The main point is not the price that an eye, a brain or heart is sold for, but that a helpless child had to be killed in order to obtain these parts. Thus legalizing abortions would not mean giving the opponents a right to privacy and choice, but would in turn give a boost to their multimillion dollar biotechnology industry (Crutcher,M). I’m the defender of the right to life in America and an issue like abortion should light a fire in the hearts of all who respect this nation’s founding principles. The strength of the pro-life position is not because of some clever definition of life. Rather the facts force us to admit that this is a unique individual human life, whose helplessness in the womb can either motivate us to compassion, nurturing and protection or be used as an excuse and opportunity to exercise our deadly power and earn millions.
One needs to dig deeper into the issue of why it is wrong to kill. Marquis main argument why abortion is immoral is not about the effect of the murderer, the victims close relatives and friends nor the personhood problem, but it is about the effect on the victims’ life and future. The effect killing has on the victim is the most influent... ... middle of paper ... ...life is at risk is also inconsistent with Marquis values since the fetus will still have a future like ours. Marquis argument contradicts itself. Marquis claims abortion is morally impermissible because killing is wrong.
This may sound like a Nazi speaking of the Jews in the early 1930s, but they based the killing on a religion, not on a case-by-case basis, as we do in this country. America’s legal system is meant to rid society of evil, and by killing the murderers and rapists it clears them out of the genetic pool and gives an example to others of what not to do. Although it may seem cruel to systematically kill people based on one act in their life, it is justifiable because those people have the potential to kill again, and if they are going to hurt someone, they should be kept from society. If ex-killers have the potential to kill again, whether it is another prisoner or a person walking the street, they should be taken away from humans.
Getting away with murder is bad on your soul and damages your hear... ... middle of paper ... ...ency from a fetus to a newborn has no weight in support of abortion. It is a sad reality that the pro-life movement hasn't been the cleanest crusade. Some pro-lifers have committed horrible acts of unrighteousness that don't justify their cause, nevertheless, that doesn't excuse abortion. The existence of wrong doesn't mean that the unborn aren't human. There might even be perverts that support the choice of life only to have prey, but that doesn't mean that the unborn aren't human.
It 's a very dark word that people tend to avoid, but when speaking realistically, what is taking place in abortion clinics is in fact murder. Is murdering someone legal? No. It is a crime. So, why are there stipulations created to make this form of fetus murder legal?
She begins by stating her own opinion that “the basis of this conviction… is the realization that a fetus is not a person, and thus does not have a full-fledged right to life.” She then goes on to point out that Noonan never questions the assumption if a fetus is human then abortion is wrong for exactly the same reason murder is wrong. Which is very odd considering that the majority of anti-abortionists hold so much weight to their arguments on the fact that abortion is murder to a fetus which they see as being a human being from conception. She calls into question Noonan’s stance again by bringing up the fact a fetus cannot be considered a member of the moral community, those existing with full and equal moral rights, for the basic reason it is not a person, and it is personhood, and not humanity given by the human genetic code as defined by Noonan, which is the basis for membership in this community. Noonan argues a fetus, in any stage of development, satisfies none of the criteria of personhood, and is not even enough like a person to be granted even some of the same rights due to this resemblance. A fetus’s possible personhood is not a threat to the morality of abortion, because whatever the rights of potential people may be, they are always disallowed in any conflict with the moral rights of actual people.
To kill innocence is murder. "Abortions are different from other murders because the baby is defenseless" (www.iep.utm.edu). It is against the law to murder life, but abortion is legal, so it is legal in or out of the womb. The fetus is alive in the womb and can feel everything. If a baby is murdered that has not had a chance to even live its fate, then what is... ... middle of paper ... ... fact it is the way out for a coward.
Although polls before the vote revealed strong support for it,the ballot was defeated by fifty-four to forty-six percent,and euthanasia remains illegal in Noth America. In addition to violating civil law,euthanasia also contradicts the laws of many religions of the world. It is God who controlls life and death. Man will take this responsibility if euthanasia is permitted. It is stated in the ten commandments,"Do not... ... middle of paper ... ...p; In conclusion, euthanasia is religiously, legally and medically wrong.
Another reason I feel abortion is not right is it is too similar to euthanasia. In theory, euthanasia, like abortion, could be efficient, practical, and even done humanely. In the same way, Nazis conveniently exterminated Jews. If abortion is legal now, what stops euthanasia from being legalized? In conclusion, I have found that most arguments for abortion are logical, but morally I view it the same way I view genocide.
If we qualify our moral exclusions of killing by allowing the exceptions of self-defense and wars, why not accept euthanasia as another exception? Beauchamp replies to this by saying that the difference with euthanasia is that it involves making the judgment that a life can be not worth living. For example, the ancient Greeks and Romans practiced infanticide, while the Eskimos killed their aged parents. And despite their apparent acceptance that their lives were not worth living, they do not appear to have less respect for other lives in general. However, as Christians, we must look at our lives as not our own, but God’s.