The article, The Case For Late Term Abortions written by Jim Buie was appeared in Newsweek on June 17, 2009. In the article the author uses personal experiences, political and social/legal issues to support his stance on legal late term abortions. He begins his article by mentioning the murder of Dr. George Tiller a late term abortion doctor and his brother Jon who was mentally challenged.…
A lot of the readers can relate to this because everyone goes through that stage of not feeling wanted. For Jig she was referring to her baby that was not wanted. Personally, Jig wanted the baby. Notice when she said “They’re lovely hills, (Hemingway, 1927)”, meaning that Jig was trying to get off the subject. The America man was trying to persuade her to abort it. Noticing that, when he said, “It’s really an awfully simple operation, Jig, (Hemingway, 1927).” Then, he continued, “It’s not really an operation at all, (Hemingway, 1927)” Anyone could clearly see that he was talking about aborting the baby because he kept repeating sentences like “I know you wouldn’t mind it, Jig. It’s nothing. It’s not as painful, as you think, (Hemingway, 1927)”. In the end, Jig doesn’t want to abort the baby, but does anyway because it seemed like she just wanted the situation to end and also the manipulation by her man who keeps saying that if you get rid of the baby everything will go back as it…
But as they talk about it, the woman becomes more disheartened and basically concedes to her boyfriend. Showing how that woman didn’t really have a say in their relationship. At which we could infer that they were going to go their separate ways even if they had the operation or not. As she struggles with her relationship with him trying to be happy with him but can’t come to terms that their relationship has already ended that it was a matter of time before she decides to leave. As such both show similarities how woman face limitations on how what they can or cannot do in their day and…
Judith Thomson’s argument through her article, “A Defence of Abortion” is one that adopts the premise that the fetus is a human being from the moment of conception. By doing this, Thomson is distancing her argument from the various theorists who maintain the moral view that it is wrong to kill another human being, such as (Marquis, 1989). This ultimately allows her to assume various hypothetical situations in which the cognitive status of the fetus is otherwise not considered. This is important. It helps the case she develops to detach itself from the focal points considered in the 'common argument', which illustrates that the development of a human being from conception through birth into childhood and then adulthood is continuous, and to draw a line where abortion is acceptable is futile. Thomson’s argument that contrasts a “right to life” against a “right to decide what happens in and to one’s body" is based on what Finnis describes as “confusing the issue” (Finnis, 1973). Throughout the article, her various thought experiments are presented in order to support and help the reader identify situations in which the permissibility of abortion seems just. This essay will scrutinise the effectiveness of Thomson’s ideas, and whether they have led to a more definable understanding when defending abortion.…
After reading “A defense of Abortion” by Judith Jarvis Thomson and what he had to say with his violinist analogy involving the kidney replacement. I agree with what he has to say on not only abortion itself but, whether or not a fetus should have the right to the women’s body. I don’t think that the fetus should be given the right to use the women’s body because what if she does not what to have a baby and ends up getting pregnant anyway. Also, each time a woman engages in sexual intercourse, she is not inviting the fetus to live inside her body. This is why birth control and other contraceptives are not a sure deal when dealing with sexual intercourse. What if the birth control method fails and the women end's up getting pregnant? She did…
Don Marquis believed that abortion was impermissible. He wrote a paper titled Why Abortion is Immoral which he argues about how abortion is seriously immoral and is in the same category as killing an innocent adult human being. Marquis’s arguments are the opposite of what it is that I am arguing. Marquis believes that a fetus is a person, so a fetus has a right to life. He believes that unless it is extreme circumstances it is immoral to kill a normal adult human because it causes “the loss to the victim of the value of its future” (Marquis, 192) and this is the equivalent to what happens when someone has an abortion.…
As the title makes plain, Thomson asserts that abortion is not impermissible. More exactly, she argues for the conclusion that at times, abortion is permissible; she asserts that there are scenarios in which getting an abortion would be immoral. What is especially innovative is the way in which her argument is constructed by Thomson. She starts the essay by pointing out the argument over abortion seems to numerous individuals to hinge on whether the fetus is a man. Most feel that if we could simply discover the response to that puzzle, the consequences for abortion would be clear; namely, that if fetuses are not individuals then, and that if fetuses are persons afterward abortions should be impermissible abortions must be allowable (Thomson, 1984).…
The American sees it as a problem that can easily be solved as where Jig sees it as a beautiful experience. Jig looks to the hills and says; "they look like white elephants" by saying "white elephants" she is referring to her pregnancy. Jig continues to say, "They're lovely hills" meaning having a baby will be lovely. The American tires to minimize the beauty of it and explains, "It's really not anything. They just let the air in." Even though the conflict is the man and Jigs issue with keeping the baby or getting an abortion, it is ultimately up to Jig to decide. Towards the end of the story when the man gets the final say about the abortion, the girl says, "I'll scream." Meaning she has made up her mind and she does not want to hear anymore from the…
