Why Is Abortion Morally Acceptable
Mallory Causey
Morality of Abortion
I.
Introduction In this paper, I will argue that abortion is morally acceptable in certain
situations. In defending this argument I will include the reason behind my decision, and I will provide an alternate example using the same general principle. After explaining my principle I will give clarity to two arguments that may be presented by others. Finally, I will conclude by describing any changes that I have made to my general principle.
II.
Argument 1.) If a person is in a situation in which she can prevent an individual from living a life of pain and suffering, then it is morally acceptable for her to do so. 2.) In cases in which a mother is in a situation in which she can prevent her …show more content…
Explanation Rule one states “an argument is good for you if and only if all of the
premises are reasonable for you to believe.” For this rule I will use a similar situation with the same general principle. If Allison is a situation in which her favorite dog severely breaks his leg and can not be repaired, then it is morally acceptable for her to euthanize the dog. In this example it is morally acceptable to euthanize the dog because the dog will not be able to walk again and will suffer because it will not be able to move. Therefore, if a person is in a situation in which she can prevent an individual from living a life of pain and suffering, then it is morally acceptable for her to do so. The second and third premise state that (1) In a case where a mother is in
a situation in which she can prevent her unborn child from living a life of pain and suffering, by having an abortion (2) Therefore, it is morally acceptable for a mother to have an abortion. In explaining my argument I will give an example that supports the second and third premise. If a mother is in a situation in which she becomes aware that her …show more content…
An
example of this is if Peter is in a situation in which he can take the place of a person in solitary confinement, which causes psychological pain and suffering, it is not morally acceptable for him to do so. It is not morally acceptable because although the individual is suffering they knowingly participated in the act that resulted in the pain and suffering. This example expresses a violation of rule two because the argument does not follow a pattern in which the conclusion follows. Another objection that may arise from premise one is if a mother is in a
situation in which she can violate the right to life of another person, the fetus, and the fetus is not threatening the mothers life, then it is morally wrong for the mother to violate the fetus’ right to life. My response to this argument is that although the mother’s life is not in danger by having the fetus, after the fetus is born they will live a short and extremely difficult life. This example is a violation of rule two because the premises are not reasonable to believe.
V.
Conclusion When thinking about the situation previously stated in the paper,
Morality of Abortion
I.
Introduction In this paper, I will argue that abortion is morally acceptable in certain
situations. In defending this argument I will include the reason behind my decision, and I will provide an alternate example using the same general principle. After explaining my principle I will give clarity to two arguments that may be presented by others. Finally, I will conclude by describing any changes that I have made to my general principle.
II.
Argument 1.) If a person is in a situation in which she can prevent an individual from living a life of pain and suffering, then it is morally acceptable for her to do so. 2.) In cases in which a mother is in a situation in which she can prevent her …show more content…
Explanation Rule one states “an argument is good for you if and only if all of the
premises are reasonable for you to believe.” For this rule I will use a similar situation with the same general principle. If Allison is a situation in which her favorite dog severely breaks his leg and can not be repaired, then it is morally acceptable for her to euthanize the dog. In this example it is morally acceptable to euthanize the dog because the dog will not be able to walk again and will suffer because it will not be able to move. Therefore, if a person is in a situation in which she can prevent an individual from living a life of pain and suffering, then it is morally acceptable for her to do so. The second and third premise state that (1) In a case where a mother is in
a situation in which she can prevent her unborn child from living a life of pain and suffering, by having an abortion (2) Therefore, it is morally acceptable for a mother to have an abortion. In explaining my argument I will give an example that supports the second and third premise. If a mother is in a situation in which she becomes aware that her …show more content…
An
example of this is if Peter is in a situation in which he can take the place of a person in solitary confinement, which causes psychological pain and suffering, it is not morally acceptable for him to do so. It is not morally acceptable because although the individual is suffering they knowingly participated in the act that resulted in the pain and suffering. This example expresses a violation of rule two because the argument does not follow a pattern in which the conclusion follows. Another objection that may arise from premise one is if a mother is in a
situation in which she can violate the right to life of another person, the fetus, and the fetus is not threatening the mothers life, then it is morally wrong for the mother to violate the fetus’ right to life. My response to this argument is that although the mother’s life is not in danger by having the fetus, after the fetus is born they will live a short and extremely difficult life. This example is a violation of rule two because the premises are not reasonable to believe.
V.
Conclusion When thinking about the situation previously stated in the paper,