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. This, however, does not mean that she agrees that in all situations the choice to have an abortion wouldn’t be self- centered or callous. To begin, she gives examples for why the right to life of …show more content…
She argues that with this situation you are aware of risk of becoming pregnant, and with this risk you are accepting the “invitation” of having a fetus to use your body. She thinks you have responsibility for the fetus even though it was not your intention to become pregnant. Going back to her main argument, this would be violating the right to life, as depriving a fetus of its right to life when it has permission to use your body would be unjust killing. I do think that voluntary sex entails giving permission to a fetus to use the woman’s body. I agree with Thomas that even though you may give yourself as much protection as possible during consensual sex, if the sperm enters and causes a pregnancy, you were still completely aware of this consequence. The “awareness” is why I think the child should have permission to use the woman’s body for its right to life. If a person feels so strongly about not wanting to have any chance of becoming pregnant, then that person should not participate in consensual sex. It is unjust to kill a fetus just because it was the unwanted result of your risky actions. To further explore the violinist example, if there was a tiny chance of getting …show more content…
I formulated this decision comparing my stance on why having consensual sex should result in permission of the fetus to use a woman’s body. Consensual sex isn’t a necessary act of survival like walking outside would be. Consensual sex is merely based off on wanting to experience a form of pleasure. The need for this pleasure is a weak justification to deny usage of another body when the fetus requires it. In other words, you can completely cut consensual sex out of your life with ease, and avoid the controversy over allowing permission for a fetus to grow. In contrast, I think that in order to survive and experience life’s capacity you must be able to walk outside. This dire need is strong enough to make it okay to deny permission to the violinist. Life would not be worth living if walking outside was avoided. Life would still be worth living without consensual sex because life’s other pleasures would still remain that wouldn’t possibly result in depriving someone else’s the ability to live. All in all, walking outside is unavoidable and necessary making it morally okay to repeatedly take a chance getting attached to a violinist and denying permission every time- if you
Essay On Why Abortion Is Immoral This article called “Why Abortion Is Immoral” written by Don Marquis argues and why abortion is prima facie impermissible. Marquis accesses both anti-abortion arguments and also pro-choicer’s claim to protect the legalization of abortion. My paper is going to understand and examine the the both sides arguments, and to attempt to recognize abortion is immoral.
In A Defense of Abortion Thompson presents an argument against the morality of abortion by showing the superiority of women’s rights through several different analogous cases. The case of focus will be case eight, “ A Selfless Brother’s Box of Chocolates.” In scenario one, Thompson argues that an older brother has a box of chocolates while his younger brother has nothing; the question of appeal is does the younger brother automatically have a right to these chocolates? The box of chocolates represents a woman’s body while the younger brother represents the fetus. Although it would be nice for the older brother (mother) to share his box of chocolates (mothers body) he is not obligated to share them with anyone even if he is perceived as a selfish, greedy, or a stingy person.
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.
Before Roe v. wade the number of deaths from illegal abortions was around 5000 and in the 50s and 60s the number of illegal abortions ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. These illegal abortions pose major health risks to the life of the woman including damage to the bladder, intestines as well as rupturing of the uterus. The choice to become a mother must be given to the woman most importantly because it’s her body, her health, and she will be taking on a great responsibility. A woman’s choice to choose abortion should not be restricted by anyone; there are multiple reasons why abortion will be the more sensible decision for the female.
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.
Rosalind Hursthouse in her paper Virtue Theory and Abortion, handles with the moral standpoint of abortion from a virtue ethics perspective. Her research is directed towards investigating whether or not an abortion is something a virtuous person would do. Hursthouse examines the morally relevant considerations and in so doing, she rejects the standard questions used to determine the morality of an abortion such as the status of the fetus, and the rights of a women. The morally relevant considerations she sees fit to assess the moral legitimacy of an abortion are concerns with family relationship, personal circumstance, and basic biological facts. Through her considerations, Hurthouses account of virtue ethics gives us adequate moral advice in regards to the question of abortion.
Argumentative Analysis of Abortion Rights Abortion is a controversial topic and people have debated between “Pro-Choice”, a woman’s right to choose, as well as “Pro-Life”, strictly anti-abortion, for decades. For Abortion Rights Action Week, a Harvard College newspaper printed an opinion-based article by Tanya Luhrmann called, The Pro-Choice Argument. She claims that a priceless part of a human life is experiencing motherhood. Based on Luhrmann’s research, she presents a strongly reasoned argument between “Pro-Choice” and “Pro-Life”, and how the perspectives of both sides affects the irreplaceable relationship of a mother and child.
This same way of thinking means that a fetus has no choice or ability to make decision when it comes to whose womb they inhabit as a result of failed contraception. Again, I am not arguing that abortion would not be morally permissible in the case of failed contraception but I am saying that there are key differences in intent and rational capacities between a malicious burglar and an unknowing fetus that weaken this analogy. Thomson also says that a burglar who breaks in should not have a right to stay in your house. While this is true, there are very few cases where a burglar will stay in your house if there intent is to steal something and get away. Staying in the house would be irrational if they want to get away with the crime.
VIII. Abortion is a really serious thing and should only be pondered after the persons involved have considered other alternatives such as give it to the other persons that in need of a baby as adoption. IX. I don’t believe that the abortion argument should be about rights, but about potentiality. X.
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.
Doris Gudino Professor Chounlamountry Political Science 1 27 July 2015 Pro-Choice Anyone? A woman has, undoubtedly, the freedom to procreate, but once a woman chooses to retreat from that freedom, a commotion arises. Abortion is a woman’s choice for many reasons. It’s her body, therefore, no one else can decide for said person.
The doctors later explain to the victim that he had been kidnapped during his sleep in order to save a famous violinists life. The violinist suffers from a rare kidney disease and the individuals’ kidney is needed for nine months to save his life. This leaves the victim with the choice of disconnecting the tubes and essentially killing the violinist, or remaining in bed connected to the tubes for nine months in order to save his life. The victim relates to the mother, demonstrating her confusion and resentment towards the violinist, which corresponds to the fetus. The kidnapping demonstrates how the mother feels as if her body was stolen while the famous violinists allows others to see potentiality and value in the fetus.
For example, if there is a complication in pregnancy and the mother can suffer because of the child, I think it is ok to do abortion. It is important to understand the various ideas that go behind abortion. The right of an abortion for a mother should be left on her own decision as the mother knows best about her condition. She is going to be the 'host body ' for the baby, even though her own, for nine months and according to Thompson, the mother should have the right to decide if she wants to foster and go through with the ordeal. But still, there are also a strong debate going on about the human rights of the child:
(Tanner) Pro-choice defenders also say that it is the woman 's right to choose to have the baby or not, forgetting the baby 's rights. The life of a human being begins at the moment of conception, and it is not the fetus´s fault if the mother wasn 't ready to have a baby or if the situation in which baby was conceived wasn 't ideal. For example, if the baby is conceived by rape, the baby should not pay the consequences of other people, he or she has not done anything wrong .”Compassion for the mothers is extremely important, but it is never