The kind of abortion that is controversial is induced abortion, in which the embryo or fetus is prematurely removed or caused to be expelled. Induced abortions are commonly voluntary elective. Induced, elective abortion is in contrast to spontaneous abortion, or miscarriage, in which the embryo or fetus is involuntarily expelled because of accidental trauma or disease.
The basic pro-life position holds that induced abortions are morally impermissible morally wrong, morally prohibited. The basic pro-choice position holds that induced abortions are morally permissible morally allowable, not morally wrong. Variations on these basic pro-life and pro-choice positions are possible and will be discussed below.
One way to see the abortion dispute is that opposing positions disagree because of differing perspectives on one or more key issues or factors:. The first notion falls under the rubric of whether and in what sense the entity is a moral patient , the second is whether it is a moral agent.
As moral patients, humans are normally considered to have moral rights — the right not to be harmed by others, for instance. Humans are also normally considered moral agents in that their behavior can be judged right or wrong. They are under moral obligations and duties to behave in a certain way toward other moral patients. Metaphysical and physical status: Metaphysics deals with questions about the ultimate nature and categories of reality.
The metaphysical status of a being is how it should be classified with respect to what we take to be the most basic categories and types of reality and experience: whether it has subjective existence or is an object only, whether it is a person, whether it has or is an immaterial soul, etc. The physical status of a being is the nature of its physical and mental existence. It could be alive, dead, able to exist on its own, be at a certain stage of maturity, be of a particular species, and possess physical organs and capabilities such as a brain, central nervous system, and intelligence.
Human beings are creatures of the species homo sapiens. Some anthropologists speak of several subspecies, with present modern humans as homo sapiens sapiens and earlier modern humans as an extinct subspecies homo sapiens idaltu. The intent is to denote a particular creature biologically, with humans clearly different than chimpanzees, dolphins, and oak trees.
The exact criteria for personhood are debated. Generally human beings are considered persons, but there could be persons who are not human beings. For example, if members of another species were rational and moral but just not homo sapiens, biologically, we might still say they were persons. Another example of persons not human would be a race of alien beings living on another planet who behaved morally and rationally but were clearly not human. The moral rights of a human person: Human beings are typically considered to be persons, so we may speak of human persons.
The right to life includes the right not to be murdered. But self defense is generally considered morally permissible. But if every human person has a right to life, the question arises of whether killing the attacker in self-defense violates the right to life of the attacker. Different interpretations of this situation are possible. Or one could say that rather than having a right to life per se, a human has a right not to be killed unjustly. Killing a violent attacker is an instance of a just killing.
Relevance of these issues to the abortion controversy: The morality of abortion depends to some extent on how the embryo or fetus deserves to be treated: in what sense it is a moral patient, whether it has the moral rights not to be harmed and to pursue a life, what kind of moral consideration it is owed. We seem to take the moral status of a being to depend on its metaphysical or physical status.
For example, we think humans and rocks deserve different kinds of treatment because they are different metaphysically or physically. So it might be that the moral status of an embryo or fetus depends on its metaphysical or physical status: whether it is a person, whether it is conscious, whether it has a soul, etc.
Moral status alone might not determine whether abortion is morally permissible, though, for some thinkers believe other factors might override the moral status of the fetus. The situation is complicated by the fact that the embryo and fetus are undergoing continual physical development.
The physical development of the embryo and fetus occur during a nine-month period. First an egg cell oocyte or ovum is fertilized by a sperm cell spermatozoon during a 24 hour long process. During this time the sperm cell moves through the area surrounding the egg cell, enters the egg cell, and merges its genetic material with the genetic material in the egg cell.
Completion of this process results in a single-celled zygote with chromosomes from both sperm and egg cells. About 30 hours after fertilization is complete the zygote begins cell division and the number of cells increases. This is different than fraternal twins from two distinct fertilized egg cells. At nine cells, the cells start arranging themselves into a pattern.
At four days after fertilization the organism moves to the uterus, floats for about two days, and then it attaches itself to the uterine wall between the seventh and twelfth day implantation. At the end of the first week the organism is attached to the uterine wall and is being nourished by the mother. After implantation, cells further differentiate and the embryo is increasingly structured. There is some indication that brain waves can be recorded by about six weeks.
At nine weeks the organism is a fetus, the heart is almost fully developed by the tenth week, within a few more weeks the brain is fully formed, and by the fifteenth week the eyes face forward and the ears are on the side of the head. Birth is usually after thirty-nine weeks. During the process of embryonic and fetal development, the organism is alive, attached to the mother for life support, and increasingly resembling a human baby in appearance.
Some thinkers believe that the moral status of the embryo or fetus changes depending on its particular stage of physical development. This difference is evident among U. The moderate pro-life position is also widely shared among the general public. Nearly 75 per cent of Americans think that abortion should be permissible in cases of rape. Since Americans are nearly equally split between pro-choice and pro-life positions, we can assume that many people who are pro-life are among those who think that rape exceptions are justified.
While the moderate pro-life position has broad support among the general public, it receives very little attention from moral philosophers. In a recent paper , I have suggested that one reason for this surprising oversight is because the popular view is actually incoherent. But it is not for the reason stated in the letter to the RNC. Rather, bringing out the incoherency requires us to unpack the underlying moral justification for the view. There seem to be three underlying claims for the moderate pro-life position.
The first claim is: a fetus is a human being from the moment of conception, or else at some point during gestation. The moral point here is that human beings have a right to life, and because a fetus is a human being it too has a right to life.
The second underlying claim is: a right to life is stronger than, or outweighs, a right to bodily autonomy.
As we saw above, this is the weighing claim familiar to pro-life positions. It says that a right to life is morally weighty enough to tilt away from a right to bodily autonomy. With the three claims on the table, what we can notice is that the third claim is an excusing condition on the second claim. And that means that the moral justification for the moderate pro-life positions stems from the type of act that rape is.
If in doubt, read our comments policy. This is a very well delivered article by LIFE. Do you publish any booklets and if so how are they disseminated? We used to publish many booklets and leaflets; now, most of our material is online, which is more cost-effective and allows us to reach more people.
Is there anything in particular you are after? Let us know by emailing lifematters lifecharity. Your email address will not be published. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Click to Text: Requires mobile phone. Read our terms of service. Facebook Twitter. She says that abortion should be valued as a method of birth control and believes it should be available for any reason — including sex-selection abortion , which is when a woman has an abortion for no other reason than the sex of the baby.
Or 6 weeks, when doctors can detect primitive brainwaves. Or 12 weeks, when the baby responds to touch. Or 16 weeks, when the mother may feel the baby move for the first time. The choice to do what? Prochoice people could be future prolifers if given the truth Have you read the story of Abby Johnson? Want to learn more? Subscribe to get our email updates! Last name. Email address. Marketing permissions Life will use the information you provide on this form to contact you and to provide updates and marketing.
By ticking "email" you agree that we may hold and process your data. Address Address Address. City City.
0コメント