Traditional Argument Against Abortion

Abortion is the intentional removal of a fetus from the womb. The Traditional Argument against Abortion asserts how unethical it is to kill an “innocent human being.” This argument also says fetus are considered innocent human beings; therefore, it is wrong to kill fetuses. Warren often critiques this and believes abortion is ethically admissible under any conditions and at any point of pregnancy. The traditional argument against abortion uses equivocation where one uses the same word, human, but shifts the meaning of it. For instance, Warren believes there are two meanings to human: the genetic sense and the moral sense meaning “person”. However, the argument uses both terms in the context of just “human.” There is a fine line between person and human. “Person” being the psychological traits that makes one

I believe a mother has their right to their own body. Because the mother’s, already existing, life is more important they should be able to terminate any pregnancy. For example, If a child is not apart of their plan or their life is at risk abortion should be an available option. One of the biggest reasons for legalizing abortion, I found intriguing about the Roe versus Wade law, is the case that If a child is unwanted they are more likely to develop physiological issues. Even if the parents decide to have the child and give it up, they could suffer in an unjust foster system and also become a delinquent. However, I do disagree with Warren in the sense of it being permissible at any stage. This is where Thompson comes in. Thompson believes at some point of pregnancy, the fetus becomes a person, but when? I believe it fair to say it is after the 8th week in a pregnancy, because the embryo is finally termed as a fetus, developed human characters, and consists of every structure an adult has. At this point the fetus should have the same rights as an adult and is developed enough to be considered for a valuable