The argument for the moral rights of the unborn child against abortion still holds true because the child cannot be viewed as a virus that abortion presents a cure because the rights of a fetus is reserves in its identity as a member of the Homo sapien community. Therefore, any acts against an unborn child( or fetus), although presently legal, should be considered as morally unjust, which is equal to the act of murder because what is killed in an abortion is not simply, a housing of organ but a human being equal to any other. Furthermore, the idea of justifying an abortion, which essentially should be viewed as the forceful and unnatural death, of an unborn child based on the assumption that he or she cannot express thoughts, or desires therefore rendering their members to full moral rights . Thus, it negates the feeling of pain and hardships that are experience by a fetus as it is forcefully yank out the worm of his
The article A Defense of Abortion written by Judith Thomson and the article Why Abortion is Immoral by Don Marquis deal with the arguments of whether abortion is moral, immoral, justified or not. The author Don Marquis wants to prove that abortion is immoral without taking into consideration extreme cases, while Thomson says that abortion is justified in some cases. The latter supports her arguments by saying that abortion is justified in cases such as rape and when the mother’s life, which is the most important here, is in danger. On the other hand, Marquis says that abortion can’t be justified, because abortion is killing a person who might have a future, without much reference to any other cases that might lead to abortion.
Right now, thousands of women face a life changing decision, whether to follow through with a pregnancy or going through the process of abortion. An abortion is the process of removing an unborn offspring, known as a fetus, from the woman’s uterus in order to terminate the pregnancy. The confrontational topic is divided between the views of pro-life and pro-choice. Advocates for pro-life strongly believe that the unborn baby should be protected. Whereas, pro-choice supporters believe the decision of what happens to the unborn baby is completely a right of the woman. After analyzing the bioethical implications of abortion, through the legal verses illegal and choice verses life stances, one will perceive that laws should be governed in support of pro-choice across the nation.
Marquis believes abortion to be extremely immoral. However he mentions that there are exceptions in rare but certain circumstances where abortion is acceptable. We can infer that these instances would include situations that would put the mother or child at serious risk by keeping the fetus. He is frustrated that this idea has received minimal support recently. As a result he wants to influence change in society in hopes of receiving the support and publicity this topic deserves. Marquis’ primary argument stems from the idea of killing in general. He explains it is immoral to kill an adult because it prematurely deprives the human of something they may have valued at the time they were killed, as well as something they may had valued in the future. Although the victim may not realize it at the time of their death, they certainly had a valuable future ahead of them to experience which has been cut short. We are the only ones who can decide what is valuable to them; in this case we value some things more than others, and this concept differs from person to person. For example, in the present I value the life I am given and the opportunity I have to earn my degree at Villanova University while also valuing my future as well knowing that I have a chance to be successful in the future. Although I have not succeeded yet, I still value that opportunity I have and the life I’m capable of achieving through earning a degree. Therefore, he connects this same theory to the life of a fetus. By killing the fetus the result is the same, we are depriving it of its futur...
In Dan Marquis’ article, “Why Abortion is Immoral”, he argues that aborting a fetus is like killing a human being already been born and it deprives them of their future. Marquis leaves out the possible exceptions of abortion that includes: a threat to the mom’s life, contraceptives, and pregnancy by rape. First, I will explain Marquis’ pro-life argument in detail about his statements of why abortion is morally wrong. Like in many societies, killing an innocent human being is considered morally wrong just like in the United States. Second, I will state my objection to Marquis’ argument through examining the difference between a human being already born future compared to a potential fetus’s future. Thus, Marquis’ argument for his pro-life
Marquis’s argument that it is immoral to kill, and abortion is wrong because it deprives one of a valuable future has a lot of problems in my eyes that does not make his view on anti-abortion solid. The lack of arguments that do not raise questions that seem to go unanswered make it hard to be persuaded to change a pro-abortionist mind or even be open to understanding where Marquis’s arguments lead. His “what if” argument leaves room for anyone opposing to “what if” in any direction which is not grounds for an effective argument and hurts Marquis’s because a lot of the questions go unanswered in his essay.
The ethics of abortion is a topic that establishes arguments that attempt to argue if abortion is morally justified or not. Philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson wrote a pro- choice piece called “A Defense of Abortion.” In this paper, she presents various arguments that attempt to defend abortion by relating it to the woman carrying the fetus and her right in controlling her body. On the other side of the spectrum, philosopher Don Marquis wrote a pro- life paper called “Why Abortion Is Immoral.” Ultimately, Marquis argues that abortion is immoral with rare exceptions because it is resulting in the deprivation of the fetus’s valuable future. He supports his paper by creating the future-like-ours argument that compares the future of a fetus to the
There are two basic moral considerations taken into account when discussing the ethicality of abortion: the rights of the fetus and the rights of the pregnant women. When picking sides in this debate one must decide whether they favor the rights of the unborn or the aged. Overall, abortion is a divisive topic and discussions on or about it can easily be blown out of proportion by overly emotional testimonies. This subject is extremely personal and often times attacks for or against this procedure can be offensive to some people. However, the driving force of the debate is the inability to come to an universal consensus on the moment a fetus becomes a human being. If the fetus is a person then it is granted the same rights as all other persons
I think a fetus works the same, so when it comes to morality of abortion, many saying ‘no’ and many saying ‘case by case’. In my paper, I will try to explain Aristotle’s response based on his ethics to the arguments advanced on abortion by Judith Jarvis Thomson and Don Marquis in their essays, “A Defense of Abortion” and “An Argument that Abortion Is Wrong,” respectively.
Abortion, one of the most controversial issues in the United States today, should remain legal because it helps to regulate population levels, keep unwanted children from being born, neglected, beaten or abandoned and in some cases it can also reduce divorce rates. Abortions can be practical for potential parents who do not have the money, time or experience to raise a child at this point in time in their life (especially teenagers). Women who have been raped also may have an abortion because she can not bear to a child that she did not willing conceive. Abortions are further more used to save the life of the mother. Abortion is defined as, the induced termination of a pregnancy followed by the death of the embryo or fetus.