At the heart of women’s rights discourse in 2023 lay a polarizing matter: reproductive rights. Across the globe, the topic fuels political and social debates, sparking discussions revolving around women’s autonomy and ethical considerations. When examining abortion rights, two disputing wings are typically presented: pro-choice and pro-life. However, beyond political distinctions, the long-standing abortion debate is one of deeply ingrained moral convictions.

In 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of the right to choose in Roe vs. Wade, only to overturn that very verdict in 2022 by allowing abortion bans in states that choose to carry them out. As of July 2023, there are fourteen states with abortion bans, as well as persistent arguments regarding the right to choose, life, conception, religion, safety, the constitution, and ethics. Intertwined are the issues of law and morality–words that are not interchangeable but are frequently conflated nonetheless. 

It can be safely said that the United States is divided when it comes to stances on abortion, with 55% of U.S. adults identifying as “pro-choice,” 39% “pro-life,” and 5% in a greyer area, according to a 2022 Gallup poll. 

Those who advocate for the right to choose often support their beliefs with the notion that individuals should be allowed to do as they wish, as famously captured by the slogan: “My Body, My Choice.” The sentiment generally argues that abortion bans infringe upon a person’s bodily autonomy, as well as constitutional rights. Meanwhile, “pro-lifers” maintain that abortions are morally wrong, often believing them to be murderous, and should therefore be utterly prohibited. For proponents, justice is generally thought about from the perspective of the unborn.

What is notable about these arguments is that they do not inherently oppose each other – “pro-choice” does not equate to being “pro-abortion.” A 2017 Gallup poll found that although approximately 48% of the American population believed abortions to be “morally wrong,” only 20% felt they should be subsequently illegalized. This is likely due to the instance that, while one may not want to have an abortion themselves, they feel that the option should be available to those who require or desire it.

The complexity of the abortion debate becomes evident when considering the diversity of opinions within each camp. The pro-life movement feels strongly about making them inaccessible to all. Opinions held by anti-abortionists are often rooted in religious beliefs. For example, Heartbeat International, a Christian, anti-abortion organization, quotes Biblical lines on its website and interprets them in a manner that appears to support the pro-life narrative. In contrast, the Union for Reform Judaism states that “the decision to terminate a pregnancy is one that, in all circumstances, should ultimately be made by the individual within whose body the fetus is growing” (ReformJudaism.org). Various other faiths and communities also grapple with their stances on abortion, which often include thoughts relating to when exactly life genuinely begins and frequently ensues disputes about conception versus birth. But in the end, no one thinks the same.

Addressing justice in the context of reproductive rights requires an understanding of the factors that influence individual perspectives. Cultural, religious, and social backgrounds all play a role in shaping such beliefs. Because of this, there is simply no feasible way to form a consensus among massive populations. In this context, morals become an issue of subjectivity: we cannot decide what is morally right, for we do not all think and act the same. Despite this, it was decided nonetheless–by nine Supreme Court justices who struck down “My Body, My Choice” in the United States after nearly 50 years of legal abortions.

SCOTUS justices act in accordance with the laws upon which America was founded. Although the Constitution of the United States says nothing regarding reproductive rights, the 1973 decision was justified by the protection of privacy stated in the Fourteenth Amendment. It makes us wonder how a decision so significant can be overturned if the same constitution was examined during each evaluation. Nevertheless, it is essential to note that these government officials are (supposedly) judging by law, not by what is necessarily “right.”

So, what is right? The closest we can get to a consensus is a compromise. Aside from the fact that banning abortions only increases unsafe ones, bans also act in favor of subjective beliefs and particular faiths, thereby disregarding any and all differing values. In a nation known for freedom and liberty, this is highly self-contradictory. 

Is justice really for all? As of now, personal autonomy for women in the United States is in the hands of five justices who voted against it, four of which were men. Looking at it closely, we can see that choice is a term that encapsulates various personal beliefs: it is a gray area of inclusivity. That is because it advocates even for those who would vow to never terminate their own pregnancy, as well as those whose life an abortion could save. 

The fight for reproductive rights reminds us that justice is not solely defined by legality and politics. It is instead a path navigated by finding what is just for all.