An Embryo Is A Person And Has Rights

‘An embryo is a person and has rights’
Abortion is a widely argued subject between many religious and ethical beliefs. Some believe that abortion can be allowed in some circumstances however others believe that as soon as the embryo is fertilised, it has rights and personhood begins. Roman Catholics and Conservative Protestants hold this view where life and personhood begins at conception. They are ‘Pro Life’ therefore they believe that abortion is wrong in every circumstance and thus should never be permitted. They believe this because life is holy and belongs to God and therefore only God can take it away. As life and personhood starts at conception, abortion cannot take place at any time during a pregnancy as all people have a natural right to life therefore both mother and child have equal rights. Each new life that begins at conception should not be thought of as a potential human being but a human being with potential.
Peter Singer, who holds a Utilitarianism belief, on the other hand would disagree with the statement above. They believe that abortion is permissible because unborn, and even new-born children, lack the essential characteristics of personhood which he and other Utilitarians believe are rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness. They conclude from this that killing a new-born baby is never equivalent to killing a person who wants to continue to live as they are aware of their actions and can therefore do well for themselves and others. They use the example of doctors switching off life support machines when a person becomes ‘brain dead’, they would say that once a person is without brain activity and doesn’t possess the characteristics of personhood they should be let go. The same should go for new-borns and unborn children as they don’t have any kind of self-consciousness therefore they do not have the same amount of rights as a person.
Both of these viewpoints however having several criticisms. For example, some people would argue against Roman Catholic belief by stating that abortion is permissible in some cases for example the mother may have become pregnant in unfortunate situations e.g. rape therefore they should be allowed to abort as it wasn’t there choice to become pregnant. Also the mother may be in an extremely difficult financial situation which means that she should be allowed to abort her baby if she is in her early stages of pregnancy. Also other people would say that the foetus has a right to life at 24 weeks as that is when the baby can survive outside the women therefore possessing those aspects of a human that could survive. Arguments against the Utilitarianism belief would say that children cannot think rationally and do not possess self-consciousness until they a few years old. The utilitarianism belief therefore says that killing toddlers is not a crime as they don’t have self-consciousness; they are permitting the murder of young children.
Given the criticisms, I agree with the Islamic view on abortion. This view states that abortion is undesirable however is permissible because the mother is the origin of the foetus, which means that it is up to her to decide whether she wants to abort the baby before 4 months depending on whether her life is well-established taking her duties and responsibilities into account. Muslims do believe that life is sacred however Allah gives the foetus its soul at 4 months which is known as ensoulement. After 4 months the foetus can only be aborted if the mother’s life is endangered because, as mentioned previously, the mother is the origin of the foetus therefore it is up to her if she wants to endanger her own life to give birth to the child. Abortion often takes place if the mother’s health is endangered as she is the pillar of the family and she is mainly in charge for the welfare of the family. Therefore my view is stronger than the viewpoints discussed above as it the middle ground between both believes however cannot be criticized for the same reasons.