...ice. While I value my experience, as I feel should be commonly held by others and the way in which we interact (killing adults is wrong), I don’t see a strong enough basis for that view to be held for a fetus. As Marquis summarized, the killing of a fetus is essentially arbitrarily choosing a human cell. Although fetuses in first trimester aren’t single celled organisms, they serve no cognitive function or purposes to themselves, so there are no features in which it is being deprived of if it is terminated. The potential life of a fetus is the same as saying there is a potential for any such biological thing, it is simply a scenario, which could happen if given the opportunity. But if an adult human possesses the ability to have goals and desires, they then should be allowed to make the discretion for their best interest to whether an abortion is permissible or not.
...nhood and potential is too flimsy a concept to be relevant and so in this essay, however to prevent repeating the same argument, i decided to examine another aspect of the issue by taking the focus from the foetus and placing it upon the woman, whose personhood and right to life and bodily autonomy are not at all questionable or worthy of debate. In doing so it becomes clear that granting legal personhood to a foetus cannot be done without greatly infringing upon the rights of women, and so abortion is morally permissible and should be readily available for those women who do not seek to assume the responsibility of a pregnancy or fulfill the role the role of mother, because a woman’s right to her own body outweighs that of another being, and it would be immoral to disallow it because of the consequences that would emerge from treating a foetus as an equal person.
For many years, the morality of abortion has been questioned by two perspectives: pro-choice and pro-life. While modern culture explains that abortion is a woman’s free choice if she does not want the unborn baby, the Catholic Church teaches the world that from the moment of conception there is a child with a soul within the womb, and to abort it would be to murder an innocent being.
If the foetus is a person, then abortion is technically murder and should be illegal. However, even if the foetus is classed as a person, abortion may still be justified; as shouldn’t a woman have the legal right to make decisions about her own body?
The teachings of the Christian denominations of Catholicism and Orthodoxy provide their adherents with guidance on the ethical issue of abortion: the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus before normal childbirth in order to deliberately terminate a human pregnancy. Both denominations condemn abortion in a mutual acceptance that it is morally wrong. In stating, “From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life” (Catechism, no. 2270), the Catechism of the Catholic Church demonstrates the Catholic teaching that each human being ha...
Over the duration of the last century, abortion in the Western hemisphere has become a largely controversial topic that affects every human being. In the United States, at current rates, one in three women will have had an abortion by the time they reach the age of 45. The questions surrounding the laws are of moral, social, and medical dilemmas that rely upon the most fundamental principles of ethics and philosophy. At the center of the argument is the not so clear cut lines dictating what life is, or is not, and where a fetus finds itself amongst its meaning. In an effort to answer the question, lawmakers are establishing public policies dictating what a woman may or may not do with consideration to her reproductive rights. The drawback, however, is that there is no agreement upon when life begins and at which point one crosses the line from unalienable rights to murder.
Similar to Mary Anne Warren, I believe that abortions should always remain legal because there is no stage in fetal development in which a fetus resembles a person. Warren does make the distinction that a fetus may resemble a human being because they have a full genetic code and potential of become a person, however, Warren defines a person as someone with the capacity for rational thought, therefore a fetus might resemble a human but doesn’t resemble a person. (Warren, 11). While it is hotly contested, a fetus doesn’t have rational thought. For the most part, people would not consider a fet...
Abortion has been a political, social, and personal topic for many years now. The woman’s right to choose has become a law that is still debated, argued and fought over, even though it has been passed. This paper will examine a specific example where abortion is encouraged, identify the Christian world views beliefs and resolution as well as the consequences of such, and compare them with another option.
Abortion is one of the most controversial issues today. It has become a question of not only ethics, but morals. In the 1973 case of Roe v Wade the Supreme Court ruled that a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy by abortion within the first six months of the pregnancy. However, conservative Presidents have changed the legislation enough to allow states to restrict abortion in various ways (Practical Ethics, Peter Singer). In the following paper, I will summarize the views on abortion of Pope John Paul II and philosopher, Peter Singer. These two men have very conflicting opinions about abortion.
Like Kaposy, Peter addresses a debate between a few different sources. Seipel introduces us to Charles C. Camosy, a professor of ethics and theology and an author of several articles for the Bioethics journal. Seipel quotes Camosy saying, “… a fetus is not an ‘actualized person’ in the sense that it has ‘the actual capacities for personhood,’ namely, ‘rationality and self awareness in time.’ Nonetheless,… fetuses have moral standing as persons because they are what he calls ‘potential persons.’ What are potential persons?… beings that have the potential to be rational and self-aware” (518). Seipel and Camosy are absolutely right. Because of the fact that a fetus is a “potential person,” it is therefore just as valuable and morally unjustifiable to kill as a comatose individual (who also has the potential to be rational and self-aware, but is not either within their current state). Seipel then introduces us to a view held by Jeff McMahan, a professor of moral philosophy at Oxford University who has produced many works regarding the issue of abortion. McMahan presumes that the right to life is dependent on the “psychological continuity” of the individual. As a rebuttal to this idea, Seipel proposes, “Alzheimer’s victims lack such continuity. Thus, the implication is that just as the death of a fetus is not all that tragic,
We’ve come to a point now where abortion is legal so now people questions if the church has changed their views? They respond by first telling everyone contemplating abortion that abortion conflicts with moral law. If they don’t feel as if they are violating any of their morals the church goes on to declare that “You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the new born baby to perish” (Vatican).Which tells anyone contemplating it that under no circumstance is it ever acceptable whether the government has made it legal or not it is still illegal under the Commandments of Catholics...
Abortion is the ending of pregnancy before the birth and the Roman Catholic Church would say that this is morally wrong. An Abortion results in the death of an embryo or fetus. Abortion, the Church says destroys the lives of helpless, innocent children. By aborting these unborn infants, humans are hurting themselves; they are not allowing themselves to meet these new identities and unique personalities. The Church teaches the human life begins at the moment of conception. During the past quarter century, abortion has joined race and war as one of the most debatable subjects of controversy in the United States. It discusses human interaction where ethics, emotions and law come together. Abortion poses a moral, social and medical dilemma that faces many individuals, which can create an intensely emotional and sometimes even violent atmosphere.
“How far along in a pregnancy is it until the unborn child is considered human? At what point does it receive basic rights?” These propositions have been the topic of one the most controversial discussions of the century. Based on the research I have completed on this topic, it has been made indisputable to me that life begins at the moment of conception.
There will never be a universal answer to whether a fetus is a person or not. Going by the traits that make a person, a fetus is not considered a person. It is not living, it cannot make rational thought and it cannot communicate with others. Therefore, the decision to have an abortion is permissible and does not infringe on any persons right. A woman has a right to body and has the choice to have an abortion if she feels necessary. The argument to whether abortion is permissible relies on one’s beliefs to what makes a person. If one believes life starts at conception, then they would perceive abortion as being morally wrong. Those that follow specific traits that make a person, find abortion permissible. The issue is determined not by one view, but many. That is why there will never be any one answer to the morality of abortion.
Ward, F. Is the Fetus a Person? The Bible's View. 15 Jan. 2001. Religion and Choice