Warren's argument may seem a bit flawed because her criteria do not provide a clear cut way to distinguish between the fetuses in the stages of pregnancy or perhaps even the infant himself. According to her criteria, a newborn infant would not have a significant right to life, either; however, according to her, killing it would be wrong because there are people willing to care and provide for it's well being. But what about a baby that is aborted, are there not people willing to adopt and care for it? Another argument that she makes is that to be considered a person a human must have rational thought. Clearly a fetus does not have rational thought, but how would it compare to others in very compromising conditions. For example, individuals that are
Warren's argument may seem a bit flawed because her criteria do not provide a clear cut way to distinguish between the fetuses in the stages of pregnancy or perhaps even the infant himself. According to her criteria, a newborn infant would not have a significant right to life, either; however, according to her, killing it would be wrong because there are people willing to care and provide for it's well being. But what about a baby that is aborted, are there not people willing to adopt and care for it? Another argument that she makes is that to be considered a person a human must have rational thought. Clearly a fetus does not have rational thought, but how would it compare to others in very compromising conditions. For example, individuals that are