Abortion Analytical Essay

The debate about the legality of abortion involves debating the legal status of the fetus. If the fetus is a person, anti-choice activists argue, then abortion is murder and should be illegal. Even if the fetus is a person, though, abortion may have justified as necessary to women’s body self-govern but that wouldn’t mean that abortion is automatically ethical. Perhaps the state can’t force women to carry pregnancies to term, but it could argue that it is the most ethical choice.

Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that there are defenses of abortion and that the right to life is not an absolute right; therefore in some cases abortion is morally permissible (265). In order to argue this, Thomson outlines the relevant steps that help form her argument. One, every person has a right to life. Two, the fetus is considered a person. Three, the fetus therefore has a right to life. Four, the fetus’ right to life is stronger than the mother’s right to bodily integrity. Thus saying, abortion is impermissible. Provided recently by the relevant steps and the thought that all these conditions are intriguing, it helps lay out the main topic for her argument. Thomson’s essay is examining and arguing

“Abortion is the spontaneous or artificially induced expulsion of an embryo or fetus” (Abortion, 2002). An artificially induced abortion is the type referred to in the legal context. Abortions happen in different situations. The question comes when is it the right or wrong choice. The root question becomes the moment a fetus becomes a person and entitled to rights. The fetus could be a person at conception, during the pregnancy, or at birth. The deciding moment differs from the Pro-life group and Pro-choice group. After critically analyzing four different arguments about the pros and cons of abortion, one will be able to understand the ethical, moral, and

Killing is wrong because it deprives someone of future experiences. Not only what we value now but what we could have come to value. Abortion is wrong because it deprives the fetus of future experiences. He states that it is morally wrong to kill and adult because that would be depriving them of future experiences. So why is it okay to kill a fetus? Abortion would be illegal after 2 weeks and the possibility of twinning is ruled out. Before two weeks there is no unique individual. I fell that he wants to rule out the possibility of twinning because of creating a unique individual and not depriving it of the fetus. Steinbock’s objection to Marquis’s potentially view is that this gives right to sperm and ova since they have the potential of becoming

Many people when the subject of abortion is mentioned will argue their opinions without really understanding their own beliefs. Some people would say that the unborn children are not human and have no rights, but in this paper I will expound on why abortion in cases of diagnosed fetal anomaly or chromosomal abnormalities is not morally acceptable. Abortion is morally wrong not because of law, not because of a group of people decided it was but because it eliminates compassion, an innocent child’s life and it goes against the act of utilitarianism. According to Mary Warrens essay “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” the unborn child, in any of its conditions, genetic differences, or diseases, has a right to life just as

Based on the view that the fetus is already a small baby, some extreme anti-abortionists would maintain that abortion is impermissible even to save the mothers life. The rationale behind this view would be that the child is innocent, and killing the child would be active, on the other hand, letting the mother die would be passive. This introduces two new concepts, the first being the mother’s rights in competition to those of the fetus and the second being the question of innocence and how we would define this (Langley).

When faced with the choice of life or death, most people would choose to live. In fact, most would not want someone else making that decision for them. They would claim that as a living and independent entity it is solely their choice as to whether they continue to live or not. While this concept may seem fairly straightforward, there seems to be some great debate when it is applied to abortion. For many, they will maintain that the fetus has the right to life no matter the situation. There are some who will argue that abortion is morally permissible in specific circumstances and there are even those that will claim that abortion is always permissible. Why is there such a great divide? A major factor that plays a part in this is whether abortion involves more than one life. Because determining the beginning point of life is such a complex and emotional debate, there will be the same allowance in this paper as there was in Judith Jarvis Thomson’s “A Defense of Abortion”. As she eloquently put it “I propose then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception” (p. 721). This will allow for a look into the moral debate of abortion from a more grounded stage. As discussed early in Thomson’s paper, most of the debate on abortion rests on whether the fetus is alive or not. Whereas the focus should be on the many other aspects of pregnancies that may lead to a mother wanting an abortion.

