any particular country. There is actually overwhelmingly agreement on this – the right to life is a fundamental, universal right, not a right subject to change depending on where that life may be located.
Restricting the practice of abortion (the intentional ending of a human life) is not inconsistent with other existing laws. There are plenty of laws in place that make it illegal for innocent life to be taken.
Does this mean that those laws are imposing morals as well?
Whatever your answer may be to this question, the fact is that society has long ago agreed that coming together in an effort to set basic guidelines for human interaction is preferable to anarchy.
It is obvious that some moral issues are not relative, but in fact absolute.
Taking a human life is wrong in every instance.
Image from www.nativevillage.org