Debates about abortion have engendered both, great interest and great hostility in the past few years. An issue of contention even today, the ethics surrounding abortion shall be discussed in this paper. As a person that believes abortion is morally permissible, I shall begin my argument by first addressing the ‘conservative’ position against abortion. I shall then examine the arguments laid out by Peter Singer in “Practical Ethics” regarding the permissibility of abortion and infanticide. It should be noted here that while I agree that abortion is permissible, I am opposed to the claim that infanticide is permissible under regular circumstances.
Abortion is a very controversial topic that has taken the main stage once again in US politics. Recently, new Republican politicians have taken power and have decided to ban abortion. There are two fields of ideas on abortion. One being that it is the murder of an innocent fetus, and that it is completely unethical. The second school of thought is that abortion is a right for women, and that it is ethical.
Valerie Tarico explains in the article, “I am Pro-Abortion, not Just Pro-Choice: 10 Reasons Why We Must Support the Procedure and the Choice,” how she is for abortion. She thinks women should plan out their pregnancies when they know they can handle a child and when they found the person they want to have the child with. Tarico says women should not have ill-conceived childbearing because the women had unprotected sex, was raped, a condom broke or the women did not think she was in the right relationship to have a baby. Even though, the author claims she is also pro-choice, Valerie Tarico wrote the article with people who are pro-life or pro-choice in mind because all she states in the article is how she is pro-abortion and how abortion is
Abortion has been a long standing ethical issue debated around the world. It is an issue that evokes, on all sides, very strong feelings and judgements and very heated arguments. The most radical argumentsof the anti- abortion or “pro-life” side of the debate views abortion as the murder of unborn children, and is the equivalent of infanticide making the legal issue of abortion (since the case of Morganthaler) at a rate of 1.5 million a year in Canada into a justified murder of the innocent. There is no right or wrong side to be on, but the side that would have to be against abortion. It has been decided in 1973 by the United States Supreme Court that as long as the baby lives in the womb, he or she would be the property of the mother.
1. Utilitarianism Philosopher View (Jeremy Bentham & John Mill) Utilitarianism theory was founded by Jeremy Bentham and then got expanded by John Mill who came up with the 2 types or forms of Utilitarianism which are Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism says an action is right if it tends to promote happiness, and wrong if it tends to produce the reverse of happiness and doesn’t just involve the happiness of the performer of the action but also that of everyone affected by it.
In this paper, I will review Mary Anne Warren’s stance on the morality of abortion and provide my objection to her view that a fetus is not a human on the basis that a fetus does not contain the characteristics, generated by Warren, to be considered a Homo sapien; therefore, warranting abortion morally acceptable. The basis of my argument against abortion is on the premise that a fetus, by the Law of Nature, is to be protected and preserved since it is considered innocent and a human being, based on the idea that a human being is something bodily and physical, an individual and a being in time (Iglesias). Mary Anne Warren defines abortion as the deliberate action to remove a fetus from a human female’s womb per her request resulting in the death of the fetus (Warren 307). By identifying what is meant by abortion before furthering her argument, Warren clearly identifies the topic of her argument so that there be no confusion.
Introduction Abortion remains one of the most controversial topics in politics and culture in the United States. The government, religious groups, women and men, cannot reach an agreement or negotiation on what should be done. The argument being; can the state, religious entities, and citizens have the right to override a woman’s autonomy, and does her right to abort override a potential life’s’ right to life? These two standpoints can be mind spinning, and that is why this paper will argue having two dichotomous standpoints is causing further conflict, with no future agreement in sight. How can the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” debate deepen their understanding of abortion, value the complexity of the issue, and reach a conclusion that will benefit both women and potential babies?
Pro-Life or Pro-Choice The debate about abortion have been around for decades. The conflict between the people who are for and against have been arguing about that topic for years. According to Sutter Health “Abortion means ending a pregnancy before the fetus (unborn child) can live independently outside the mother.” Pro-Life
During Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court held that a pregnant woman has the fundamental right to privacy in the cases of abortion. This case recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions, including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians. Furthermore, it affirms the legality of a woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th amendment to the constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court Case of Roe vs. Wade has made abortion legal in America. The ruling was that babies are not legal “persons”; from that point on, they have had no rights or protection under Constitution.
Abortion is considered as a sin by many, but is also measured as the answer to certain issues such as overpopulation. According to the recent studies, Canada has fluctuated extremely from being the most pro-life country around the globe to one of the most pro-choice. As a country known for its multiculturalism, many immigrates and emigrates, bringing one of their prized possession – religion. Having said, this issue of abortion in Canada, through the lens of religion, with the views of conflict and functionalism theorist, shapes their stance in regards to the culture and ethics of their affiliated faith.
The Planned Parenthood activist group justify their stance on protecting reproductive rights for mothers and providing free sexual and reproductive health services by claiming that their organizations efforts lead to the fundamental ideals of the historic authors John Locke, Edmund Burke, Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill; life, liberty, and property. To begin, Planned Parenthood would argue that individuals who choose to take part in their services, do so to better their life. It may be utilizing their birth control services, getting an abortion, or acquiring simple reproductive health care, but the person receiving the resources ultimately decides what is best for their body and life. Throughout the organization's website and tabs of information
Abortion is one of the most argued topics for several different reasons, and while abortion kills a fetus to end a woman’s pregnancy, supporters of abortion say that abortion is beneficial to many women in society. One of the reasons why people argue about abortion is that in some perspectives, abortion is preserved by the United States Constitution, while other perspectives show that there is no connection between abortion and the Constitution. The impact of the Roe v. Wade supreme court case involving abortion resulted in the decision making process of women about having an abortion, though abortion was not considered to be a constitutional right by some people in the United States (Sullivan). In contrast to how abortion was not considered
Practicing abortions are very controversial topic. According to the article “America Deserves Better”, it states abortion held center stage in a major national debate throughout the 21 century (Goldkamp 42). Some religions consider it a horrendous act. It is unacceptable in religions, no matter the reason. Society can label women who seek abortions as “sinful, selfish, dirty, irresponsible, heartless, or murderous” according to “The Bad Mother: Stigma, Abortion and Surrogacy” (Abrams 181).
In “A Defense of Abortion,” Judith Thomson argues with a unique approach regarding the topic of abortion. For the purpose of the argument, Thomas agrees to go against her belief and constructs an argument based on the idea that the fetus is a person at conception. She then formulates her arguments concerning that the right to life is not an absolute right. There are certain situations where abortion is morally permissible. She believes that the fetus’s right to life does not outweigh the right for the woman to control what happens to her own body.