Mary Ann Warren On Abortion
The morality of abortion is an argument that has spanned decades with debates on both sides as to whether or not it is right to kill a fetus that is not yet born. Even today, there is still no set motion that humanity follows as a whole, and they have been labelled as being either ‘pro-choice’ or ‘pro-life’ following in their own beliefs as to what is right. There are even many articles, essays, and journals today which exist to validate the point of each of these sides. Many have attempted to make sense of the matter as well including some philosophers. Two of these philosophers include Mary Ann Warren and Don Marquis, who each give their own opinion on the matter quite formally and use many ideologies to back their claims.
Warren herself …show more content…
First she looks at the meaning of being human. There can be two different ways to look at the meaning of being human, in a moral sense and a genetic sense. People as a whole often overlook that fact and group both together, or even using one as an equate for the other. Warren uses a set of premises here to objectify this. The argument states that since “(1) it is wrong to kill innocent human beings, and (2) fetuses are innocent human beings, then (3) it is wrong to kill fetuses” (Warren 23). In the genetic sense of the meaning human, this logic is sound and turns abortion into a moral issue however, when looked in the moral sense with the meaning of personhood, the argument can begin to look false and show abortion not to be. Warren continues further to explain that in the moral sense, a human should also have the potential for rational thought and that can lead to personhood in …show more content…
Marquis however, immediately dismisses the extreme cases of abortion in his argument, such as in the event of rape, or abortion to save the mother. He begins by defining the classic argument that each side takes, stating that anti-abortionists “will argue or assert that life is present from the moment of conception” (Marquis 184), whereas the pro-choice argues the opposite in that “fetuses are not persons” (Marquis 184). He then states that while each side may have their own arguments, they still need moral principle to dictate their claims and proof their
Warren herself …show more content…
First she looks at the meaning of being human. There can be two different ways to look at the meaning of being human, in a moral sense and a genetic sense. People as a whole often overlook that fact and group both together, or even using one as an equate for the other. Warren uses a set of premises here to objectify this. The argument states that since “(1) it is wrong to kill innocent human beings, and (2) fetuses are innocent human beings, then (3) it is wrong to kill fetuses” (Warren 23). In the genetic sense of the meaning human, this logic is sound and turns abortion into a moral issue however, when looked in the moral sense with the meaning of personhood, the argument can begin to look false and show abortion not to be. Warren continues further to explain that in the moral sense, a human should also have the potential for rational thought and that can lead to personhood in …show more content…
Marquis however, immediately dismisses the extreme cases of abortion in his argument, such as in the event of rape, or abortion to save the mother. He begins by defining the classic argument that each side takes, stating that anti-abortionists “will argue or assert that life is present from the moment of conception” (Marquis 184), whereas the pro-choice argues the opposite in that “fetuses are not persons” (Marquis 184). He then states that while each side may have their own arguments, they still need moral principle to dictate their claims and proof their