Analysis: A Defense Of Abortion By Judith Jarvis Thomson

Charlotte Taft once said “Women who have abortions do so because they value life and because they take very seriously the responsibilities that come not just with birth, but with nurturing a human being”. The Editorial Board at The New York Times believes in this statement as well. The Editorial Board published an editorial on June 27, 2016 titled “A major Victory for Abortion Rights”. The article published, is about a change in Texas 's anti-abortion law and is intended for woman who can or will bear children. The editorial was created to persuade these women that if another woman who is pregnant and cannot keep the unborn child or does not want to keep the child, that these women should have the right to abort the embryo or fetus legally.

If life was not started at conception in these cases and scientifically the unborn child could not be having any thoughts or actions running through the brain the argument would be stronger to persuade the anti-abortion side. Personally, taking away an unborn living thinking fetus’s rights just because we cannot hear them or see them physically does not seem justified. In case eight I do not see how women can just say “well it is nice of me to share my body so I will or I will not because I don’t have to,” when they have a person breathing and thinking inside of them that could be the next inventor or great doctor of the world. For Thompson to be more persuasive to the opposing side she should try discounting life at conception and arguing how the fetus can not have thoughts, therefore it cannot have desires or rights because the unborn person is 100% reliant on its mother and therefore her right has to superior to the unborn child because this fetus cannot perform one single task without the help of its

As humans, we are given different rights that are meant to provide us with a chance at a good life. However, these rights can become compromised when it comes to conflicts between a pregnant woman and her fetus. The right of the fetus to live is seen as inferior to the right of the mother to have an abortion. Although each of the rights is different, it is not appropriate to say that one citizen’s rights are more superior than another citizen’s rights.

Abortion is not only a fluctuating concept in our society, but an ethical and emotional debate, as well. The image I have chosen presents concepts from a cultural and historical background, as well as presents an ethical, emotional, and logical appeal to the audience. The debate about abortion has simply been overblown and exhausted. The truth of the matter is, abortion is murder. Ending a life, whether innocent or guilty, is murder.

With almost half the nation divided among their views, abortion remains one of the most controversial topics in our society. Since Roe v. Wade, our views in society as well as following court cases have been progressing toward the woman’s right to choose. The precedent set by Roe v. Wade made the Supreme Court acknowledge that it cannot rule specifically when life begins and it also affirms that it is the woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th Amendment. In the 1st Amendment, the Establishment Clause forbids the government from passing laws “which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another”. Many Christian pro-lifers use their religious beliefs to dispute when life begins.

Patrick Lee and Robert George assert that abortion is objectively immoral. One of Lee and George’s main reason for coming to this conclusion is that human embryos are living human beings. This essentially validates that abortion is indeed the process of killing a human. Another main point said by the two is a rebuttal to a common argument used in favor of abortion, which states that a potential mother has full parental responsibilities only if she has voluntarily assumed them. The rebuttal to this was that the potential mother does indeed have special responsibilities to raise the child.

According to the WHO, there are an estimated 40-50 million abortions every year around the globe. The dictionary definition for abortion is ‘the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy’, and people usually very absolutist about their stances regarding this topic. The two sides of the argument are those who are pro-choice or pro-life. The pro-choice side argue that it is the free will of the parent/s to decide on how to handle the pregnancy as unplanned pregnancies could mean a detrimental life for both the parent/s and the baby as the parent/s may not have the resources to support and take care of the baby, or are not ready for such big change and responsibility. On the other hand, the pro-life side argue that life begins at conception

The Death with Dignity Act has two arguments: those who believe we have the right to choose how and when we die, and those who believe we do not possess that right; that we should not interfere with the natural order of life. Every year, people across America are diagnosed with a terminal illness. For some people there is time: time to hope for a cure, time to fight the disease, time to pray for a miracle. For others however, there is very little or no time. For these patients, their death is rapidly approaching and for the vast majority of them, it will be a slow and agonizing experience.

Judith Thomson’s A Defense of Abortion is an article defending abortion on the grounds of rights, duties, and justice. Thomson uses various thought experiments to represent different circumstances surrounding a pregnancy and the permissibility of abortion in these circumstances. One such thought experiment that she uses in her argument is the burglar example. If you open a window and a burglar climbs into your house, anti-abortionists would argue that the burglar has a right to stay in your house and you have a duty to shelter him because you are partially responsible for his presence there. Even if you install bars specifically to keep out burglars and the burglar still manages to break in then you are still partially responsible and he still

I. I believe in the inviolability of human life II. I am absolutely disagree the elective abortion for personal or social convenience. A. All of us should not submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange such abortions. III. The word abortion by definition means the ending of pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo before it can survive outside the uterus.

Throughout the article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives”, her thesis statement is clear. Joanne believes that people should be allowed to donate their kidneys even if people believe that it is “morally wrong.” Throughout her entire article she restates her opinion that people should be able to sell kidney’s without consequences. In the article, she states why people believe that it shouldn’t be legal as well as people who do believe that it should be legal. Most people believe that it shouldn’t be legal for one reason, that it is morally wrong.

In “A Defense of Abortion,” Judith Thomson argues with a unique approach regarding the topic of abortion. For the purpose of the argument, Thomas agrees to go against her belief and constructs an argument based on the idea that the fetus is a person at conception. She then formulates her arguments concerning that the right to life is not an absolute right. There are certain situations where abortion is morally permissible. She believes that the fetus’s right to life does not outweigh the right for the woman to control what happens to her own body.

There are two sides to this debate in which individuals identify themselves as either “pro-choice” or “pro-life.” Supporters classify themselves as pro-choice, and argue “that choosing abortion is a right that should not be limited by governmental or

Annotated Bibliography "Abortion ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.

Philippa Foot presented a series of moral dilemmas when she discussed abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect. One famous problem of her was the trolley dilemma: “..he is the driver of a runaway tram which he can only steer from one narrow track onto another; five men are working on one track and one on the other; anyone the tack he enters is bound to be killed.” (Foot, 1967, p. 2) What should the driver do? Despite what he does, he will harm someone!1