Warren Abortion Summary

800 Words2 Pages

In “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion,” Warren argues that abortion is permissible because fetuses are not human beings therefore; they have no right to life. One of the strongest arguments that Warren gives for this claim is that a fetus is not a person and all and only persons have full moral rights therefore; a fetus has no right to life. In this paper, I will argue that even though fetuses are not yet developed human beings, they still have the right to life. In the article, Warren argues that fetuses are not human beings therefore; they have no right to life. She says that people often misinterpret the words “human being.” According to Warren, a human being is someone who is a member of a community and only they have moral rights. Throughout the article, she describes the five characteristics that permit an individual to be considered a human being: consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, capacity to communicate and presence of self-concepts and self-awareness. Warren claims that anyone who does not acquire any of the five characteristics above is not considered a human being in the moral sense. …show more content…

Warren claims that fetuses are not human but according to medical studies, a 22-day fetus already has a beating heart and blood starts to circulate which are both characteristics of a human. Thinking back to conception, a life begins once the egg and the sperm meet. During conception, 23 chromosomes per mother and father are contributed and an unborn person is created. These 46 chromosomes when combined make up a genetic code, which produces a human being. Warren claims fetuses are not humans and he is wrong. Once something has a DNA it makes them an entity. Warren has to understand that just because a newborn is not yet entirely developed does not imply that it is less than a person. A fetus is an innocent human being no matter what stage they are

Open Document