Introduction
The complete cessation of pregnancy is referred to as abortion. However, the issue of abortion is an ethical debate and has become one of the most critical and controversial subject matters, globally. Also, there are many points of view regarding the issue of abortion, proposed through different scholars, philosophers, psychologists, and advocates of natural sciences as well. These different points of view provide arguments of whether abortion is ethical or moral to end the life of a fetus before birth or immoral in nature. Today, in many nations medical ethics offer people to have an abortion according to their own wills and requirements. However, is it ethical enough to act so (Owiti, 2016)? In this concern, the major focus of this paper is to talk about the morality regarding the issue of abortion, whereas analyzing the claim of Judith Jarvis Thomson and explaining why his argument does no succeed.
For Thomson, the idea of abortion is morally permissible by means of the fact that there is a moral right to abort. For Thomson, from the conception of the fetus, abortion becomes morally permissible because of the fact that a fetus lack essential traits for personhood such as emotions, senses etc., and, therefore, the fetus has no right to life. Therefore, Thomson concludes that a woman has a moral right to end the life of the fetus according to her body’s conditions, and the fetus has no right to the woman’s body (Thomson, 1971).
So, from the above claim, it would not be wrong to say that Thomson itself ignored morality, as morality is all about right and wrong. Ending life of someone is not right and, therefore, morally wrong as well. In addition, the idea of abortion is an unethical act to perform, as the fetus has the life over which he or she has the right to live in future. In other words, when a mother becomes pregnant then it becomes his moral duty to save the life of that fetus developing in her tummy. In fact, it would be interesting to note that the life of the fetus starts from his or her conception. In other words, when a mother is confirmed that she is pregnant then it clearly means that the part of her life is attached to another life that also requires oxygen and food for his or her survival as fetus during the start of the pregnancy. Therefore, the argument of Thomson does not succeed (Thomson, 1971).
For example, Don Marquis is one of the famous journalists, authors, and social reformists who discussed the idea of abortion at different places many times. In this regard, he has written an article named ‘Why abortion is Immoral’ in 1989 within the journal of philosophy. In his article, he maintained the position against the idea of abortion. In this concern, he claims that the process to terminate the pregnancy is simply like the end of someone’s life and it is one of the lowest forms of ethical behavior against an individual who did not even have something to do with his or her birth. In other words, it refers to the claim that the fetus is innocent and not responsible for his or her life, but after the confirmation of his existence as a fetus, he is a living being who must have the right to live as others do (Marquis, 1989).
From Marquis’ claim, it becomes clearer that the idea of abortion is an unethical act to perform and the lowest form of morality. Over his claim, it would not be wrong to say that fetus that is born has the same right to live and enjoy the future as other people do. Also, fetus has nothing to do with birth so why termination of his or her life before arrival is permissible under the idea of humanity.
From a humanistic point of view, it would be very important to know that the idea of abortion also influences other situations of life over which individuals have to decide over the idea of life and death. For instance, the idea of euthanasia refers to the process of killing someone either by force or by the will of a particular individual who suffers from an illness painful and disgusting for his or her life. The notion of Euthanasia is also called mercy killing of someone with the intention to offer him pleasure and to offer him the way to get rid of the suffering of his or her illness. However, it is another issue but there is a need to discuss this issue with the intention to better offer an argument against the idea of abortion.
Regarding the idea of euthanasia, it would not be wrong to say that people who act immorally over the idea of abortion and tend to kill the life of a fetus are actually those people who are supporting another kind of killing associated with the lives of many other personalities. So, it would not be wrong to say that over the idea of life and death, it is immoral in every situation and in every kind of trouble to end the life of someone.
Kant Theory About Abortion Morality
Kant’s ethical theory about the morality and immorality of abortion. German philosopher Immanuel Kant thinks that all humans have particular demands and nobility to respect. He also thinks that all type of actions and behaviors done by the people as they are true things to do so. Kant holds the opinion that it is immoral to end the life of a fetus or inborn person, no matter what is the condition or circumstances, it will be a murder and nothing else as every human has its own value and life. Kant believes that any human behavior must have particular moral value in spite of doing the correct thing for any immoral cause. For Kant, abortion is murder and has no moral value whatever the causes of the pregnancy. Kant thinks that a fetus is a person like others and also has a soul due to which he believes that abortion is an immoral activity and should not be permissible in society. According to Kant’s idea of “categorical imperative,” all humans have the moral obligations to obey and to follow the moral rules of society (Denis, 2008).
Abortion Essay Conclusion
In last, this paper has reached a point that the issue of abortion is unethical in a broader context. In addition, the idea of abortion must be fulfilled under certain conditions as having an ill baby might offer pain to the mother of the child, or that it may cause future trouble for the mother. Overall, the idea of abortion needs more ethical consideration as life is precious and no one has the right to kill someone’s life. Therefore, the argument of Thomson that abortion is morally permissible does not succeed, when it comes to the depth and the true meaning of the idea of abortion through a moral lens.
References
Denis, L. (2008). Animality and agency: A Kantian approach to abortion. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 76(1), 117-137.
Marquis, D. (1989). Why Abortion is Immoral. Journal of Philosophy, 183-202.
Owiti, G. (2016). ABORTION: A Critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson’s Pro-abortion argument. ResearchGate .
Thomson, J. J. (1971). A defense of abortion.
