The Cherry Orchard by Anton Checkov portrays the stark contrast between the ideals of the past and present, between aristocratic ideals and the values of the new middle class. In my opinion the character of Lubov encapsulates this contrast perfectly. (She once belonged to category of the aristocrats but now occupies the position of the middle class due to her extravagant and lavish lifestyle in Paris.)

One contemporary contrast of ideals between the past and the present that comes to mind is that of abortion. (More specifically, pro-life or pro-choice)  Initially abortion was looked at as a sin. It has been argued, that choosing to abort is the equivalent of murder. The primase for this argument lies in the fact that we are indeed taking away the future of an individual being. Much like what one would do if one were to commit homicide.  In the past, several biblical references have also been made to support this claim (Genesis 1:26-279:6). However in recent times there have been several counter arguments that state that abortion is a choice. A choice that should be left wholly to the bearer of fetus (the mother).  Judith Thompson famously argued in her 1971 “A Defense of Abortion”: If I must use your kidney to stay alive, do I have a right to your kidney? No, and you don’t violate my rights if you don’t let me use it and I die. This shows that the right to life is not a right to bodies of others, even if those bodies are necessary for our lives.

The issue of abortion, has most definitely been a burning one which has contrasting ideals between the past (pro-life) and present (pro-choice) (Nobis, N. (n.d.)). As for me, I believe that the only solution is to leave the choice to the individual. I believe the decision to bring a child into the world is one that requires great thought and planning. It is not one that should be forced on anyone. But hey, that is just one opinion in the myriad of others on the internet. I would love to hear yours. Feel free to comment below.

I would also like to address an interesting topic brought up by Miss. Echo in the comment section. While it is true that the anti- abortion rage is still strong in some places I believe it so with most conflicts between the past and the present. For example, one of my classmates rightly brought up the topic of homosexuality in her blog posts (Vamika). I think we can agree that homosexuality although it is more accepted in modern society, there are places and people who are still very anti- homosexual. For example in India an act was passed (popularly known as section 377 ) which made homosexuality a crime punishable by imprisonment.  Therefore I think for any contentious topic there will always be those who have a primitive school of thought. Thus making it difficult to categorize the contrasting views on the topic into the past and the present.



Nobis, N. (n.d.). The Ethics of Abortion. Retrieved April 4, 2016, from


One thought on “Pro-life or Pro-choice?

  1. Personally I’m absolutely pro-choice. A fetus is not yet a life in the early months of pregnancy. But coming back to the question of the conflict between past and present, do you think the two sides of the struggle can be clearly categorized into the past and the present? The anti-abortion rage is still strong in some places, and there is no evidence that it will die away inevitably.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s