The state and national government should have absolutely no say on the issue of abortion. In a country where we are promised basic freedoms such as the freedom of speech, it is absurd that some argue that a woman does not have the freedom to choose whether or not cells from her body can be removed. Although legal, abortion has been confronted with a flood of litigation. In the United States, state laws banning abortion were struck down in 1973 by the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade. This ruling has not been met without controversy. Although the central holding of Roe v. Wade has remained intact, subsequent decisions such as Webster v. Reproductive Health Services and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey have weakened it.
             A woman's right to choose is exactly that: a right. I know that I should follow the laws in this country, but does that mean I do not have the right to break them? When a doctor suggests that surgery is the only option, do we always follow his orders? In both cases, we take the advice into consideration and then personally reach a decision. In the judicial case, we know that society reflects poorly on those who break the law. Thus, it is in our best interest to follow these laws. In the medical case, we know that doctors, at times, make an error in judgment and thus we choose to receive a second opinion It is this right to choose that separates human beings from other organisms. Lower level organisms rely on instinct to determine their actions. If they feel hunger, they eat. If they are tired, they sleep. If they need to remove bodily wastes, they do so. Humans, on the other hand, have the ability to make informed decisions on these basic features of life. These decisions have helped to mold our society to the form it currently holds. Negating this basic right to choose would undermine a long history of social cognitive reasoning.
             In the current issue of Time Mag...