Mary Anne Warren's Argument For The Moral Permissibility Of Adulthood

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

Rosalind Hursthouse has a very different opinion on abortion and does not relate it to the murder of children or the rights of women. Instead, she justifies it through what a virtuous person would do. In the case study with the Thompson’s, Hursthouse would relate it to the relevance of the familiar biological facts and how pregnancy is a known result of sexual intercourse. The fact that Linda’s fetus is four months old would not be of relevance in Hursthouse’s opinion as clear lines are not visible as to when the fetus is attached and developed. The main focus of Hursthouse would be to question whether the abortion would be a result of a person acting “virtuously or viciously or neither” (Hursthouse 474). The abortion Linda ended up having

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. This, however, does not mean that she agrees that in all situations the choice to have an abortion wouldn’t be self- centered or callous.

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

In A Defense of Abortion Thompson presents an argument against the morality of abortion by showing the superiority of women’s rights through several different analogous cases. The case of focus will be case eight, “ A Selfless Brother’s Box of Chocolates.” In scenario one, Thompson argues that an older brother has a box of chocolates while his younger brother has nothing; the question of appeal is does the younger brother automatically have a right to these chocolates? The box of chocolates represents a woman’s body while the younger brother represents the fetus. Although it would be nice for the older brother (mother) to share his box of chocolates (mothers body) he is not obligated to share them with anyone even if he is perceived as a selfish, greedy, or a stingy person. In

However, she continues on to state that neither the abortion of a fetus nor the killing of a neonate could count as murder of a person because both, a fetus and an infant, lack all of the plausible components of personhood. Warren explicates that in an impoverished society that is unable to care for its infants without jeopardizing the health and safety of its members, infanticide cannot be deemed morally wrong. She also claims that infanticide is morally justified in the form of euthanasia where the child is born with severe abnormalities and the parents are unable to afford the financial and emotional burdens of its treatment. Warren’s response to infanticide is completely justified because in case of life or death, the life of an actual person far outweighs the life of a potential

A woman has, undoubtedly, the freedom to procreate, but once a woman chooses to retreat from that freedom, a commotion arises. Abortion is a woman’s choice for many reasons. It’s her body, therefore, no one else can decide for said person. She may have family and or financial problems preventing her from being able to properly care for the child. Women are forced to hear both sides of the debate and feel the intensity of a decision. Abortion is the said woman’s private decision and should not be stopped by any law.

An ethical dilemma today in society is that of abortion, which one would define as a deliberate end to a pregnancy. Various arguments exist questioning if an abortion is morally justifiable. Some say the state should decide on the legality of an abortion, some politicians say the federal government should decide, and many believe it should be up to the women since it pertains to their body. In this paper, I will analyze what a utilitarian’s perspective on abortion would be.

“Life begins at conception. Therefore, an un-born baby has a right to life. This court ruling is a slap in the face of humanity” (Gordon, Tacoma,

A pressing women’s right issue that has divided the nation for the last 40 years is Abortion. It’s a procedure in which a woman medically terminates her pregnancy, this option to terminate a pregnancy has come under great fire due to moral permissibility and ethical concern. The right to abortion was granted on a constitutional basis under the landmark decision by the supreme court case, “Roe Vs. Wade” but has been attacked and attempted to be dismantled by sweltering opposition by several special-interests groups.

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.

Tanya Luhrmann upholds her evidence behind every premise regarding abortions, the unfair treatment of the fetus, and “Pro-Life” beliefs. She explains that, “...the issue that provokes such anger surrounds the fetus’s right to life--its status as a potential human being” (Luhrmann, 1979, p. 1). Luhrmann addresses the importance of legalizing and creating safe procedures during abortions

Women’s rights have been a long struggle in America’s legal system, as well as in the religious world, for many decades and women continue to have challenges, concerns, and struggles today. Fighting for what is best for their bodies such as a woman’s right to contraceptives to control whether she will get pregnant or not was not ideal for religious and personal reasons but would find a worthy advocate in a woman who would dedicate her life for women’s reproductive rights. The right for a woman to have an abortion became a legal battle that went all the way to the Supreme Courts in a very well-known case.

The article from our text on “A Defense of Abortion” written by Judith Jarvis Thomason states the right to have an abortion should be the pregnant woman’s decision. Everyone should have the right to do whatever they want with their body. She goes on to mention that the fetus is a “person from the time of conception” (p241). This is what those who seek abortions use as their rational. Judith comes back and contradicts the statement I just presented by stating that she does not believe the “fetus is a person at the time on conception”. So, if the fetus is not a person at the time of conception, this suggests that “everyone has the right to life” (p242). One of the arguments she present is that abortions should be allowed in some cases, such as rape, incest, and when the mother’s life is in danger. When some people think of the word abortion, they think it is about killing an innocent life that did not ask to be created. Killing is often referred to as murder, and that is wrong. Judith appears to be pro-choice when it comes to the decision regarding abortions. Pro-choice

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.