Why Is Abortion Intuitively Wrong

Those who support abortion often overuse the claim that every individual has the right to choose and it is unfair to restrict a women’s choice on abortion. Although this claim at first thought may seem to be able to uphold the abuse of abortion, we

child is in the womb it still has a life and having an abortion is

There are many factors that are taken into consideration when determining if abortion is morally permissible, or wrong including; sentience of the fetus, the fetuses right to life, the difference between adult human beings and fetuses, the autonomy of the pregnant woman, and the legality of abortion. Don Marquis argues that abortion is always morally wrong, excluding cases in which the woman is threatened by pregnancy, or abortion after rape, because fetuses have a valuable future. Mary Anne Warren contends that late term abortions are morally permissible because birth is the most significant event for a fetus, and a woman’s autonomy should never be suspended.

One of the first moral issues addressed by both sides of the abortion debate concerns a pregnant woman’s so-called natural “right” to make “reproductive choices.” (“The Rights of Pregnant Women”) Anti-abortion advocacy groups claim that “the only way to actually protect the mother’s rights will be by enforcing laws that secure her child’s right to life,” (“Argument 2”) whereas pro-abortion groups contend that these laws “create a dangerous precedent for wide-ranging government intrusion into the lives of all women.” (“The Rights”) With two fundamentally contrasting viewpoints at odds with each other, it is apparent that one of the core issues concurrent with abortion is a woman’s rights versus the rights of her unborn fetus.

While parts of both may be true, both cannot stand side by side as completely true when discussing abortion. As they stand today, fetus rights and female rights are incompatible in arena of abortion. Even the “other side” agrees that the two cannot stand shoulder to shoulder. In a chapter entitled “Abortion Does Not Violate Human Rights”, Christian Beenfeldt quotes Brian McKinely when claiming that female rights have a higher precedence than fetus rights: “It’s actually quite simple. You cannot have two entities with equal rights occupying one body. One will automatically have veto power over the other.” So one question remains, which more important, fetus rights or female rights? The winner of this question can be decided by one simple factor: is the fetus to be considered a true, living human being at the point of conception, or does true human life not begin until after birth? A clarification should be made here, however. In this paper it will be assumed that everyone involved in this debate considers a newborn child to be a human being. That is, at the moment of birth, a child either becomes a human being or continues to be a human being; regardless of the fetus’s life state before birth, it will be assumed that all agree that birth “confirms”, so to speak, the life and human existence of the newborn.

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.

There are several sub-categories within the moral justification for women having the right to choose whether to have an abortion or not. These are: the feminist quality of life argument, the general quality of life argument, the not-a-person argument, and finally the no-duty-to-sustain argument. Each one of these examines something that makes those who support a woman’s right to choose tick.

Proponents of punishing pregnant women, who put their fetuses at risk, have highlighted some pertinent legal and ethical issues. One is that a viable fetus (fetus after 27 weeks gestation) has certain rights and privileges. They are of the opinion that as soon as the fetus is viable and can survive independently from it mother, it becomes a

Likewise, what criteria dictate whether the fetus’ right to life prevails over any rights the mother has to bodily autonomy?

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).

In the article Ethics of Abortion, much of the pro life argument seems to be

child. “Those choosing legalization of abortion will argue that the developing fetus lacks a moral status

“A living human person begins to exist at the moment of conception, even though only as a cell.” The road to human life may begin at conception, but to call abortion murder is ludicrous and a large exaggeration. Murder is described as the killing of a human being, and an unborn fetus should not be considered a living human being. A fetus is a group of cells that are completely dependent on its mother that cannot live on its own, therefore it should not be considered a human. One of the most popular arguments on the topic of abortion was the supreme court case Roe V. Wade. This case was about a pregnant single women (Roe) challenging the constitutionality of Texas abortion laws. The winning argument in the case Roe v. Wade, states that the “word ‘person’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn,” putting this argument to

A long on-going subject that has been greatly debated in our society is abortion. Many people argue that because the baby in the mother’s womb is not alive, aborting him or her is not considered a murder. However, others say that as the baby’s heart and brain are the first things to develop, the baby is technically alive and killing it would be a murder. As soon as the baby has a heartbeat, it has life. Abortion has many characteristics of a murder, including the killing of one human being by another, it’s unethical, and it is done without the consent of the person.

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