The way in which rhetorical strategies are constructed in the controversy over abortion in Brazil is discussed. The analysis focuses on two documents: the Minister Marco Aurélio's injunction in 2004, which authorized termination of anencephalic pregnancy, and the Federal Attorney General's opinion, which was against this decision. The methodology consisted of interpreting the strategic resources of the arguments for and against legalization of abortion. The arguments in favor were sustained in the rhetoric of valuing the lives of pregnant women who would have more interests to be protected than such fetuses would, since the women's lives are biographically invested, while investment in the lives of such fetuses would only be of biological nature. The arguments against have constructed rhetoric defending the fetus's life because it belongs to the human species. The analysis indicates that the overlapping of religious values in evaluating reproductive rights encumbers the implementation of women's healthcare.
Rhetoric; Anencephaly; Abortion; Women's healthcare