In A Defense of Abortion Thompson presents an argument against the morality of abortion by showing the superiority of women’s rights through several different analogous cases. The case of focus will be case eight, “ A Selfless Brother’s Box of Chocolates.” In scenario one, Thompson argues that an older brother has a box of chocolates while his younger brother has nothing; the question of appeal is does the younger brother automatically have a right to these chocolates? The box of chocolates represents a woman’s body while the younger brother represents the fetus. Although it would be nice for the older brother (mother) to share his box of chocolates (mothers body) he is not obligated to share them with anyone even if he is perceived as a selfish, greedy, or a stingy person.
Vimy Ridge was considered Canada’s greatest victories. This is the time when the country came out from Britain’s shadow and was capable of doing great things as their own country. Canadian soldiers earned respect and a reputation of effectiveness and a tough army. On April 9th 1917 the Canadian army were ordered to attack Vimy Ridge which was located in Northern France in the pas-de-Calais region. Near the border of Belgium, is a village called Vimy which was equipped with Barbed wires and machine guns.
Don Marquis’s purpose to his essay is to set out to prove that abortion is seriously wrong. He is addressing that abortion is morally wrong and should not be permitted except in certain cases. The authors thesis is “Abortion, except perhaps in rare instances, is seriously wrong”(Marquis, 754). Marquis’s purpose for exceptions or rare instances is to eliminate those instances that could be considered ethically controversial such as cases like abortion after rape or abortion during the first fourteen days after conception. Marquis provides another exception in the form of a pregnancy that could endanger a woman’s life and abortion when the fetus is anencephalic.
Mackie believes that there are no objective moral values, and to support his stand, he famously puts forth two arguments. The first argument is the Argument from Relativity or Disagreement, and the second is the Argument from Queerness. The focus of this essay will be on Mackie’s argument from queerness, and I seek to prove that his argument does not succeed in showing that there are no objective values. I will first be summarizing Mackie’s argument from queerness. Subsequently, I will proceed to form an argument on the first part of Mackie’s argument from queerness, the metaphysical component.
A and the other woman had a right to be happy, but if their happiness caused a death, did they have the right to be happy? It’s like having a right to be six feet tall when you’re not, or having a rich father when you don’t, somethings just aren’t a right to happiness. Society gives you the right to have freedom, but not to hurt someone, if the law allows you to cheat on your spouse then where does that leave happiness at? In my opinion I don’t think they should have a right to happiness because that leaves them just along the lines of a person who has committed a crime and no society should be built on that kind of foundation. (228).
Rosalind Hursthouse in her paper Virtue Theory and Abortion, handles with the moral standpoint of abortion from a virtue ethics perspective. Her research is directed towards investigating whether or not an abortion is something a virtuous person would do. Hursthouse examines the morally relevant considerations and in so doing, she rejects the standard questions used to determine the morality of an abortion such as the status of the fetus, and the rights of a women. The morally relevant considerations she sees fit to assess the moral legitimacy of an abortion are concerns with family relationship, personal circumstance, and basic biological facts. Through her considerations, Hurthouses account of virtue ethics gives us adequate moral advice in regards to the question of abortion.
Patrick Lee and Robert George assert that abortion is objectively immoral. One of Lee and George’s main reason for coming to this conclusion is that human embryos are living human beings. This essentially validates that abortion is indeed the process of killing a human. Another main point said by the two is a rebuttal to a common argument used in favor of abortion, which states that a potential mother has full parental responsibilities only if she has voluntarily assumed them. The rebuttal to this was that the potential mother does indeed have special responsibilities to raise the child.
In “A Defense of Abortion,” Judith Thomson argues with a unique approach regarding the topic of abortion. For the purpose of the argument, Thomas agrees to go against her belief and constructs an argument based on the idea that the fetus is a person at conception. She then formulates her arguments concerning that the right to life is not an absolute right. There are certain situations where abortion is morally permissible. She believes that the fetus’s right to life does not outweigh the right for the woman to control what happens to her own body.
Essay On Why Abortion Is Immoral This article called “Why Abortion Is Immoral” written by Don Marquis argues and why abortion is prima facie impermissible. Marquis accesses both anti-abortion arguments and also pro-choicer’s claim to protect the legalization of abortion. My paper is going to understand and examine the the both sides arguments, and to attempt to recognize abortion is immoral.
Philippa Foot presented a series of moral dilemmas when she discussed abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect. One famous problem of her was the trolley dilemma: “..he is the driver of a runaway tram which he can only steer from one narrow track onto another; five men are working on one track and one on the other; anyone the tack he enters is bound to be killed.” (Foot, 1967, p. 2) What should the driver do? Despite what he does, he will harm someone!1
Hursthouse states, “... the status of the fetus - that issue over which so much ink has been split - is according to virtue theory, simply not relevant to the rightness or wrongness of abortion” (Hursthouse 164). Don Marquis argues that abortion is seriously wrong. Marquis does admit that his argument can include some exemptions which include such cases as
Caleb Stephens April 15, 2017 Introduction to Philosophy The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that Philippa Foot’s objection, raised to her own argument against utilitarianism, is correct. Her initial thesis is that benevolence, while the foundation of utilitarianism, is an internal end of morality, rather than the ultimate end of morality. The possible objection to this that there must be some overarching reason behind morality, which must imply a form of consequentialism. The response she offers is that there should be some other form of morality, which is a weak argument, as it does not provide an alternate conception of morality itself.
In his article ‘A Right to Self-Termination?’ David Velleman brings up the topic of the right to die and elaborates his view on the subject. Two broad principles are stated by Velleman and he goes on to reject the first principle and accept the second principle. The first principle is that “a person has the right to make his own life shorter in order to make it better… ”the second principle is that there is “a presumption in favor of deferring to a person's judgment on the subject of his own good.
Abortion is not only a fluctuating concept in our society, but an ethical and emotional debate, as well. The image I have chosen presents concepts from a cultural and historical background, as well as presents an ethical, emotional, and logical appeal to the audience. The debate about abortion has simply been overblown and exhausted. The truth of the matter is, abortion is murder. Ending a life, whether innocent or guilty, is murder.
Today, abortion still one of the most controversial topics in our communities, some with the Idea that it's wrong (pro-life) and others that is totally okay that women should have control over their body (pro-choice). Even though, it became legal in 1973, there are a big amount of people opposing abortion as a moral wrong. In this paper I would like to talk about three different theories on abortion. First, the structural functionalist, second the conflict perspective theory and third the symbolic Interaction theory.
