My Action Is Morally Permissible

Nowadays, in this world, there are a lot of problems that can make tremendous conflicts for human beings. They are very complicated and bring a lot of argument and nobody knows what the exact answer is. They also have pros and cons. One of the most complex problems is abortion. This is due to moral and ethical values which we all have. The majority of us are Christians or are brought up in that kind of ambiance which means that as small children we were taught values that are based on the bible such as that famous phrase “Thou shall not kill”. This phrase relates to this topic because an abortion is the murder of a human being.

Embryonic stem cell research is important for further development in the medical field. It strongly supports the idea that every life has value, an idea known as human dignity. Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, and thus, are all equal. The idea of radical equality before God leads us to think no less of someone regardless of their physical appearance, religious beliefs, cultural background, or anything else. It is through virtues such as charity, mercy, and justice that our human dignity is preserved. By living through these virtues and realizing how to effectively instill them within us, we are able to live a virtuous life. This paper argues that although issues involving embryonic stem cell research are controversial, research in this area is typically permissible for further development in the medical field when looking to preserve human dignity. In order to defend this thesis, this paper will be structured into three sections as followed: the description of embryonic stem cell research, the development of a moral lens, and the moral argument and analysis of this case.

One field of genetic science which is crucial in society today is medicine where cloning is now possible. The need for moral reasoning is essential in this field because with greater power society must “[recognize] not only the limits of our knowledge but also our vulnerability to being misguided” with an evolving world (Dalai Lama 140). Humans have kept high moral responsibilities over the century when faced with new developments in knowledge. The Dalai Lama suggests that “our technological capacity has reached a critical point” during the past decade and the gap between knowledge and human ethics when making decisions has grown farther apart as new biogenetic science has arose (133). The issue is not whether

Purdy defends surrogate mothering from a consequentialist point of view. Her case is founded on two premises: firstly, that surrogacy is favourable (that is, it brings about pleasure and reduces pain), and secondly, that the practice is only non-traditional and not morally reprehensible. She thus concludes that "appealing to the sacrosanctity of traditional marriage or of blood ties to prohibit otherwise acceptable practices that would satisfy people 's desires hardly makes sense", and thus, surrogacy should be permissible (Purdy, 1999).

Access to emergency contraception has been heavily debated issue, because there has to be a balance between protecting healthcare providers’ religious and moral beliefs on one hand, and providing a uniform standard of care and maintaining patients’ rights on the other. This principle gives a significant approach to the analysis of ethical questions arising from the general obligation to preserve human life, and the limits of that obligation.

Consider for a moment a society in which there are no rules or laws. A society in which everyone is allowed to do what they please whenever they feel like it without any consequences. The world would be in a state of chaos. In order to maintain order and implement laws we use a set of morals to judge what actions are permissible and which are not. Through evaluating their actions and the outcomes of these actions, humans begin to develop morals. However, to fully understand the consequences one must first claim responsibility for her actions. The moral validity of abortion does not depend on the status of the unborn as a person, when life begins-whether it is conception, birth, or sometime between-or religious beliefs. The permission

In the United States, per year, twenty million unsafe abortions and sixty-eight thousand deaths from them occur, (Odyssey) while the average death risk for a safe abortion is less than .01 percent. An illegal and unsafe abortion should never result as the last resort, but it tends to because of a lack of access to safe ones. Morals, usually drawn from religious beliefs, tend to play a part in one’s opinion towards abortion. More than three fourths of Americans consider themselves as Christians. This means that more than three fourths of Americans believe that it is morally wrong to undergo an abortion and a person should not hold the right to take someone else’s life away. While a moral belief, based on religion, is something all people are free to have,

Medical professionals today can screen for certain genetic traits (genetic diseases and sex) with in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to obtain a healthy child, and reproductive technology continues to improve. With this in mind, the question arises whether sex selection is ethical. Julian Savulescu, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics at Oxford University, argues that sex selection is moral, based on his ethical principle of Procreative Beneficence: that “couples (or single reproducers) should select the child, of the possible children they could have, who is expected to have the best life, or at least as good a life as the others, based on the relevant, available information” [Savulescu 1]. Savulescu claims

In her essay, Virtue Theory and Abortion Rosalind Hursthouse gives an account of virtue ethics and uses it to evaluate the moral status of abortion. Unlike other ethical theories virtue ethics does not impose a set of moral rules, rather, the theory centers around virtuous action through an appropriate disposition. A virtuous person possesses all virtues allowing them to evaluate a situation and make a virtuous decision. In addition to the virtues (and more pertinent to Hursthouse’s discussion) is the concept of Eudaimonia. A rough translation of this is “Human Flourishing”, in most forms of virtue ethics this term is central and is typically held up to be achievable through virtue.

There are several issues that arise when it comes to the development in medical ethics whilst also maintaining religious principles and ethical values. The development of medical knowledge has allowed for humans to practice different ways in helping society. But these new discoveries have found to clash with religious principles and ethical values. This can be related to the topic of abortion as it goes against monotheistic religious teachings.

The society has evolved over the decades. Medical advances, greater technologies, better understanding of the world around us, the sky is the limit! The progression of a society is astounding from where it was just twenty years ago. One is able to do things that the forefathers would have never dreamed! Science has discovered ways to travel to the moon and back, reach some of the deepest depths of the oceans and discover new species, and drive hybrid cars. The achievements of today’s society have reached a new high; however, with great achievement comes great questions of ethics.

Embryonic stem cells research has challenged the moral ethics within human beings simply because the point at which one is considered a “human,” is still under debate and practically incapable to make a decision upon.

How can the principles of ethics (autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice) assist in finding a middle ground on new reproductive technologies?

IVF raises many of these difficult moral issues. If the above conceptions about the nature of ethics were correct, however, discussion of these issues would either be futile (because morality is a matter of personal choice or opinion) or superfluous (because morality is what a divine or secular authority says it is) (Walters 23). In this paper, I want to suggest that it is not only possible, but also necessary to inquire into the ethics of such practices as IVF because the fact that we can do something does not mean that we ought to do it.

Some view altruistic surrogacy as a form of exploiting the surrogate. There is no monetary compensation to woman placing her health and well-being on the line for another’s benefit. However, it can also be held that the woman knowingly entered into the agreement with full disclosure of the risks and benefits to her health and body. Again, autonomy and justice are extremely prevalent ethical principles to explore when discussing the topic of surrogacy. Same-sex marriage has become a hot topic in the United States in the last few years. The idea of raising a family by homosexual