Don Marquis Abortion Essay

Don Marquis’s purpose to his essay is to set out to prove that abortion is seriously wrong. He is addressing that abortion is morally wrong and should not be permitted except in certain cases. The authors thesis is “Abortion, except perhaps in rare instances, is seriously wrong”(Marquis, 754). Marquis’s purpose for exceptions or rare instances is to eliminate those instances that could be considered ethically controversial such as cases like abortion after rape or abortion during the first fourteen days after conception. Marquis provides another exception in the form of a pregnancy that could endanger a woman’s life and abortion when the fetus is anencephalic. An anencephalic is a condition with “the absence of all or a part of the brain

Judith Jarvis Thomson and Don Marquis both have extremely strong views on whether or not abortion is permissible. Judith Jarvis Thomson’s pro-choice standpoint defends a woman 's right to do what they want with their body. Don Marquis’s pro-life standpoint defends that a fetus is a person from the time of conception and it has a right to a future. Different situations come into play when it comes to abortion from rape to the mother 's life at risk that affect choices. A woman 's right to choose what to do with her body should absolutely never be taken away. Which is why I believe abortion should be permissible in all

According to the journal Why Abortion is Immoral of Don Marquis, a philosophy professor at Kansas University, he stated that “he tries to show that aborting a fetus is, except in exceptional circumstances, a serious moral wrong.” In fact, killing is not accepted in the society. specially to kill potential human being who has a valuable ability like ours. Although the fetus is not considered as human being and it also have a spirit and sacred, the fetus will be a human being after nine months and ten days, therefore no one could destroy another person’s

Patrick Lee and Robert George assert that abortion is objectively immoral. One of Lee and George’s main reason for coming to this conclusion is that human embryos are living human beings. This essentially validates that abortion is indeed the process of killing a human. Another main point said by the two is a rebuttal to a common argument used in favor of abortion, which states that a potential mother has full parental responsibilities only if she has voluntarily assumed them. The rebuttal to this was that the potential mother does indeed have special responsibilities to raise the child. Similarly to the responsibilities those have with their siblings, although those responsibilities were not chosen, they are definitely there. Another main

If life was not started at conception in these cases and scientifically the unborn child could not be having any thoughts or actions running through the brain the argument would be stronger to persuade the anti-abortion side. Personally, taking away an unborn living thinking fetus’s rights just because we cannot hear them or see them physically does not seem justified. In case eight I do not see how women can just say “well it is nice of me to share my body so I will or I will not because I don’t have to,” when they have a person breathing and thinking inside of them that could be the next inventor or great doctor of the world. For Thompson to be more persuasive to the opposing side she should try discounting life at conception and arguing how the fetus can not have thoughts, therefore it cannot have desires or rights because the unborn person is 100% reliant on its mother and therefore her right has to superior to the unborn child because this fetus cannot perform one single task without the help of its

It is important before breaking down Hursthouses argument, to examine the basis in which she grounds her claims. We can see through her investigation her examination of whether having an abortion is something a virtuous person would do. A virtuous person therefore, is someone who exercises virtue with virtue being defined by Hursthouse as “a character trait a human

If human have their own experience, they must think the experience which they have is valuable, so that the feeling of continuing their life exists. Other reason is human have their fundamental and strong desire of being alive. (Marquis,1987), therefore Fe thtus are not strongly connected with these two arguments of immorally killing. This two rivals accounts also have problem. The desirability is not necessary condition for the side that abortion is moral. The victims are not only the people who suffer a “real” disaster, or crimes, fetus can also be a victim. Though victim is not a sentience being, and they apparently fail to the requirement of mentation. Empathy faces the risk of ending of life, they directly do harm on them. For more, contraception is an attempt to question future-like-ours theory. The essay does not analysis the contraception as immoral and wrong. Contraception is still a problem of preventing a potential future of a value of life. If consider the process of contraception. There are for stages of subjects (sperm, ovum, sperm ovum separately, and sperm ovum together), so there are a lot possible that harm too many futures that may occur. The question on contraception seems to challenge the future-like-ours arguments given by the essay. This is a misleading question, because the amount of sperm is quite large, and contraception does not create a combination. There is no obvious losing of

