Paper short abstract:

This paper analyzes the controversy between pro-life and pro-choice groups during the debates of the legality of abortion performed in the cases of anencephalic fetus and examined by the Brazilian Supreme Court in 2012.

Paper long abstract:

Abortion is a crime under the Brazilian law except in two situations: when the life of the woman is threatened and in cases of rape. New pro-abortion rights policies tried by the federal government starting from 2008 with Lula De Silva's government, resulted in the mobilization of pro-life groups which aim to prevent the advancement of these policies. These groups have also been trying to reverse the two exceptions in the current Brazilian abortion law.

The Supreme Court judgment legalizing anencephalic fetus abortion and the accompanying pro-life mobilization exemplifies the actions of these groups in the Brazilian public arena, seeking to interfere in the decision-making process. Throughout the court case the agents linked to the Catholic Church and members of pro-life movements were articulated and positioned against the Court's action.

This paper observes how these agents sought to intervene in this judgment, their forms of organization and their repertoires of justifications. I analyze the strategies and measures used by these agents in the constitution of the argument against aborting anencephalic fetuses. The resulting justifications sought to be convincing in the public arena of discussions. To understand this dispute my analysis extends to understanding the broader controversy, identifying the repertoires of justifications produced by the agents and groups favorable to the lawsuit. This paper identifies elements of different orders - science, morality, religion and rights - in the discourses of these two blocks, as these discourses are mobilized and articulated in the actions and justifications of both sides.