Is Natural Law the best approach to abortion
Natural Law says that abortion is wrong because life is a valuable gift from God and therefore only he can take it away. A believer of the natural law would say that the unborn foetus should have the same status as a born human being because life starts at the moment of conception which means that no matter how long the foetus has been growing, abortion is murder. This point ties in with the right to life and other religious approaches. Under Natural Law, abortion is the stealing of innocent life - going against one of the Primary precepts. Abortion undermines the Primary precept which encourages society to reproduce and grown. All these objections come down to one point. Man's ultimate
…show more content…
This approach is strong as it’s flexible; each situation can be measured using the Hedonic Calculus. The mother can reach a decision by herself, she becomes independent. But it also takes into account the fathers feelings, other family members etc - it looks at the family situation a baby would be born into. However, you also don’t know what the outcome of a situation will be. E.g. A woman may choose to have an abortion because she has too many children and knows it would affect them. After having an abortion she may become depressed and will be in no better state to look after them.
Kant was a deontological thinker and according to his theory of the Categorical Imperative, one must find a maxim in respect to abortion which they could universalize in order to discover what to do when faced with unwanted pregnancy. He doesn’t tackle this problem but he could have argued that abortion is immoral in all circumstances as he strongly believed that human life was of infinite value and that it should be protected. Furthermore, he also believed that one of the universal laws was ‘do not murder.’ Having an abortion would break this universal law and end a valuable life. However, he might also have argued that all people should have the right to determine what happens to their own body. In this case, a universal maxim might permit abortion on the
Abortion has always been a controversial subject among everybody whether they are involved directly or indirectly, whether they are for it or against it. It is nearly impossible to find someone who doesn't have an opinion about abortion. Both those who favor or oppose abortion make superior arguments to defend their beliefs and views. Personally, I think every last person is entitled to his or her own opinions, beliefs, thoughts, and rights. And yes, women have rights too, and denying women the right to choose abortion in the early stages of fetal development is denying her rights as a US citizen and is also discriminating against her. I think that abortion should be restricted to the first 21 weeks, which
When touching the subject of abortion, one must consider that there are two sides battling for control. That is right, abortion has literally turned into a war zone where even the unlikely of individuals do the unthinkable. Each side has their motives and methods for contradicting the other. For instance, there are cases and events that support both sides of this issue.
Utilitarian’s believe that under certain circumstances an abortion could be justified. For example if the mother doesn’t have the financial means, utilitarian’s would understand living a miserable life would contradict the idea of maximizing happiness to all, including the mother who doesn’t have to carry the financial burden a child would bring to an already bad financial situation. Another case would be if the family knew the baby knows the baby would be brought into this world with a disability, why make him or her suffer (only if the disability could not be cured medically). The thought process for utilitarian’s is that if the child will live a miserable life, why make them live if the abortion could be done before the fetus is even developed into a baby. Utilitarian’s are much more flexible when dealing with an issue such as abortion if the circumstance allows for it and if it maximizes happiness to all, if not most. Therefore an abortion may be decided with the consideration of all in mind.
There are many factors that are taken into consideration when determining if abortion is morally permissible, or wrong including; sentience of the fetus, the fetuses right to life, the difference between adult human beings and fetuses, the autonomy of the pregnant woman, and the legality of abortion. Don Marquis argues that abortion is always morally wrong, excluding cases in which the woman is threatened by pregnancy, or abortion after rape, because fetuses have a valuable future. Mary Anne Warren contends that late term abortions are morally permissible because birth is the most significant event for a fetus, and a woman’s autonomy should never be suspended.
Abortion has been an issue of heated debate in the United States for numerous years. Legislation has ruled it legal to perform an abortion on any gestational age of an embryo or fetus. Some people agree with the law and consider themselves pro-choice. Others are completely against abortion and are pro-life. In addition to these two groups is another group who support abortion in the first half of pregnancy, but believe abortion should be banned for the second half.
The topic of abortion and its legality is one that is strongly felt on both sides of the issue. This is one of the most heated arguments you can get into and if I am being fully honest I am a little nervous about publicizing my view point. But here is my research and arguments for whether abortion should be legal or not.
