Essay on The Morality of Abortion and Surrogacy

When touching the subject of abortion, one must consider that there are two sides battling for control. That is right, abortion has literally turned into a war zone where even the unlikely of individuals do the unthinkable. Each side has their motives and methods for contradicting the other. For instance, there are cases and events that support both sides of this issue.

Abortion’s legalization through Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade, has allowed for one in three pregnancies to end in abortion. This means that 1.5 million abortions are performed in the United States each year (Flanders 3). It ranks among the most complex and controversial issues, arousing heated legal, political, and ethical debates. The modern debate over abortion is a conflict of competing moral ideas and of fundamental human rights: to life, to privacy, to control over one's own body. Trying to come to a compromise has proven that it one cannot please all of the people on each side of the debate.

There is controversy surrounding the concept of surrogacy in the United States. There is nothing in federal legislature the addresses the issue directly. Different States have different laws concerning surrogacy. Some forbid it and some enforce surrogacy contracts in court. Finding a surrogate mother, for some is their last chance to have a child that is biologically their own. There are people that believe that surrogacy is morally wrong for several reasons. I believe that if it is done properly then it can be a blessing for a family that would not have been able to have their own children, otherwise.

Utilitarianism is the thought that actions are right if they benefit or bring happiness to a majority of the population. A utilitarian’s view on abortion could be that it is a good thing or a bad thing. They could argue that there is overpopulation in today’s society and around the world people are starving and going thirsty because of overpopulation. A utilitarian would say it would benefit the world’s population if a baby was aborted rather than taking another persons food. Another argument a utilitarian would make is that if a couple could not raise that child or would be alone (single parent) it would be better if they are aborted because it would put less of a burden on society having the mother not be

Abortion is one of the most personal, widely discussed, and controversial topics in American culture today. In most cases, people on both sides of the argument take worthy and moral positions. Who can blame someone who wishes to prevent the termination of a teen pregnancy to save the life of an unborn child? On the other hand, who can blame anyone who advocates the soon-to-be mother's right to make such a personal, heartbreaking choice? No matter what she chooses to do, should anyone have the legal right to force her to bear an unwanted child? Most people in the US are pro-choice, and believe that abortion should be a legal, confidential decision that only a woman can make for herself. However, some are against the idea of

The morality of induced abortion is one of the most controversial moral issues of our time. Abortion has grown to be one, if no the most, debated argument of modern times. In the following web-page, we will be discussing abortion in three of its major aspects: Public Opinion, Congress and Courts, and Interest groups.

The argument of abortion has been raging since the Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade, in 1973. This court case has divided the country into two factions: pro-choice and pro-life. Pro-life advocates argue that abortions are murder and extreme levels of child abuse. While pro-choice advocates believe abortions are a justifiable means to end pregnancies. The pro-choice argument is that the fetus is not yet a human being and its rights should not override that of the mother’s.

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.

Of all the legal, ethical, and moral issues we Americans continuously fight for or against, abortion may very well be the issue that Americans are most passionate about. The abortion issue is in the forefront of political races. Most recently the “no taxpayer funding for abortion act”, has abortion advocates reeling. Even though abortion has been legal in every state in the United States since the monumental Supreme Court decision, “Roe v Wade”, on January 22, 1973; there are fewer physicians willing to perform abortions today than in 2008. (Kraft) At the heart of the ethical dilemma for many in the medical profession is the viability of the fetus. And just to make this whole dilemma more confusing, according to the United States

Does a women’s right to choose to have an abortion outweigh a baby’s right to be born? The controversy at hand is whether the rights of a women outweigh the rights of a baby, and whether a mother should be given the rights to pursue a procedure like an abortion. To clarify an abortion is a medical procedure that ends a pregnancy in which a doctor uses a vacuum and suction to suck out a fetus from the uterus. The issue is whether the fetus who has the potential to be a rational, productive human being has the unequivocal rights of any other human being and whether he or she should be protected from, in every sense of the word, murder. The argument made by abortionfacts.com a nonprofit Christian pro-life education organization, is that

Many argue is it the women’s or the foetus’ rights and values that are being trampled on? “Pro-choice movements sometimes fall back on an abortion rhetoric that seems to dehumanize and trivialize the death of a foetus as a way to humanize and make important the reproductive rights of women.” (Wolf p54) “Women can treat an unwanted foetus as a violation of her civil rights and is therefor justified tin using force to expel it” (McMillan pA12) The decision is not up to the mother because she is not God. Only God, the ultimate creator has the right to choose who may live and who shall die. Humans do not have the right or the power to control the quality of life and to avoid suffering. “The issue of abortion is not just life, but how life is created and the extent to which human intention and control the process, both before and after birth.

Carol Everett once said “The product abortion, is skillfully marketed and sold to the women at a crisis time in her life. She buys the product, finds it defective and wants to return it for a refund, but it is too late.” Abortion is one of the most controversial topics amongst not only politicians but also every human being alive; rather they are pro-choice or pro-life. I am personally in between; I believe that is the choice of that particular woman. We can not as a society decide the choices of others, especially if it is not a written law. But also I believe that it is murder. It was in 1973 when the Roe v Wade case abolished all laws prohibiting abortion.

In this paper, I argue that if the debate about the morality of surrogacy is couched in terms of respect due to other human beings and the paramount importance of their intimate relationships with one another, then it may be shown that most ordinary instances of surrogacy are morally wrong. Human flourishing cannot be separated from one’s relationships with others and any circumstance which is destructive of such relationships must be considered immoral. The surrogate, unless she is treated as an object or merely as a means to an end, is intimately involved in the relationships between the child and its putative parents and important relationships become ambiguous and so harmed. Furthermore, if this view if rejected, then the feminist

George Herbert Mead’s theory, which “centers on the relationships between symbols and interactions between people using these symbols,” best known today as the Symbolic Interaction Theory, was first published in 1934 (West, 2014, pg. 73). In today’s society, symbols have many meanings and the interpretations we draw from them can be positive or negative. The way we interpret these meanings influence how we act on a daily basis as Mead further suggests. In the beginning, numerous quantified studies were underway with the help of Herbert Blumer, a student of Meads. Since the SI theory was created, there have been many studies performed to test the assumptions of it. These assumptions focus on the importance of meaning for human behavior, importance of the self-concept, and relationship between the individual and society. Turner believes Mead had a “much more robust conception of the processes involved” (Turner, 2011, pg. 2) in this theory. However, most studies focused on the SI theory all rely on the three basic assumptions. In short, the symbolic interaction theory focuses on the relationship between the individual and society.

Mead he underlined the importance of language and symbols in social life human and, subsequently, the prospect that became known as "symbolic interactionism". Mead that paid more attention to small social processes to the society as a whole. Although the beginning of! interactionism symbolic are quite old, this perspective only began to be influential after a