Argumentative Essay : Why Abortion Is Immoral Essay

There are essentially three objections to murder: it takes away the victim's autonomy, it prevents the victim from years of life it was due, and the effects of others who had some relation to the victim (6. Glover, CC2006, p. 0110). Casting aside religious teachings because of the variety of religions, Glover focuses on these three objections. Glover claims that a fetus has no real autonomy of its own, thus can not be afforded its own rights and that even if the fetus did have rights, the rights and autonomy of the mother supercede the rights of the fetus (7. Glover, CC2006, p. 0113). In this way, the second reason also falls by the leeway because years of life due to the mother if her life was threatened by the pregnancy or the years she has to invest in raising an unwanted child is usurped by the birth of the fetus. And finally, though not explicitly mentioned, the only other person that a fetus has any relation or interaction with is the mother, thus if the mother wants the fetus aborted, the moral implications that arise reside solely with the mother.

On one end of the argument is the belief that all human lives are of equal merit, because they are humans it gives them equal merit. Therefore no human should ever take the life of another, even if that individual has taken other lives. This argument is mostly favored by people of religious faith, but there are some sensible individuals who also adhere to this as an ethical position. At the other end of the spectrum is an argument in favor of the death penalty because of its ability to get rid of a problematic human so that they will be able to do no more harm. This is a very utilitarianism-like perspective of the death penalty. To examine this perplexing ethical dilemma one must first figure out their stance on what death is, like Socrates would.

Morally, killing someone else is never okay and usually this heinous crime, is not committed by the average person. However, what if there was an exception to this and the “common person” stumbles upon such a malicious act? Typically, society does not stick up for those who kill someone else and tend to shun those who have, except when they have committed the act under the circumstance that they were protecting themselves. The best way to understand why killing someone to benefit you is by putting yourself in that

Marquis thinks that premise one is true because killing in particular “deprives the victim more than perhaps any other crime” (Marquis, 1989, pg. 190). The reason that killing is wrong, Marquis thinks, is because of the innate badness that death brings via depriving something of a future. It is this depriving of a future that Marquis uses to motivate the rest of his argument, and why killing is bad. The second premise is true to Marquis because it is “having a future like [ours] is what makes killing someone wrong” (1989, pg. 191). The key phrasing here is that a future like ours (FLO) extends to something that can grow to value a future much like our own, therefore, giving a fetus FLO. Finally, Marquis finds the third premise is true because, abortion is killing off a being that can develop into having a FLO. It also does not even have to do with the fact it will be human, but merely because it could have a FLO (Marquis, 1989, pg. 191). Marquis has already provided that death has an intrinsic quality of depriving a future (pg. 190), so he makes a reasonable connection that killing is bad, and therefore, abortion is equivocal to killing because it causes death, which then deprives the fetus of a FLO (Marquis, 1989). Naturally, the conclusion must be true that aborting a fetus is impermissible after following the truths of premises

Therefore , when I die I, am deprived of all of the value of my future . Inflicting this loss on me is ultimately what makes killing me wrong. This being the case, it would seem tat what makes killing any adult human being prima facie seriously wrong is the loss of his or her future.”(Don Marquis p127) Don Marquis compares Abortion to Wanton infliction of pain on animals. Marquis came to the conclusion that infliction of pain cause suffering, and since causing suffering is what makes the wanton infliction of pain wrong and since the wanton infliction of pain on animals cause suffering, it follows that the wanton infliction of pain on animals is wrong. (Don Marquis p.127) Terminating of a life causes suffering so Abortions are under the same principal which makes abortions wrong also.

Therefore, it explains why it is wrong to kill a person while they were and infant as it is to kill them now. The conclusion of this argument is that because abortion involves killing fetuses and fetuses have FLOs for exactly the same reason infants have FLOs, and then abortion is immoral.

In the article, “Why Abortion Is Immoral”, Don Marquis begins his discussion by arguing that standard arguments or standard explanations for and against abortion are rather similar and fairly unsophisticated. He states that the debate has become “intractable.” In the sense that the two sides of the issue have become a dug-in and no one is willing to listen to the other side at this point meaning that it is an entrenched opinion. He argues that we need a fresh start to the issue a better way to think about wrongful killing, in the philosophical literature is something debated that whether wrongful killing such as murder is bad because of the effect on the murderer or the effect on the society or the effect on the victim.

If we examine some arguments presented from both sides, opponents of the capital punishment claim that executing someone is nothing more than an immoral, state-authorized killing which undervalues the human life and destroys our respect for our government which itself says that killing is wrong. But the supporters of the death penalty think that certain murderers

I will review my definitions of “killing”, “murder”, “personal gain”, since these terms can be interpreted in various ways. Killing is the taking of a life, either unintentionally or out of self-defense. Murder is the deliberate, selfish act of taking a life for personal gain. In this context, an action for personal gain is any action that is done out of avoidance, revenge, or malicious intent. Using this definition, one could say that any abortion done out of avoidance, fear, or self-justifying logic is

In his paper “Why Abortion Is Immoral”, Don Marquis argues that abortion is almost always morally wrong, regardless of the circumstances. He set forward a non-religious argument against abortion in what he believes is an ethically important similarity between killing adults and killing fetuses. Marquis’s argument against abortion is considered one of the most refined and comprehensive philosophy papers ever written. Analyst have come up with many objections to Marquis’s arguments, all of which he has successfully responded too. In this paper, I have some new considerations that will prove that Marquis fails to provide adequate support for his thesis.

Additionally, in regards to his second objection, Nichols asserts that the bare differences between killing and letting die are not morally different ceteris paribus. He cites the example of murder in the newspapers as a reason behind why the general public views killing as immoral. Whereas killing and murder are synonymous, the public only ever hears of “letting die” in relation to humanitarian reasons. Therefore, the general view that killing is worse than letting die is skewed by our perceptions - which are grounded in fictitious

Directly killing an innocent person is murder, and murder is always and absolutely impermissible, an abortion may not be performed.

In the case of Capital Punishment, killing another is justifiable, because if a suspect committed a crime for killing someone, then that suspect would be responsible for serving the possibility of the death penalty. For example in the article, “Hundreds

Many arguments in contradiction of the death penalty look at the spiritual and ethical side of the issue. By taking a human beings life, we as communities along with our conscious,

Abortion has always been an incredibly controversial topic. It has been one of the most widely discussed issues in the American culture for decades. Abortion is a discussion of human interaction, in which emotions, ethics, and law all come together. In many cases, people on both sides of the argument have valid points and take moral positions. A pro-choice position would assert that the decision to terminate a pregnancy lies the mother and that the government has no right to interfere or step in and make that decision. On the other hand, the position of pro-life advocates argue that life begins at the moment of conception. They believe that because the embryo or fetus is a human life and that one has no moral right to abort it. This theory argues that this human has no power or say in the matter and is rendered helpless from advocating for itself. Although abortion is a morally and emotionally charged issues, it is ultimately protected under the 14th amendment. The most common reasons for abortion include but are not limited to, teen pregnancy, rape, and health issues.