Imagine if a women is forced to be a mother, even if she does not want to, even if she is not prepared, would it be fair? Would it be fair that a fifteen year old girl who was raped, was the mother of another girl? It would be a very irresponsible act on the part of the society to leave that girl, who is not even an adult, and let her take responsibility for the life of someone else. In the end, not all the women are the same, which is why everyone has a different opinion and a different perspective on life. Laws disallowing abortion keeps women from settling on the decisions that empower them to carry on with their preferred way of life, and reducing their capacity to contribute to society adequately.…
Warren states that the anti-abortionist must show that the fetus is a person in the full moral sense, not just in a genetic sense. The moral community, she believes, consists of all and only people, rather than merely human beings. She finds a distinction between a human being (someone genetically human) and a person (someone we have included in our moral community). She gives the example of finding life forms on another planet, and questions how humanity would decide if they should be treated as persons, or as potential sources of food. The determining factors she decides on are five traits of personhood: consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, the capacity to communicate, and self-awareness.…
In philosophical literature, Marquis argued that abortion was/is immoral, except only in rare exceptions, but more importantly he noted that prochoice and anti-abortion arguments cannot be symmetric thus making discussion on the topic quite a conundrum. Marquis purported the arguments of anti-abortionist, who asserted and believed that life is present at or from the moment of conception, and that fetuses look like babies, possess genetic code, and are therefore in possession of the qualities and attributes of being humans. While pro-choicers typically assert that fetuses are not persons as they are not rational agents or social beings. Marquis did however exclaim that anti- abortionist and pro-choicers arguments/beliefs exhibit two similarities,…
John T. Noonan makes the argument that the jump in probability for a fetus' coming to term, at a specific point in the development of the fetus, has an important implication for the humanity (personhood) of the fetus. He bases this argument on the reasoning that "life itself is a matter of probabilities, and most moral reasoning is an estimate of probabilities." He goes on to state that his argument in which a fetus has an implication for the humanity of the fetus is strictly an "appeal to probabilities that actually exist." To demonstrate his point concerning probabilities he uses an analogy. The analogy he uses is of a man who shoots into the bushes because of movement in the bushes. If the chances of this movement in the bushes being a man were 200 million to one, then no one would think anything of him firing away into the bushes. However, if the chances are 4 out of 5 that the movement is a man, then you would not be justified in firing into the bushes. He uses this analogy to relate it to the development of a baby. When a male ejaculates he emits about 200 million spermatozoa. Of these 200 million, only one single spermatozoon has a chance to develop into a zygote. Noonan says that therefore, if one spermatozoon is destroyed than you're only destroying a being that had a one in 200 million chance of ever developing into a reasoning being. This would be similar to the case of shooting into the bushes when there is a one in 200 million chance that the movement is that of a man. On the other hand, if a fetus is destroyed, then you're terminating a being that had "an 80 percent chance of developing further into a baby outside the womb who, in time, would reason." This would be similar to shooting into the bushes when the movement has a 4 out of 5 chance of being that of a man. The probability of the baby becoming a full being of reason drastically changes from a single spermatozoon (1 in 200 million) to a fetus (4 out of 5). This probability change…
Marquis argues that killing a fetus deprives it of a valuable future/future like ours, and concludes by saying abortion is not morally permissible. I agree with Marquis’s argument that it is wrong to kill a fetus through abortion because I believe that they have a valuable future as all humans do. Abortion is defined as the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, which is most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy. (dictionary.com) Furthermore I do agree with Marquis that majority of deliberate abortions are seriously immoral, however I do believe that in some cases it is permissible, for instance choosing to have an abortion after being sexually assaulted or due to life threatening circumstances.…
According to www.sdadefend.com, there are approximately 1.6 million abortions in the U.S. every year, which is about 4,383 a day and 3 per minute. That’s an abortion every 20 seconds! Abortion should not be performed unless it concerns the health of the mother that makes her unable to carry a child. There have been many arguments about whether abortion should be legal or not. In an editorial from the Washington Times, entitled “Abortion is no minor matter”, its written that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which is pro-choice, wants to delay a 1995 law that requires parental or legal guardian consent for a minor to have an abortion, while the Americans United for Life (AUL), which is pro-life, has supported the Pregnant Women Support Act in 2006 and was an important role in the Harris v. McRae decision that occurred in 1980. There are many things that the government should acknowledge before passing laws about the legalization of abortion, such as the choice of adoption, the dangers of abortion and every human being having the right to live. Conforming to www.womenissues.about.com, life begins at conception of a baby, and abortion is no different from murder because it is taking a human life.…
Noonan's is an extreme anti-abortionist. He believed that once conceived, the being was recognized as human because he/she had human's potential. The criterion for humanity, thus, was simple and all embracing: if you are conceived by human parents, you are human. He believes in four pro-choice criteria for human being. The first criterion is viability. Viability is the point in time in which a fetus lived attached to its mother determines the fate. Notion of viability is that fetus is depended on its mother in order to live, and if this dependence is taken through abortion, then it is actually a right of life taken from a living human being. The second view is experience. Experience as defined through Noonan is, " A being who has had experience,…