Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pro-life abortion
Pro-life abortion
Pro choice strengths in abortion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pro-life abortion
Abortion has long been a controversial debate affecting most societies, religion, and especially women. Anti-abortionists and pro-abortionists both propose many arguments against and for abortion. However, the most prominent argument comes from anti-abortionists who believe that “a fetus is a human being, and therefore abortion is murder.” However I agree with both Mary Anne Warren and Judith Jarvis Thompson in that women should have the choice of whether they wish to keep the baby or not. Although the traditional anti-abortion argument is strong, the arguments that both Thompson and Warren provide in their texts have convinced me that abortion is not murder. Despite that anti-abortionists believe that that a fetus is human, Marry Anne Warren makes a very good distinction between being human and being a person. Not all humans are people and not all people are humans and only people can be considered members of the moral community. Thus if only people can be considered members of the moral community then only people can be ascribed full moral rights. A human according to John Noonan is someone who has full genetic code and the potential capacity for rational thought. Warren defines a person as someone who has the following traits, consciousness, capacity to feel pain, ability to reason, communicate, can perform self-motivated activity, and has the presence of self-concepts/self-awareness. A fetus has none of the above traits so it cannot be considered a person rather it is a potential person. Therefore a fetus is a human being, which is not yet a person and thus cannot be granted full moral rights that a person is entitled to. Another issue that arises is the potential personhood of the fetus. Many would argue that its poten... ... middle of paper ... ...g abortion I am convinced that abortion is not murder. Abortion does not involve killing a person because a fetus is not yet a person it is only a genetic human being. Unfortunately many people overlook the rights of the woman and only take into consideration the rights of the potential person. Once people stop assuming that a fetus is entitled to the same rights as an actual person can people learn that abortion is morally permissible and a woman should have the right to obtain an abortion. Pope John Paul II assumes that one will accept that abortion is immoral because it is the killing of a human. But after reading Thompson and Warren’s arguments I disagree with Pope John Paul II. On a final note I believe that every woman should have the right to obtain an abortion because at the end its will her decision that she will have to live with for the rest of her life.
...es presented, and disregarded the fetuses right to a valuable life. Warren also briefly discussed the morally permissible options, such as adoption but failed to include how much more beneficiary putting a child up for adoption is rather than aborting the fetus. Marquis article is more convincing even to those who are pro-choice as it is less easy to criticize.
The criterion for personhood is widely accepted to consist of consciousness (ability to feel pain), reasoning, self-motivation, communication and self-awareness. When Mary Anne Warren states her ideas on this topic she says that it is not imperative that a person meet all of these requirements, the first two would be sufficient. We can be led to believe then that not all human beings will be considered persons. When we apply this criterion to the human beings around us, it’s obvious that most of us are part of the moral community. Although when this criterion is applied to fetuses, they are merely genetic human beings. Fetuses, because they are genetically human, are not included in the moral community and therefore it is not necessary to treat them as if they have moral rights. (Disputed Moral Issues, p.187). This idea is true because being in the moral community goes hand in hand w...
Mary Anne Warren’s “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” describes her justification that abortion is not a fundamentally wrong action for a mother to undertake. By forming a distinction between being genetically human and being a fully developed “person” and member of the “moral community” that encompasses humanity, Warren argues that it must be proven that fetuses are human beings in the morally relevant sense in order for their termination to be considered morally wrong. Warren’s rationale of defining moral personhood as showcasing a combination of five qualities such as “consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, capacity of communication, and self-awareness” forms the basis of her argument that a fetus displays none of these elements that would justify its classification as a person and member of the morally relevant community (Timmons 386).
But, there are many differences between an actual person and a fetus. First of all, a fetus is completely dependent on the mother. Fetus’s need their mothers in order to be fed correctly, to live in a stable environment, and to grow and expand among many other things. Because the fetus cannot survive on its own, then it does not qualify as a human being. In addition, a fetus that is still inside the womb is only a potential person. The fetus resides inside of the mother, and thus is part of the mother herself until it is born. Another difference between a fetus and a person is that a person can feel pain. Anti abortionist commonly argue that abortion is wrong because it would cause pain to the fetus. But, according to Mark Rosen, an obstetrical anesthesiologist at the University of California at San Francisco, “the wiring at the point where you feel pain, such as the skin, doesn’t reach the emotional part where you feel pain, in the brain.” Furthermore, the thalamus does not form until week 28 of the pregnancy. So, no information, including pain, can reach the cortex in the brain for processing. These facts prove that a fetus would not be affected by the mother’s choice of having an abortion, thus proving Marquis and all other anti-abortionists wrong.
