Like any controversial debate, abortion advocates and opposition alike, fashion themselves titles most becoming of their respective sides. The divisive camps, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice, make it difficult to pick a side. You’re either Anti-Life or Anti-Choice. I am a resident of the Anti-Choice camp.About a year ago, I sat in the Old Main Pit and talked to a friend of mine. He was undergoing an ideological shift from staunch conservative to radical liberal, as many college students do. He told me he was undecided about abortion, because he couldn’t agree with religion having a say in government. I gave him a secular reason to be Anti-Choice, and as far as I know, he still is.I told him I couldn’t endorse the Pro-Choice stance because it’s a violation of the government’s primary duty. The most fundamental tenant of any social contract is that the government upholds and defends the lives of its governed. Few would argue with that point. The friction I experience with many Pro-Choice advocates is “when life beings” and when said life is entitled to the rights and privileges of an American citizen. Again, I am not here to support Pro-Life, but to attack Pro-Choice.The following are arguments I was exposed to in support of abortion and my refutations to them.It is suggested, “a fetus of 12 weeks cannot in any way be compared to a fully-formed functioning person.” This argument leads me to assume that any organism unable to survive without of the assistance of another organism (specifically, the mother’s womb) does not possess its own life, and is therefore simply an extension of the will of the supporting organism. If one was to follow that particular brand of logic, then any organism that is 100% dependent on something else: comatose patients, the mentally ill or any other organism that is wholly dependent on another, is without rights, and able to be removed at the discretion of whomever is providing the care.My favorite is, “Constitutionally, a fetus has no rights of personhood. Most legal precedent in English law attributes personhood to the live born.” Until 1868, men of African descent were not considered persons with any legal rights or privileges in the United States. Until 1964, it was inconceivable to racially integrate public schools and restaurants. The female brain was known to be inferior to that of the male’s brain until this century. Only 88 years ago, women were awarded the right to vote. The same rights that now allow them to have abortions. Just because we do not assign rights to the unborn fetus, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have equal rights.I have known individuals to support abortion because children are not economically viable for large families or unmarried couples. They ask, “What good reason exists to create more mouths to feed and put single mothers at a disadvantage?” Personally, it is that reason that brought my father and brother into this world. That argument seems specific to me, however.After Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey, better known as Jane Roe, began volunteering for an abortion clinic. As it turned out, ironically, she had the child that was at the center of this case. Presently, Ms. McCorvey is a Pro-Life activist and Roman Catholic.