Abortion
PHIL 253
Abortion
November 14, 2012
* Thomson, A Defense of Abortion.
Judith Thomson defends that women must have the moral right to decide whether to abort or not bases on thefact that after all, a woman considering aborting is acting within the rights of do whatever she wants with her body. According with her essay, law should not have to have any authority to make awoman scarify her liberty, physical integrity or even her life to save the life of others (the baby). She argues that the fetus, even though this might also be a person with the right to live, this rightdoes not give it the right to also dispose the body of the mom because the rights of the mom must have above the rights of the fetus. In conclusion, she believes that abortion is permissible if thisis a consequence of the mom being raped, or if giving life to the baby means giving up her own life.
* Warren, On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion.
Moral rights are meant to be for persons,persons have the right to live. According to Warren, a fetus lacks moral status because they do not have enough characteristics that define a person and therefore have no right to live. She arguesthat if the baby will cause the pregnant woman to be deployed from her rights to live, be healthy, to be happy and free, then there should not be any moral issue by getting rid of the unwanted pregnancy.She believes that “genetic humanity” is not enough for a fetus to belong to the moral community which is for persons and only persons.
* Marquis, Why Abortion is Immoral.
Marquis’s analysis isbased in two important matters: One, the fact to accept if abortion is not morally permissible, that if the fetus is or not the type of being whose life is seriously wrong to terminate. Two, killingis wrong. Marquis focuses his essay on the second matter more than the first; his theory about taking somebody’s life away is supported in the fact that by doing so, one is also taking away the...
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.