abortion

The first article is entitled “Why abortion is immoral,” is written by Don Marquis that considers arguments to establish the basic wrongness of abortion. Marquis connects abortion with murder, a victim that is murdered is deprived of the value of his or her future. A fetus, if not aborted, can be assumed to have a future like ours that is also of value therefore aborting the fetus is immoral. Marquis rejects the idea that assumes anti-abortion arguments to be either a irrational religious dogma or a conclusion generated from confused philosophical arguments.
Marquis states “It is wrong to kill us, but why is it wrong?” He states that the brutalization of the killing does not explain the immorality and nor does the great loss others experience in the absence. Also the change in the biological state does not make the killing immoral, what makes the act immoral is because the victim is deprived of a valuable future. The effect of the change in the biological state deprives them of their experiences, activities and enjoyments of life. Marquis gives an example of terminally ill AIDS patients, they believe that death would result is the loss of a future thus making premature death a bad thing. An aborted fetus faces a premature death, so if a premature death is a “bad thing,” abortion is unethical. The theory Marquis presents also opposes the idea that it is wrong to kill only if the being is biologically human by giving an example of a different species that could have a valuable future like ours. If the loss of a future makes killing wrong therefore killing that particular species is wrong as well. The fetus, even if it is merely considered a “potential human” still has a valuable future filled with enjoyments, activities...

... middle of paper ...

...he right to do what they want to their bodies. Even though i believe that abortion is unethical, we cannot take put restrictions on what a person can do with their body. I do agree with the loss of a “valuable future” argument but in some cases abortion is needed to save the life of a mother. The idea that a fetus is a “potential” person is absurd, the fetus in fact is a person simply because of the biological traits. To put it simply, an abortion and a homicide are basically the same thing but one is legal and the other is not. It is true that the fetus does not possess the neurological ability to envision a future but it is still an immoral offense to abort him/her. If a fetus had the ability to speak it would most likely want to live, but either way it is difficult to distinguish whether if it’s the mother's rights that are being taken away or the fetus’s.