ARCS, Chapter 3

The issue of the acceptability and legality of abortion continues to pervade the effectiveness of discourse in the American political system. As ARCS discusses, the issue lies in the lack of statsis within the arguments conducted by officials that continue to discuss the issue.

As the book lays out the points made throughout each argument, it becomes clear that politicians and activists are not discussing the same issue. As it states on page 81:

"Stasis Achieved: Rhetors Can Now Agree to Disagree
A. Abortion is murder
B. Abortion is not murder."

The issue here is that the argument made by opposing political parties looks a little more like this:

"A. Abortion is murder
B. Women have the right to decide what happens to their bodies, including terminating a pregnancy."

The result is two arguments that are not in stasis; as ARCS demonstrates, no one in the pro-choice camp will argue, "Abortion is not murder," and no pro-life camp will state, "a woman has no right to decide what happens to her body." Since the parties will not argue the same facts, it can be stated that no solution will ever come to this argument; no two of the same argument will be made, and people will always disagree.

Ultimately, the issue with lack of stasis in this argument lies with the inability of either party to accept that "agreeing to disagree" is an acceptable compromise. This is additionally problematic, since a lack of definitive conclusion on the issue makes it difficult to formulate policy to regulate abortion in the first place.