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.
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).
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.
With almost half the nation divided among their views, abortion remains one of the most controversial topics in our society. Since Roe v. Wade, our views in society as well as following court cases have been progressing toward the woman’s right to choose. The precedent set by Roe v. Wade made the Supreme Court acknowledge that it cannot rule specifically when life begins and it also affirms that it is the woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th Amendment. In the 1st Amendment, the Establishment Clause forbids the government from passing laws “which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another”. Many Christian pro-lifers use their religious beliefs to dispute when life begins. Although through the Free Exercise
It is evident that the believing and doubting game involves trying to evaluate the set beliefs and ideas that have been formulated by other individuals against our standards. Most people use the believing tool to test and scrutinize arguments by other people. Consequently, this paper has chosen three opposing viewpoints on the debate against and for abortion. For many years, the topic of abortion has been greatly been discussed in the United States. While some people argue to support abortion, there has been legislation enacted that has also prevented the same. Some other people have been against pro life arguments against abortion. Those who are pro choice arguments have stated that the laws that support abortion should be under the woman’s choice. They are called pro choice advocates for their support (Almossawi, 2014).
By failing to define the terms ‘fetus’ and ‘standard fetus’, he leaves open for interpretation not only the moral significance of the terms, but also their strength in relation to his argument. Marquis assumes that the fetus has a future that is just as valuable as that of an adult yet fails to grant the fetus the same moral status as an adult. This lack of consistency along with the falsity of his claims weakens his argument and leaves a large piece of the abortion question unanswered. Because many of his premises are false, I altered them to be correct which in turn resulted in an illogical sequence of evidence for Marquis’ original conclusion; rendering his argument invalid. After altering the conclusion to follow the revised premises, it only gave a suitable claim for some abortions, rather than the overwhelming majority of abortions. Due to the fact that these premises had to be revised in order to be correct, and the conclusion no longer accomplishes Marquis’ original goal, we can conclude that his argument is
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.
Numerous attempts have been made to define the term fetus. Scholars have attempted to use both biological and psychological aspects, some have gone further to outline characteristics and conditions that define a fetus (Garrett et al., 2011). Others have tied the developmental aspects related to viability, birth and conception. The United States Supreme Court definition provides an alternate decision. The case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey and Roe vs. Wade best defines a fetus in terms of viability (Nocon, 2010). Another way of looking at it is by identifying legal and moral status calculated in constitutional frameworks. A baby is considered to acquire both legal and moral standings when they exist as a separate person. Numerous questions
Judith Thomson’s A Defense of Abortion is an article defending abortion on the grounds of rights, duties, and justice. Thomson uses various thought experiments to represent different circumstances surrounding a pregnancy and the permissibility of abortion in these circumstances. One such thought experiment that she uses in her argument is the burglar example. If you open a window and a burglar climbs into your house, anti-abortionists would argue that the burglar has a right to stay in your house and you have a duty to shelter him because you are partially responsible for his presence there. Even if you install bars specifically to keep out burglars and the burglar still manages to break in then you are still partially responsible and he still
Singer’s argument states that if you can prevent suffering without sacrificing “too much” then it is wrong not to do so. You can prevent suffering without sacrificing “too much”. Therefore, it is wrong to keep your luxuries while others are starving, suffering etc. An objection to this argument is that “too much” is too general. The argument does not define too much and can differ from person to person. The same goes for suffering. The way a person’s suffering differs from person to person.
The topic of abortion has been and more than likely will forever be an extremely controversial and typically heated debate. The Supreme Court made the landmark decision in 1972 in the Roe vs. Wade case making abortion legal and on demand for all American women. Throughout the years, however, new appointed Supreme Court judges say the abortion issue should be a decision for the individual state to decide and not a federal matter. The abortion debate houses two sides: pro-choice and pro-life.
In the article 'A Defense of Abortion' Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that abortion is morally permissible even if the fetus is considered a person. Morally philosophy paper by Judith Jarvis Thomson first published in year 1971, granting for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, she uses thought experiments to argue that the fetus's right to life doesn't trump the pregnant woman's right to control her own body and its life-support functions, and that induced abortion is therefore not morally impermissible. In particular her primary reason for presenting an argument of this nature is that the abortion argument at the time had effectively come to a standstill. The typical anti-abortion argument was based on the idea that a fetus is a person and since killing a person is wrong, therefore abortion is wrong.
The assigned readings for today included chapters 3 and 4 of the book “Reconstructing Motherhood and Disability in the Age of ‘Perfect’ Babies”. The third chapter of the book is a discussion of the idea of “personhood”, and how disability affects personhood in babies with disabilities (Landsman, 2009). The fourth chapter is a discussion of parental diagnosis, the perceived infallibility of doctors, and denial vs. hopeful outlooks (Landsman, 2009).
Abortion is a controversial topic and people have debated between “Pro-Choice”, a woman’s right to choose, as well as “Pro-Life”, strictly anti-abortion, for decades. For Abortion Rights Action Week, a Harvard College newspaper printed an opinion-based article by Tanya Luhrmann called, The Pro-Choice Argument. She claims that a priceless part of a human life is experiencing motherhood. Based on Luhrmann’s research, she presents a strongly reasoned argument between “Pro-Choice” and “Pro-Life”, and how the perspectives of both sides affects the irreplaceable relationship of a mother and child. Her well-developed and valid premise holds value and presents a strongly reasoned argument, backed by extensive research she conducted.
Abortion is one of the most controversial topics discussed in our world today. Millions of fetuses never got a chance to be born because a mother chose to abort them. Although I do not believe in abortion, I believe a woman should have the right to decide whether to have a baby or not. Our textbook presents views and arguments on the issues.