None_Provided
Abortion has been one of the topics of hot debate for the last three decades in our nation. Since the Roe v/s Wade decision in 1973, some Americans feel the need to ponder whether aborting fetuses is a moral action. On the one hand, some people feel that abortion should be legal because a woman has a right to choose whether she wants to continue a pregnancy or not. It's her body. On the other hand, some feel that fetuses have no advocates and deserve a right to live, so it is immoral to abandon their rights and kill them. This issue is not only at the center of political debate, but philosophical debate as well. In this paper, I will examine and critique Mary Anne Warren's On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion, where she examines the moral humanity of the fetus and its right to life. Mary Anne Warren describes how abortion should be kept legal without any restrictions on it. She states that the pro-abortion argument should center around the moral status of the baby, not simply on the rights of the mother. Yet, she does criticize those who defend abortion as the right to control one's body, "...it would be very odd to describe, say, breaking a leg, as damaging one's property, and much more appropriate to describe it
murder, of the existence of such a right unless we are able to produce a Well, to my knowledge she herself has not done this. Mary Anne Warren has written a very detailed and understandable article, however, her claims are not consistent or convincing and may seem a bit heartless, but nonetheless she presents them concisely with charisma, keeping the reader on a philosophical seesaw, anxiously agreeing and disagreeing throughout her piece. If one refers to the five standards of being a person, a fetus could not be a person, so abortion is therefore moral, according to Warren's hypothesis. She admits that a person need not have all of the traits, but should exhibit a few. However, she does not state which traits are crucial for the reward of personhood (Warren, 320). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ e murder if one declined to share their body (Warren, 316). She concludes her use of this analogy by agreeing with Thomson: even though a fetus is a human, a woman still has a right to obtain an abortion (Warren, 317). Even though Warren agrees with Thomson on some levels, she does mention one problem with this. A fetus comes into existence as a result of the woman's actions; the violinist does not. This is when she breaks off from Thomson and forms her own opinion: the need for the realization that a fetus is not a person (distinguishing between "human" and "person") and does not have a right to life. In the beginning of her article she says: clear and convincing refutation of the traditional antiabortion argument, Section II of Warren's article attempts to define what a "person" is, to follow thr
Some common words found in the essay are:
According Warren, Warren Thomson's, Anne Warren, , II Warren's, Judith Thomson, Defense Abortion, Status Abortion, moral humanity, Judith Thomson's, mary anne, Mary Anne, fetus person, mary anne warren, abortion moral, warren 314, human person, warren 320, fetus human, five standards, people feel,
Approximate Word count = 1150
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
