Essay about Is Abortion Ever Justfied?

To put it simply, an abortion is defined as, the intentional termination of a pregnancy most often preformed before the third trimester (within weeks 1-28). The controversy over abortions usually stems from the difficulty between individuals to agree on a set of conditions that would constitute ones’ decision, to abort as just. This issue is examined by many philosophers, particularly, Judith Thomson and Don Marquis. Both philosopher’s views loosely encompass the complex underlying beliefs of those who stand behind the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” arguments. Tomson and Marquis demonstrate the very distinctively different perspectives one could take on the issue. Don Marquis suggests that fetuses, being persons, possess the right to a “future like ours” and that it would be wrong to intentionally impede on “the life that I would have lived if I had lived out my natural lifespan” except for in “rare circumstances”. While, Tomson asserts that not all abortions are morally wrong, nor do they “violate the victim’s right to life”, and by having one that is in no way indicative that a fetus’s rights have been violated. Despite the fact that both philosophers present valid positions, and outline their key differences, Tomson goes far beyond Marquis’ efforts by illustrating that the way in which we view abortions ought to be redefined in order for one to maintain a clear perspective.

The controversy surrounding the ethicality of abortions has been a hotly debated topic during the past several decades. In the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade, the Court ruled that women had the constitutional right to seek abortions; however, in 1989, the Court later decided that each state had the right to set its own abortion policy. Heated disagreements and different perspectives have led to the creation of two different movements: the prochoice movement and the prolife movement. The former supports abortion, the intentional ending of a pregnancy, while the latter claims that abortion is immoral. The issue has been escalated from a matter of choice to the questioning of morality – Is having an abortion the killing of a human?

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.

not the fetus should be considered a human being with the right to a life. The root of this

Abortion is always argued with different cases and play a main role in medical ethics (blackwell.,p291).It is evidently reasonable for some to argue that in moral situation, abortion is a murder and it should be illegal, while others may claim that abortion is woman’s right when concerning on autonomy ( The abortion debate in Australia). Opponents of making abortion legal claim that abortion is a kind of murder on extend of moral situation. It is always regarded as a sin to kill a person who is no aggressor in most moral communities (new ethics 1). Fetus is a biologically human as it is not just a part of the mothers, such as a lung or a kidney. On the contrary, it is obvious that fetus is human due to he or she has genetic code of human and human parents as well (abortion myth p5). Moreover, it has potentiality to be a person with primary moral worth (text book p210-211). As Gillion (new ethics) pointed out, every person has his right to life, especially he is not an aggressor. This point is also been pointed by (Rebecca and john,Blackwell p204), “embryos has a right to life” .The fetus is innocent and

Abortion is among the most significant, and certainly the most contentious, moral issues faced by society today. The development of women’s rights has called into doubt the universality of the sanctity of life, whilst recent developments in medical and genetic technology have blurred the boundaries that traditionally categorised foetal development. Renewed interest in the ethical parameters of murder has been solicited by the rise of procedures such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and genetic screening, whose development requires experimentation with dispensable embryos, and by the use of foetal tissue in medical procedures.

The greatest controversy with determining if abortion is permissible or not is one of defining if whether the fetus is a human being or not. In a genetic sense a human being is defined as the member of biological species, homo species which includes fetuses and humans without functioning brains. In the moral sense a human being is defined as a fully-fledged member of the moral community, consisting of all and only persons. Moral humanity overrides the genetic humanity in that there are five characteristics that entitle an entity to be considered a person: consciousness and in particular the capacity to feel pain; reasoning; self-motivated activity; capacity to communicate; and the presence of self-concept and self-awareness [The ethics of abortion, (2015)]. Warren (1973) argues that if any ‘being’ does not possess most of these characteristics it is then rendered not a human being in the moral sense, thus assuming that there is no stage during fetal development at which a fetus resembles a person enough to have a significant right to life [The ethics of abortion, (2015)]. A counter-argument to the above school of thought points out that if killing the fetus is permissible because they are not ‘full-fledged’ members of the moral community, by the same standards it would be permissible or justifiable to kill new-borns as they have not entailed these five characteristics of ‘personhood’ and depend fully on an adult individual to survive and cannot survive on its own.

In most societies, abortion is a very debatable topic. Abortion is an act of killing an unborn child or fetus inside the mother’s womb. In almost all societies one question arises: is abortion an ethical or unethical act? In this paper, I will argue that Don Marquis’ argument is convincing because the fetus is a human being, and abortion is a form of murder that is both ethically and morally wrong. With these reasons, I will also consider the counter-argument for abortion. I will start by explaining Judith Jarvis Thomson argument, then I will explain Don Marquis argument. Next, I will explain why Don Marquis reasoning is more convincing for abortion is an immoral act. Finally, I will give my reasons for

Imagine living in a world where an individual could not decide what happens to her own body. This could become the reality for thousands of women in the United States today. Abortion is defined as the process of terminating a pregnancy through medical practice; this procedure became legal in 1973. Over the years, overly restrictive laws have been placed on the act of abortion by the pro-life movement, and now more than ever, the government is working to ban abortion altogether; for now, however, it is still legal in the majority of states in the United States, including Iowa. Abortion should remain legal in the United States for many reasons.

