NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Abortions Introduction The problem of abortion was always in the centre of attention of moral and ethical discussions. We can easily notice confrontation of two main groups: pro-life and pro-choice. Differences in historically prevalent orthodox (or conservative) and liberal positions of relatively allowable choice were the subjects of heated debates. Whereas Don Marquis upholds classic non-religious anti-abortion standpoint, Judith Thompson considers that woman has right to choose whether to make an abortion or not.
Taking into account Thompsons standpoint, she can be related to so-called moderate pro-abortion group. She claims that abortion can be morally justified in some cases. Now lets examine the issue more thoroughly. Don Marquis Don Marquis generally votes against abortions.
Don Marquis argues that abortion is, except possibly in rare cases, seriously immoral... it is in the same moral category as killing an innocent adult human being (Don Marquis n. p. ). This position rests on the assertion of the wrongfulness of killing. He considers that abortions are immoral due to the main reason: abortion is immoral because the fact of abortion deprives the fetus of a future. This conclusion is derived from an assumption that killing a being is wrong, first of all, because the killing results in one of the greatest possible losses of the victim.
This loss consists in the assumption when I die, I am deprived of all the value of my future. Following this logics, we come to conclusion that if a fetus has a future like ours, then the killing of this fetus will inevitably deprive him of all the value of his future. Consequently, the abortion is a wrong act. Don Marquis considers that the righteousness of his logics rests upon the fact that a fetus should be considered a being whose life is seriously wrong to end (Don Marquis n. p. ) and provides the readers with the following explanation. First of all, he says that there are two main groups: pro-life and pro-choice.
Pro-life group focus attention on the fact that fetus is human, therefore, abortion is immoral. Pro-choice group adheres to position of non-personhood of a fetus; therefore, the abortion is morally acceptable because it involves no living being. Further, Don Marquis says that both groups should add several moral premises. Pro-life group considers that it is wrong to deprive of a human life, whereas pro-choice group adhere to position that it is wrong to deprive of a human life. Don Marquis continues that both viewpoints become too slippery and arouse many questions. For example, according to pro-life, killing a cancer-cell will also be immoral (as their position can be interpreted too loosely).
On the other hand, pro-choice position can be understood too narrow because, as Don Marquis claims, pro-choicer's dont prove that killing retarded people of infants is wrong. Further, Don Marquis claims that pro-life group can refer to human being, whereas it is difficult to prove that fetus can be considered a human being (as human being is generally considered a full-pledged human person). Pro-choice group, it its turn, has to include in consideration retarded persons and infants, because they are not considered persons according to general pro-choice classification. At the same time, Don Marquis empathizes on fact that pro-life group mainly rests on biological category and pro-choice group rests on typically psychological categories.
At the same time, Don Marquis reminds us that these categories, then, should be justified why they are morally relevant. In order to prove the correctness of his assumption, Don Marquis tries to explain why the killing is considered wrong. He starts with two wrong assumptions (the killing is wrong because it brutalizes the killer, and killing is wrong because it influences people left behind). Further Marquis proposes solution that the killing is wrong because it deprives a person of all possible future experience. According to him, such assumption is correct because the wrongfulness of killing beings is extended to infants, retarded persons, and even some animals that are to a certain extent similar to us. In such a way, a fetus is another form of a person that can be extended to the rule applied.
Judith Thompson Judith Thompson considers that abortion can be morally justified in some cases. She agrees with Don Marquis position that abortion is a wrong act, but claims that abortion is not always wrong even if a fetus was a person. Judith Thompson tries to prove her standpoint by refuting a logical assumption that the right to life outweighs any other right. She admits that her opponents are right, and then after she refutes their logics. First she admits that the fetus is a human from the beginning of conception. Secondly, she takes a popular anti-abortion argument: Every person has a right to life; the fetus is a person and hence has a right to life.
The mother has a right to control her body, but the right to life is a stronger right. Therefore, an abortion may not be performed (Thompson n. p. ). Then she demonstrates the wrongfulness of the logics with an example of sick violinist. She asks you to imagine that you are hooked up to a famous unconscious violinist.
You were kidnapped by his fans. The violinist inevitably dies if he will not use your kidneys for nine months. You are in this position because you was forced (kidnapped) but not by your own good will. Therefore, you can choose whether to agree to rescue his life, or not. The violinist is innocent because he didnt participate in kidnapping and wasnt involved in your predicament.
According to Thompson, the right to live (violinist) is in confrontation with the right to control your body (you). Further, Thompson refutes the pro-choice position that argues that abortion is always wrong even if it was done to save the mothers life or in case of rape. Again she comes back to the sample of violinist. She asks to imagine that the operation hurts your kidney and, in result of this, youll die. However, if you unplug yourself from the violinist, he will immediately die. Thompson claims that we have right to choose what to do in this case.
Finally, Judith Thompson claims that Except in such cases as the unborn person has a right to demand it -- and we are leaving open the possibility that there may be such cases -- nobody is morally required to make large sacrifices, of health, of all other interests and concerns, of all other duties and commitments for nine years, or even for nine months, in order to keep another person alive (Thompson n. p. ). Conclusion Don Marquis standpoint rests upon the position of the wrongfulness of killing. At the same time, he appeals to no religious premises and the notion of a personhood. Don Marquis doesnt claim that abortion is always immoral and discusses no slippery cases. Sometimes the abortions can be made in order to save the mothers life, the abortions in case of rape or, the abortion made before implantation, etc.
He considers that right to allow or to forbid the abortion depends on whether a fetus is the sort of being whose life it is seriously wrong to end (Don Marquis n. p. ). According to his position, the fetus is the being whose life is not allowed to end. What concerns Judith Thompson, her standpoint of moderate pro-abortion choice sounds much stronger than Don Marquis position. Although it doesnt mean that abortion is morally legal and invited to do, there are some cases when the mother has to choose between her life and the life of fetus. I especially like Judith Thompsons position, because she upholds moderate pro-abortion standpoint.
Her arguments are quite logical and provide us with easy-to-follow explanations. Judith Thompson proposes us completely different approach that relates neither to religious empathetic claims, nor to radical anti-abortion views. Although it seems that both of them, Judith Thompson and Don Marquis, support the right to make an abortion in certain cases, Judith Thompsons position contains stronger arguments, whereas Don Marquis position is weak. Bibliography: Thomson, Judith. (1971). A Defense of Abortion.
Philosophy & Public Affairs Don Marquis. (April 1989). Why Abortion is Immoral. Don Marquis. The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 86, No. 4, 183 - 202
Free research essays on topics related to: anti abortion, pro choice, pro abortion, pro life, morally justified
Research essay sample on Morally Justified Pro Choice
