She then reconstructs the initial argument to state that it is morally impermissible to abort a fetus if it has the right to life and has the right to the mother?s body. The fetus has the right to life but only has the right to a ... ... middle of paper ... ...ould assure the survival of twin A. I feel that Thomson?s argument was easily refuted although it was very imaginative and clever. It doesn?t seem that her idea of abortion only being wrong in the case of voluntary pregnancy will hold water too long. In my personal opinion I feel that abortion is generally wrong. I think that if the woman became pregnant through consensual sex, even if she did not want to have a child, abortion is wrong regardless of the contraceptive precautions that were exercised.
One problem is that your viewpoint allows no abortions, that allows no consideration for the mother of the family that would be effected by that child. Also, pro-lifers do not agree with sex-education in schools this would lead to more teen pregnancies which would lead to children giving birth to children. A huge problem that would occur if there was no abortion would be illegal abortions. Illegal abortions would cause women to become law breakers, and may even cause many women to die. My viewpoint does not lead to all of those problem.
I feel this is a just action because with certain cases of abortion such as unplanned, rape, etc. I believe the fetus does have a right to life, but if the mother does not want to carry out her pregnancy then she could at least leave it for adoption or find someone who is willing to care for her child. She also adds to her claim that it is wrong for a mother to have an abortion in the last trimester of her pregnancy due to, “a vacation.” I whole heartedly agree with Thomson because again, if the pregnancy is causing financial instability, doubts on caring for the child due to lack of education, or detrimental problems to her physical and mental health, the mother should be allowed to have an abortion. Then Thomson uses the seed/person case to support her argument where if you left your window open and a seed was to fly in and take root on your carpet and the seed grows into a person/plant, have you granted permission for that person/plant the right to use your room? This is where I start to find Thomson 's example a bit unrealistic.
In this paper, I will discuss the pro- abortion argument presented by Judith Thomson. The main idea of Thomson’s argument is that abortion is morally permissible. In supporting her position, Thomson presents several arguments regarding the implications of the right to life that she believes the anti- abortion might have dwelled on. As I explain her arguments, I will also attempt to criticize her view on the topic. As Thomson observes, most of the common argument on abortion is to define whether or not a fetus is a person.
Judith Thomson uses different analogies to justify that in, most cases, abortion is morally acceptable. She states at the end of “A Defense of Abortion”, that she although she having an abortion isn’t always permissible for example it would be wrong for a women to demand for an abortion if she was going on a vacation. She also says that she is not arguing for the right to “secure death of the unborn child… You may detach yourself even if... ... middle of paper ... ...hese different analogies justify that abortion is morally permissible in different cases such as rape, contraceptive failure and pregnancies in which the mother’s life is at risk. Thomson agrees that women deserve the right to have an abortion based on their own right to life in the case where her life is at risk or in the case that the pregnancy was unwanted in the first place. With the combination of the reasons backing up these rights, Judith Thomson postulates a strong argument for her view on the morality of abortion.
Without a woman's right to do what she chooses with her body, her freedom and ... ... middle of paper ... ...nking of herself, she also thinks on behalf of her baby. Abortion clinics do not make the choice easier, nor do they force the woman into the surgery. People who are against abortion have the choice not to have one. It is not fair to take away the choice of people who do want one. The reason I believe so strongly about the abortion issue is because sometimes circumstances beyond a woman’s control present themselves.
She claims that, opponents against abortion have been concerned to justify the independence of a fetus, to ensure that it has a right to life, just as a mother would. Making the fetus a human being (pg#). To fight off the argument she writes that what if mother’s body resulted pregnant from involuntary acts. Leading to the question being is the abortion permissible in the situation of an involuntary act? Many will claim that the mother was in a situation that entails high risks and Thompson later points out what if it was a voluntary act, is abortion permissible now?
In A Defense of Abortion (Cahn and Markie), Judith Thomson presents an argument that abortion can be morally permissible even if the fetus is considered to be a person. 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, abortion is wrong. The pro-abortion adopts the opposite view: namely, that a fetus is not a person and is thus not entitled to the rights of people and so killing it couldn’t possibly be wrong. Thomson’s argument is presented in three components.
This examples stands as one of her most prominent defenses. Thompson believes that the fact of whether of not a fetus is a person is completely irrelevant towards the issue of abortion. This is mainly because she has found the point of becoming a person cannot be proved with complete confidence. Judith does not seem to understand why people think that just because a fetus may actually be a person that it ... ... middle of paper ... ...t it is immoral. I also see that it may not be immoral for a woman to abort if she has made the most effort to avoid pregnancy using contraceptives.
Indeed, pro-abortionists argue that at the time an abortion procedure takes place, the fetus cannot exist separately of her mother and for that reason it cannot be considered as a separate organism. Furthermore, they claim that in the case of rape or incest, forcing a woman carry a pregnancy to full term after this violent act would cause further psychological harm to the victim and the unborn child. They also argue that abortion is a safe medical procedure with less than 0.5% risk of serious complications; however, anti-abortionists hold very different views. They claim that life starts at the moment of conception and for that reason, since abortion is the act of taking human life, it is murder. They argue that abortion is a grave offend against God and his creation.