Why Abortion Is Immoral?

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The meaning of a right to life: Which version is implicitly advocated by Thomson?

Thompson accepts that every individual has the right to life, that is, the fetus has the right life, and also the mother has the right to life. From the above two interpretations, Thompsons advocates that the right to life of the mother must be respected; this is because it is within the choices of the mother to decide what should take place in her body and nobody should object to that, including whether or not to have an abortion. From the analogy of the violinist, Thompson argues that the right to life does not include the right to kill but instead the right not to be killed in an unjust manner, an idea that cuts across the analogies that he applies in all his arguments. To him, abortion is unjust killing.

In explaining the principle of the right to life, Thompson used a thought experiment to justify that induced abortion can be allowed. Thompson agrees that at conception, the fetus has the right to live but he contradicts this fact by arguing that the right of the fetus to live will not in any way override the decision of the mother to decide on whatever occurs in her body. He considers the freedom of the mother to have sex voluntarily but disagrees with the victimization of the mother based on her ability to decide whether to procure an abortion and hence abortion is allowed despite the fact that the mother might be aware of the risks from sex (Thompson 267).

Describe Marquis’s novel argument on abortion

According to Marquis, abortion is an immoral act and should only be sanctioned in exceptional circumstances. I find Marquis’s argument persuasive because he posits that abortion is like the killing of any other individual like us. The fact that he uses persuasive language like FLO to mean future like ours is aimed at arousing emotional attachment since it compares the life of the fetus to that of ours or that of a mature individual, he seeks to underline the fact that if we could have been aborted then we could not have a life experience like the one we have. Marquis argues that only killing should be sanctioned when it is self-defensense. His argument that the right to life supersedes the right to control the individual’s body makes Marquis’s argument necessary (Marquis 295).

The “Wade” argument in the Roe v. Wade ruling

Wade, who is the appellee in the case, argues that a fetus is a person according to the provision of the fourteenth amendment. Wade outlined the various processes of fetal development and upon explaining this process of fetal growth; he argued that the case brought by Roe should collapse since the right to life of the fetus has been protected by the fourteenth amendment as any other person. To Wade, it is the responsibility of the state to uphold and to recognize the prenatal life prior to and after conception.

Consequently, Wade reargues that the fetus should not be considered as a person and the use of the word person does not conform to the context of the constitution since the analyses of the word as used in the constitution has the postnatal connotation and lacks prenatal application, he argues that the word person as referred to in the fourteenth amendment does apply to the unborn (Blackmun 263).

Thomson’s point with her “boys with the box of chocolates” example

The box was full of chocolate and one of the brothers denies the other brother the chocolate since they were given the chocolate to share but the only brother who was given the chocolate box assumed that it was his prerogative whether to give the other brother a share of the chocolate.

According to this analogy, Thompson treated this case as unjust since the other brother has the right to the share. The use of the analogy of the boys with the box of chocolate has been used by Thompson is to enable us to get the morals of assumption and to enhance our understanding of the moral issues in abortion without obscuring the emotional dimension of the debate. He passes the message that any individual that ought to do something should not have the right to do it.

Consequently, though the refusal is treated as impolite and a demonstration that the other brother is becoming an egocentric and terrible individual, the act of refusing the chocolate in not unjust in any way because no right is violated: “it is that the brother ought to share but because sharing when we can is morally good and not because others have the right over what we have” (Thompson 272).

English’s main argument on the abortion question

English argues that it is biological factors that make an individual a person; this includes having genetic makeup and other factors as breathing and eating and should also demonstrate the tendencies of locomotion. She also argues that there should be psychological, social, and rational factors.

According to English, there are no sufficient and substantial conditions and if there are those few reasons then no reason is big and justifiable enough to warrant the sanctioning of abortion. She argues that if a fetus is a person as other philosophers argue then some abortions may be allowed and may be for self-defense when they are a threat to the life of the mother, this argument is in line with Thompson’s. Also according to her, if the fetus is not a person as argued by other philosophers, then based on our moral sentiments and our attitudes, it is imperative that we give moral consideration to persons like creatures; he concedes that at the later stages of the pregnancy, abortion is equivalent to killing or murder.

English suggests that a woman should be given the exclusive right to decide whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. According to her, arriving at the concrete understanding of the word ‘person’ will not put to rest the debate on abortion. To her, the only justification for restricting the freedom of the woman to abort is on the premise of preventing any harm to others including the fetus. Because there is wide support of the fact that sympathy for the fetus is the basis for sanctioning abortion, then the more the fetus develops, the greater the chances of disallowing abortion due to the intensified sympathy for the fetus (English 288).

Abortion debate if men had wombs and gave birth

It is argued especially by those who propose abortion that if men could be getting pregnant and giving birth, the debate on abortion would have never been a controversial issue. In the abortion debate, men are always on the pro-choice life and they have been advocating against abortion, and putting them as the victims instead of spectator role will definitely alter the direction of the debate since no one could think twice about the legalizing of abortion.

Works Cited

Blackmun, Harry. Majority opinion in Roe vs. Wade case. New York: Cengage Learning, 1973. Print.

English, Jane. Abortion and the concept of person. Ontario, Prentice Hall, n.d. Print.

Marquis, Don. Why abortion is immoral. New York: Cengage Learning, 1989. Print.

Thompson, Judith. A defense of abortion. Princeton: Princeton University press, 1971. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!