Thou shalt not kill; one-tenth of what may arguably be the most famous guidelines of morality in the western culture, and also the main driving force for pro-life advocates. The argument supporting their beliefs typically starts with the premises that a fetus is a person, and to destroy or to kill a person is unethical. Therefore abortion, the premeditated destruction of a human being, is murder, and consequently unethical. I deny the fact that the fetus, what I will refer to as an embryo up to 22 weeks old, has the right to live. The opposing argument is invalid because a fetus, although perhaps a part of human species, is not formally a person. This leaves it simply to be a part of the woman?s body, whose fate lies solely in the hands of the pregnant woman alone, no different from a tumor she might have. By proving this, the abortion debate then becomes an issue of women?s rights, something that is most controversial indeed. Furthermore, it is fair to question the credibility of many people against abortion because of obvious contradictions in the logic of their belief systems. The fact that this debate is relevant in modern society is ludicrous since there is a simple and plausible solution to this problem that could potentially end the debate for good, leaving both sides satisfied.
There are many who say that the preborn child is just a mass of tissue, a part of the woman's body. If this were the case, then no one would have any reason to o...
Mary Anne Warren is one of the top advocates for keeping abortion legal without any restrictions on it. She states that the morality of abortion is dependent on the moral status of the baby, not simply on the rights of the mother. She criticizes those who defend abortion as the right to control one's body: "it is at best a rather feeble argument for the permissibility of abortion. Mere ownership does not give me the right to kill innocent people whom I find on my property…" (The Monist, pg. 44) Using this analogy she shows that just because the fetus is inside us it does mean we have a right to terminate it.
“On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” by Mary Anne Warren is an in depth analysis of what, in Warren’s opinion, is exactly what defines a person and human being, the moral community, fetal development and the right to life, potential personhood and the right to life, and infanticide. Warren believes that emotion and morality should be entirely separate, and that abortion should be legal for all women, as denial would strip women of basic human rights, the rights that a woman holds over an unborn fetus. I personally agree with her arguments on these topics as I agree that women should be allowed to have abortions on their own terms, without subjection of authority or society telling her what she can and cannot do, as well as I agree for the most part on her view of what a person is, potential personhood not outweighing the choice of abortion, and her reasoning on what defines a person in the moral community. Warren insists that the “moral” sense of human and “genetic” sense of human must be kept separate in this observation. As she defines the two, she goes on to say that the confusion of the two “results in a slide of meaning, which serves to conceal the fallaciousness of the traditional argument that since (1) it is wrong to kill innocent human beings, and (2) fetuses are innocent human beings, then (3) it is wrong to kill fetuses.
Pope John Paul II’s Argument: This argument is very adamantly against abortion. It is also a religiously based argument. He uses exerts from the Bible and other religious documents and quotes many different clergymen and priests to help defend his position. He starts by explaining how you must follow the ten commandments to live a good life and have eternal life. “Jesus replied, ‘If you would enter life, keep the commandments’” (Mt 19:17). The first of these ten commandments is “You shall not kill”. On the contrary, you should ‘love respect and promote life’ (The Gospel of Life, Paul II). In order to do this, one must carry out God’s plan of procreation with love and intentions to multiply. By having an abortion, one is doing the exact opposite. Not only are they killing an innocent human being, but they are killing a child of God. Also, man is not the final judge in matters such as life and death, he is only a ‘minister of God’s plan’ (Humanae Vitae, Paul VI). Paul II goes on to explain how human life is ‘sacred and inviolable’. Life is sacred because it is a gift from God and man was created in the image of God. God overlooks our lives from birth to death, and no one else has the right to destroy an innocent human being, especially one as innocent as an unborn child. Man is suppose to be the defender of the innocent, not the destroyer. He explains how the man who kills the innocent is one who has been deceived by the Devil, because only Satan delights in the death of the living. “You shall not kill” represents the extreme limit which cannot be exceeded. It is meant to encourage man to see life with respect and lead to the promotion of life with love. Along with the teaching that one shall not kill another,...