Even today, there are many moral and philosophical issues that divide the United States because they create very polarized opinions and beliefs. One such philosophical issue is the moral permissibility of infanticide. Mary Anne Warren, a philosopher, presents her liberal yet controversial views on the issue of infanticide in the postscript of her article, On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion. However, the anti-infanticide arguments pose problems for Warren’s position because they justify the immorality of infanticide through the physical similarity in resemblance of neonates to human beings. These arguments also claim that the destruction of a viable infant is needless because even if the infant’s biological parents reject the infant, there are many other parents who are willing to adopt and nurture that infant.

[They hope for “pro-lifers” to join pro-choice activists in preventing unwanted pregnancies.](Wolf, 1997). They feel that a common ground can be met to which these debates will no longer exist. They realize the other side’s arguments and understand some of the cruelty. They still believe in a woman’s choice but wish to prevent pregnancies all together and stop all of the arguments.

The word abortion by definition means the ending of pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo before it can survive outside the uterus.

Abortion is not only a fluctuating concept in our society, but an ethical and emotional debate, as well. The image I have chosen presents concepts from a cultural and historical background, as well as presents an ethical, emotional, and logical appeal to the audience.

A second reason why abortion is wrong is because it deprives the fetus from his future. When we decide to kill a fetus then we are taking away from him a future like ours. The argument is as follows : (1) it is impermissible to kill humans, who if lived, would have a future like ours, (2) if abortion is not done, the fetus would have future as we do have, (3) so it is wrong to kill the fetus (4) therefore abortion is impermissible. A similar argument was given by Don Marquis in his article “Why Abortion is Immoral”. He stated that what makes killing wrong is neither the effect on the murder, nor the effect on the victim’s relatives or friends, but the effect is on the victim himself. The loss of life is a great lose one can suffer from. The loss of life deprives the individual from experiences, projects, activities and enjoyments that would have been part of his/her future. So killing is wrong because it deprives the individual from his future. Therefore abortion is impermissible because it will deprive the fetus from his/her future.

The conflict over abortion in America has been a major social problem in our nation for decades. During the 1960 's and 70 's with the coinciding civil rights movement and women’s rights movement, abortion became the new national issue that we still see today between two opposing ideologies, grouped into sides coined as pro-life and pro-choice. It is one of the biggest debates over whose morals and beliefs are adequate for our society that make the abortion issue such a controversial and divisive one. Each side believes that their views and beliefs are what we are a society should follow and belief.

The debate whether abortion is morally permissible or not permissible is commonly discussed between the considerations of the status of a fetus and ones virtue theory. A widely recognized theory of pro-choice advocates can be thought to be that their ethical view is that fetus’s merely are not humans because they lack the right to life since they believe a fetus does not obtain any sort of mental functions or capability of feelings. Although this may be true in some cases it is not in all so explaining the wrongness of killing, between the common debates whether a fetus does or does not obtain human hood, should be illustrated in a way of a virtuous theory. The wrongness of killing is explained by what the person or fetus is deprived of, such as their right to life; not by means of a heart beat or function of one’s body, but by the fact that it takes their ability of potentially growing into a person to have the same human characteristics as we do.

One of the furthermost essential issues in biomedical ethics is the controversy around abortion. There’s a long history on this controversy and it is still critically debated among researchers and the public in both terms of morality and legality. Some of the basic questions argued that may perhaps characterize the importance of the issue: Is abortion morally justifiable? Does the foetus/embryo/zygote have any moral and legal rights? Is the foetus a human being and, if so, should it be protected? What are the measures for being a human being? Is there any morally relevant break along the biological process of development from the unicellular zygote to birth? In this essay I will discuss why physician should recommend prenatal testing for severe birth defect even if it might encourages abortion therefore I do not agree with the statement above. My argument will based on the following ethical principles and theories: Utilitarianism, Respect for Autonomy and Virtue