Yet, it is your duty to look after your baby. As Kant suggests, if you
What are the ethics of Abortion? I believe ethics of abortion is a controversial topic, in which it involves the act of removing a fetus from the womb of a woman’s body. This bioethical issue has been an ongoing debate for over forty years now. For many people, abortion is a moral issue, concerning the rights of a fetus and a woman’s right over her own body. What are your moral beliefs about abortion and a woman’s right to having one? I am a Pro-Choice supporter. I believe a woman has the right to make the ultimate decision on what she wants to do with her own body-safe and legally. However, I don’t believe that abortion should be used as a form of birth control or contraception. Society today, approaches discussions about abortion with caution; for many in society today, believe that it’s an act of murder and against all Godly ways. On the contrary, others like myself believe that under certain livelihood circumstances, the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy should be a
Looking at abortion from a religious viewpoint, abortion is a mortal sin. Taking the life of a human being is the greatest sin a human can commit. If it is not acceptable to take the life of a 5 year old, an 18 year old, or a 50 year old, then why is it acceptable to take the life of a human who hasn’t even had the chance to live yet? The point is it shouldn’t be. Taking a life, no matter what the age is, is morally wrong.
The argument of abortion has been raging since the Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade, in 1973. This court case has divided the country into two factions: pro-choice and pro-life. Pro-life advocates argue that abortions are murder and extreme levels of child abuse. While pro-choice advocates believe abortions are a justifiable means to end pregnancies. The pro-choice argument is that the fetus is not yet a human being and its rights should not override that of the mother’s.
When faced with the choice of life or death, most people would choose to live. In fact, most would not want someone else making that decision for them. They would claim that as a living and independent entity it is solely their choice as to whether they continue to live or not. While this concept may seem fairly straightforward, there seems to be some great debate when it is applied to abortion. For many, they will maintain that the fetus has the right to life no matter the situation. There are some who will argue that abortion is morally permissible in specific circumstances and there are even those that will claim that abortion is always permissible. Why is there such a great divide? A major factor that plays a part in this is whether abortion involves more than one life. Because determining the beginning point of life is such a complex and emotional debate, there will be the same allowance in this paper as there was in Judith Jarvis Thomson’s “A Defense of Abortion”. As she eloquently put it “I propose then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception” (p. 721). This will allow for a look into the moral debate of abortion from a more grounded stage. As discussed early in Thomson’s paper, most of the debate on abortion rests on whether the fetus is alive or not. Whereas the focus should be on the many other aspects of pregnancies that may lead to a mother wanting an abortion.
Of all the legal, ethical, and moral issues we Americans continuously fight for or against, abortion may very well be the issue that Americans are most passionate about. The abortion issue is in the forefront of political races. Most recently the “no taxpayer funding for abortion act”, has abortion advocates reeling. Even though abortion has been legal in every state in the United States since the monumental Supreme Court decision, “Roe v Wade”, on January 22, 1973; there are fewer physicians willing to perform abortions today than in 2008. (Kraft) At the heart of the ethical dilemma for many in the medical profession is the viability of the fetus. And just to make this whole dilemma more confusing, according to the United States
Kant’s ethical theory regarding the immorality of abortion highlights that every individual is endowed with some sense of dignity and respect. Based on Kant’s theory, all human behaviors as well as actions are done simply because are considered the right and appropriate things to be done. Additionally, people’s behaviors and actions are weight in terms of their moral appropriateness instead of any other terms or grounds. Kant would assert that the act of abortion is definitely immoral considering the fact that killing another person is illegal and thus
The following essay will examine the morality of abortion with specific reference to the writings of Don Marquis, Judith Jarvis Thompson, Peter Singer and Mary Anne Warren. I will begin by assessing the strength of the argument provided by Marquis which claims that abortion is impermissible because it deprives a being of a potential “future like ours,” and then go on to consider the writings of Singer, Thomson and Warren to both refute Marquis claims and support my assertion that abortion is morally permissible primarily because of the threat to the freedom and bodily autonomy of women extending the right to life to a foetus in utero would pose.
Abortion is an abomination and a serious confliction in civilization today. This heated topic is one inflicted upon by many different thought processes, morals, and religions, making it extremely controversial, but most do not realize one’s life is truly at stake. Abortion signifies revoking someone the opportunity of life, for the sole reason that things are not in our favor (Ladock). Ladock states the most important factor of abortion: human life is involved and killing it would be a crime. The innocent child in the womb is called innocent for a reason, and taking away the life of someone without their permission is cruelty and unjust. Just because a parent may not be prepared to have the child, does not mean they should be