Abortion is one of the most controversial topics of all times. The definition most people associate with abortion is the termination of unwanted pregnancy. In their essay, “The Wrong of Abortion”, Patrick Lee and Robert P. George argue that intentional abortion is unjust and therefore objectively immoral no matter the circumstances. Also, they argue that “the burden of carrying the baby is significantly less than the harm the baby would suffer by being killed; the mother and father have a special responsibility to the child; it follows that intentional abortion (even in few cases where the baby’s death is an unintended but foreseen side effect) is unjust ” (24).

Religion, personal rights, or science normally fuels the debate on abortion. However abortion can be looked at philosophically and debated whether it is moral or immoral. In this paper I will argue that abortion is immoral because it deprives the zygote from any future life.

One of the most frequently debated topics in bioethics is the morality of abortion, or the ending of a pregnancy without physically giving birth to an infant. Often times abortions are categorized into either spontaneous, a natural miscarriage; induced or intentional, which is premeditated and for any reason; or therapeutic, which albeit intentional, its sole purpose is to save the mother’s life. It seems however that moral conflicts on issue mainly arise when discussing induced abortions. In general, people universally agree it is morally wrong to kill an innocent person and in some people’s eyes induced abortions are the intentional killings of innocent persons, thus making them immoral. However not all individuals view fetuses as persons and consequentially argue it is not morally wrong to kill them.

When women decide against abortion, people expect that they will take care of their bodies and avoid drugs. However, some critics say that this expectation treats women as “fetal containers” and not rational beings. These critics believe that women should have the autonomy to behave how they want to, regardless of their pregnant status. In contrast, many people disagree with this. They believe that when a woman decides not

Ethical justification of abortion is a controversial subject consisting of numerous significant theories that have been presented based on studies and researches. Basically, abortion refers to termination of pregnancy through removal of the undeveloped fetus. Seemingly, the act is highly condemned by majority sociologists and health practitioners due to violation of humanitarian ethics and morals. However, this particular perspective is orientated by the normative ethics system entailing utilitarianism versus deontology. Alternatively, this excerpt shall focus on analyzing the social altercations of abortion based on views and opinions presented by two influential individuals, namely Marquis and Steinbock. By identifying the main arguments and key elements apparent in the two arguments, the study is likely to derive rational insight concerning moral permissibility of abortion.

In the case of abortion, both the moral and physical statuses of the fetus serve as pivotal points to the ongoing debate regarding the moral justifiability on the termination of a pregnancy. Through this, popular arguments often involve an attempt to confirm or deny the humanity of the fetus human as being comparable to ourselves, and thus, if so, would call for the classification of abortion into a morally unjustifiable area. Whereas if the fetus can be proven to not satisfy the requirements of a human being, will allow for the justification of an abortion in most if not all cases. However, it would seem logical to conclude that the fetus during pregnancy should not be classified as a legitimate human and therefore, not entitled to the basic

In this essay I will discuss abortion.Abortion is one of the most discussed issues all over the world. It has raised political, public and ethical problems. Two important philosophies like Judith Jarvis Thomson and Don Marquis wrote two of the most influential articles about it. Thomson wote” A defense of abortiona” and Marquis wrote:”Why Abortion Is Immoral”..an importante issue is ‘Unwanted Pragnency” . In a family where everyone is working full time, another baby is not an option so the mother decides to terminate the pregnancy.. Is this choice morall or immoral.? Marquis argues that a fetus is considered a human from the moment of conservation. If the mother performs the abortion, then she is killing a human and preventing his future from him In this case abortion is an immoral act.. However Thomson’s arguments are more accurate and prove that the fetus right to life is not always as important as mothers ' right to control her body. He explains it by talking about “the violinist experiment(rape), the burger and people-seed experiment”.

The topic of abortion has been highly controversial in the American consciousness for many decades. The main topic of debate has been about whether a fetus deserves the same moral consideration as a physical human being and thus a moral right to not be killed. The answer to this question usually devolves into an argument about whether or when a fetus is a person. This type of argument has not been able to resolve the difference between ideologies throughout the decades. It is for this reason that Don Marquis in his article “Why Abortion is Immoral” aims to take a different perspective on the controversy by discussing why he believes that killing is wrong in general and applying that logic to a fetus. However, Marquis’s argument that abortion is prima facie wrong is unsound, because through the application of his moral evaluation of killing, he makes problematic implications concerning the value of life and also undermines his own argument through inconsistent logic within the paper.