“Is abortion moral or immoral?” We yet have not acquired an answer to this question. Infer by that, we defend about the nature and the moral status of the fetus. In the other word, should we or should we not? Don Marquis as well as Bonnie Steinbock embraces with the argument of their own, which point out the morality of abortion.

This topic brings an extreme concern to the public because it is one of the biggest controversies topics, which is an abortion. The question is whether an abortion should be performed or not and should be moral or immoral regardless of pro-life and choice of the mothers. However, the two authors, Lee and George, argue that the choice of abortion is immoral. Lee and George’s view on abortion is that a fetus is a human being at the moment of conception. Even though the baby inside her or his mother’s stomach is not fully developed, it is still a complete human being. Having an abortion is like it’s killing a human being, which they say that a fetus is innocent. Not only abortion is killed, but also called murder. Therefore, abortion is impermissible except the mother wants to protect herself from something. Lee and George give three reasons to their arguments of abortion, why they think it is wrong to end the lives of innocent fetuses and not given a fetus a chance at life. First, it’s own distinct direction. Second, it is genetically human. Third, it is a complete organism. Not only Lee and George believe that abortion is immoral, but also many people believe it. That is because abortion is not something the mother can take slightly. Otherwise, this person is considered to be murder because many people value and want to protect human life, and Lee and George are one of them. They support human life and believe abortion should be illegal. In my point of view, abortion should

This topic brings extremely concern to the public because it is one of the biggest controversies topics, which is an abortion. The question is whether an abortion should be performed or not and should be moral or immoral regardless of pro-life and choice of the mothers. However, the two authors, Lee and George, argue that the choice of abortion is immoral. Lee and George’s view on abortion is that a fetus is a human being at the moment of conception. Even though the baby inside her or his mother’s stomach is not fully developed, it is still a complete human being. Having an abortion is like it’s killing a human being, which they say that a fetus is innocent. Not only abortion is killed, but also called murder. Therefore, abortion is impermissible except the mother wants to protect herself from something. Lee and George give three reasons to their arguments of abortion why they think it is wrong to end the lives of innocent fetuses and not given a fetus a chance at life. First, it’s own distinct direction. Second, it is genetically human. Third, it is a complete organism. Not only Lee and George believe that abortion is immoral, but also many people believe it. That is because abortion is not something the mother can take slightly. Otherwise, this person is considered to be murder because many people value and want to protect human life, and Lee and George are one of them. They support human life and believe abortion should be illegal. In my point of view, abortion should

The topic of elective abortion is greatly contemplated, with arguments on either side: opposing and supporting the legalization of abortion. Both sides, whether Pro-Life or Pro-Choice, have many of their arguments backed by ethical and moral theories. The basic dilemma of whether or not abortion is morally permissible stems from the question of personhood. Personhood entertains the idea of what constitutes the term "human being." Does a human being have more than just a genetic sense? Are there certain criteria that are applicable when deciding whom or what is considered a “human being?” Do factors such as at what point does human life begin to play a part in the decision? These are all questions that philosophers take into mind when attempting to back their position on the morality of abortion. These are all questions that could have more than one answer, but one basic premise that exists in our world that has only one answer is: Is it wrong to kill humans? The answer to this is universally accepted as yes, it is wrong. But, this is where the conflict begins. Pro-life supporters believe that this premise can be applied to fetuses because fetuses are people. Whereas pro-choice supporters understand this universally accepted statement, and abide by it, they believe that this concept has no effect on the morality of abortion seeing as a fetus is not a person, either not until birth or later into the development. The basic discussion of whether or not the fetus has a moral

My argument begins with explaining the concept of personhood. I will argue that the fetus is not a person. I will then explain why this lack of personhood grants the woman the opportunity of choosing whether to have an abortion or not. My paper will then go to explain why prohibiting abortion will violate a woman’s rights. I will provide examples to develop this violation of rights. The paper will then focus on respecting the fetus and showing how the support of abortion rights does not involve the dehumanization of the human fetus. I will end by tackling the potential objections of my argument.

A debate that has been analyzed and discussed for many centuries, and still is today; is whether abortions, should be allowed to continue or prohibited. Although with that broad topic in mind, it brings up many other subtopics. One that is most considered is whether a fetus’ right to life is absolute. In today's society, people have different opinions on this topic, some believe that from the moment of conception, that a fetus is a human being, while others believe that regardless of how long the fetus has been in the womb, it not a human until it has experienced the world, developed morality, emotions, able to think for itself. In this paper I will argue that the fetus does not have a right to life, until it is born. Judith Jarvis Thompson speaks about in “A Defense to Abortions” that the life of a fetus is dependent on a woman’s body. Since her body is her own, then it is the right of the woman to give a right to life.