One of the most controversial issues in society today is abortion, and as of now, it is morally acceptable because of Roe vs Wade. However, when a study conducted by Minnesota reveals that women who have had an abortion have 10 times the risk of committing suicide than women who have not had an abortion, it’s time to seriously think about whether or not abortion should be acknowledged as morally right. Considered by some to be a form of murder, anti-abortion laws should apply to all women in order to prevent any emotional mishaps of the abortion victim and to save the lives of the innocent human beings not yet born. Pro-Choice advocates believe that abortion should be legalized because they feel it is necessary to empower women with choice. They have strong opinions that women are not subordinate, so they ought to be allowed to make moral decisions and should not be forced to have a child, but why should the child have to suffer for the wrongdoings of his mother?
The permissibility of abortion has been a crucial topic for debates for many years. People have yet to agree upon a stance on whether abortion is morally just. This country is divided into two groups, believers in a woman’s choice to have an abortion and those who stand for the fetus’s right to live. More commonly these stances are labeled as pro-choice and pro-life. The traditional argument for each side is based upon whether a fetus has a right to life. Complications occur because the qualifications of what gives something a right to life is not agreed upon. The pro-choice argument asserts that only people, not fetuses, have a right to life. The pro-life argument claims that fetuses are human beings and therefore they have a right to life. Philosopher, Judith Jarvis Thomson, rejects this traditional reasoning because the right of the mother is not brought into consideration. Thomson prepares two theses to explain her reasoning for being pro-choice; “A right to life does not entail the right to use your body to stay alive” and “In the majority of cases it is not morally required that you carry a fetus to term.”
According to Judith Thomson in her book “A Defense of Abortion”, a human embryo is a person who has a right to life. But, just because the human fetus has the right to life does not mean that the mother will be forced to carry it (Thomson, 48). Naturally, abortion may be seen as the deliberate termination of a pregnancy before the fetal viability. Though people have understood this, the topic of abortion has remained a controversial issue in the world. Individuals are divided into “Pro-choice” and “Pro-life” debaters depending on their opinion on the morality of the action. "Pro-life," the non-consequentialist side, is the belief that abortion is wrong, generally because it equates to killing. "Pro-choice," the consequentialist view, however,
Abortion is a decision every person should decide for themselves. The major arguments against abortion are how a fetus is a person; a fetus has rights; and it is morally impermissible to take a life. Many consider abortion to be equivalent to murder. However, a fetus is not a person. There are important traits one most hold to be a person, 1) self-awareness, one must be able to make decisions regarding themselves 2) being able to converse with others and hold a relationship 3) consciousness, one must be able to make rational decisions and have thought (Warren). On important aspect of being person is the ability to be aware of its surroundings and decision making. Being a pregnant is not a situation everyone gets to experience and the decision to abort a pregnancy should be left up to the women. A woman has a right to her body and should be able to make decisions concerning herself with no outside judgment.
Abortion is an extremely controversial issue and one that is continually on the forefront of debates. Those who oppose the idea (Pro-lifers), thinks it is an act of woman playing “God” who live from who dies. Yet, whether an unborn baby constitutes a normal person is questionable; a pregnant woman, on the other hand, has the undeniable right to choose whether she wants to have a child or not. Therefore, the decision to have an abortion is the personal choice and responsibility of the woman, because prohibiting abortion impedes freedom of choice and endangers the physical and mental health of women.
Abortion in the United States is a legal form of murder. Each and every year over a million babies are murdered and it must be stopped now before it will continue to get out of hand each and every day. We have discussed in this essay that a fetus is a living humans and not something that can just be thrown away. An unborn child is still a child and he or she needs an opportunity to grow and live a long successful life just like the rest of us have gotten the privilege to do. Abortion cannot go on any longer. More and more live are lost every day.