Nancy could based her decision that she has already have an abortion and it would be morally irresponsible for her to have another. That would allow her to think that other women can still an abortion but not her. Another way, could be that Nancy could consider her motive for an abortion to be immoral. Nancy could be aware although not perfect, her fetus has the potential to have a healthy and happy life. In that aspect, Nancy could fall in the group of moderates who believe that abortion are only allowed under certain circumstances and for Nancy a fetus with Down Syndrome could simply not fall under those circumstances.
Ultimately, the decision to end a pregnancy shouldn’t be taken lightly, but should be the woman’s choice, and no one else’s. It is not up to one group of people to decide what is ethically appropriate for everyone else. Frankley, the pro-life movement is sexist and abortions are justifiable because the fetus is not yet a person. In the Journal Of Philosophy, Don Marquis wrote an article
Alyza Ramirez Mr.kegley 3rd period 9-18-15 Abortion: Pro-Life When it comes to abortion I believe in pro-life, that abortion should be illegal in the United States. In my opinion i believe that abortions should be illegal in the United States because its not right to take a child's life even if the child was not planned, I will explain the pros and cons of having an abortion and the negative effects it has on a woman. One effect that abortion can lead to is “medical complications such as heavy bleeding, incomplete abortion, anesthesia, and in some situations death”. “It can even go as far as having breast cancer, liver cancer, or placenta previa”. Having an abortion can also lead to “emotional complications
While it is desirable to save both the baby and the mother, sometimes only one can be saved. According to my ethical theory, the woman should die because that is not murder, it is natural causes. It may seem harsh, but God knows when we will live and die, and sometimes a woman is not supposed to live through her pregnancy. If the baby dies, it is murder because the baby had a chance at life, but it was prevented from experiencing life. Life is so important to God that he says anyone who murders should die.
Callahan would suggest that Lisa continues the pregnancy, as she does not have a right to control this other body that is dependent on her, especially since it is fully developed. The act of terminating the late pregnancy would be, according to Callahan, comparable to murdering a powerless or immature person. Lisa would need to consider herself as not just a single unit and understand that a human is developed within her care. Though it might seem like a quick and “easy” solution to terminate if the fetus was just an embryo, the fact that Lisa is carrying a six-month-old fetus makes it more morally serious and hard. Moreover, Lisa has a moral obligation to take care of this life form.
Thomson then shifts the argument towards the definition of abortion, according to opposing parties, which is that it is directly killing the child and how it is connected to the woman’s rights and the analogy. This idea leads to the four logical trains of reasoning. The first is that directly killing a human being is always not permissible, then an abortion may not be carried out. The second is that killing a person who is innocent is murder, than abortion may not be performed, and the third is that one should refrain from killing a innocent human is more important than keeping another alive, an abortion should not be done. The fourth is “if one's only options are directly killing an innocent person or letting a person die, one must prefer
We cannot give the argument to justify the act of abortion that the child has not arrived in world. The child has no existence, how is it a murder? The death of the child in the womb of a mother is not considered when it is the result of some injury. The state laws advocate that if woman faces miscarriage due to fighting off others, the responsible person must have fined which is
Thomson’s A Defense Of Abortion, Ms. Thomson uses the example of a sick violinist to show that a person may have a right to life but that person does not have a right to your body. In her example you are kidnapped by a group of music lovers and hooked up to a machine that is using your kidneys to flush harmful toxins out of a famous violinists blood. If you were to unplug yourself from this machine the violinist would die but if you don’t unplug yourself then you will be forced to spend nine months in bed with a sick violinist hooked up to your kidneys. Although it would be considered largesse to continue to let the violinist use your kidneys it is your decision whether you allow the violinist to use your kidneys because your right to your own body outweighs the violinists right to
Human rights, the choice of adoption, and Post Abortion Syndrome are three good examples on why abortion should be illegal. The unborn child deserves to have a chance at life just as much as any other human being. Whether the child grows up with the birth family or an adoptive family, the child is still experiencing life rather than death. Why have an abortion when in the end it could cause the mother more damage than happiness? Before having an abortion all women should consider the advantages, disadvantages, and possible side effects very carefully.
Since data can be used for both sides of the argument it makes this point completely invalid. Secondly, Pro-Life advocates make the argument that abortion should not be used because adoption is a perfectly good alternative. This is imply a false statement because abortion and adoption are two extremely different actions. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy and adoption is the giving away of a child for personal reasons. In one case the baby is definitely alive, adoption, and in the other case it is debatable whether the fetus is alive or not, abortion.
Abortion is full of excuses, going against God’s will, and murder. America should reconsider the laws and regulations of the countries soon to be mothers. Because abortion is a deliberate termination of a human life, women should not legally have the option to choose one. Making excuses for reasons a mother can kill her baby is wrong. For example, a mother having a baby she doesn’t want is no excuse to end a life.
Pro-life supporters, believe that abortion should be illegal because it denies the unborn fetus from having any chance at life. They also believe that adoption would be a better alternative than aborting an unborn child. However, the fetus is considered to being a potential person, but in reality it’s not one as of yet. It is said
If a being has a right to life then it is wrong to kill it. Abortion is the termination of a fetus; therefore abortion is wrong (Thomson, 48). Much of the debate on whether if abortion is permissible or not gets caught up on this first premise that fetuses obtain personhood at conception and to deny this premise would be to claim that personhood does not start at conception which would make this argument fail. Thompson does not believe this claim that personhood is achieved at conception, but she feels that the permissibility of abortion can still be argued for even if premise (1) were true. She does this by attacking premise (3); that if a being has a right to life, then it is wrong to kill it.
Marquis’ thesis is as follows “That abortion is, with rare exceptions, seriously immoral.” Prima facie is defined as “based on the first impression; accepted as correct until proved otherwise.” Marquis is saying that abortion, at first glance, is seriously wrong but in some cases, it can be proven morally permissible. These exceptions include rape, when the woman’s life is in danger due to the pregnancy or if the fetus is anencephalic (a congenital condition in where the fetus has some or all of the developing skull leaving brain matter exposed). I like the fact that Marquis takes into account congenital anomalies, because the fetus would most likely suffer and to be taken to term would cause the fetus pain and a very short life span. Marquis first states that killing an adult is wrong. What makes the act of murder immoral is, not losing the physical aspect of being alive, or the pain caused to our family and friends, but because we are completely eradicating their future, robbing them of their future of value, that they would’ve experienced had they not died, and that is what makes it unjust.