Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /home/rmhu6fn7r820/public_html/wp-content/themes/opskill-123help/functions.php on line 75
Notice: Trying to get property 'status' of non-object in /home/rmhu6fn7r820/public_html/wp-content/themes/opskill-123help/functions.php on line 75
Essay > Words: 1310 > Rating: Excellent > Buy full access at $1
The abortion dilemma is one of the most sensitive and contentious issues in the moral, political, religious and cultural frameworks (West, 1999). The debate has dates has a very long history, and to-date, is still heavily debated across the globe; both in legality and morality terms. Some of the never ending questions include: Are there any legal and/or moral rights for the foetus? Is the justification of abortion morally? Is the foetus a human being, and therefore, need protection? What does it take to be a human being?
This debate is dominated by two camps with opposing views concerning abortion. They include the pro-life activists and the pro-choice with extreme conservative and extreme liberal views on abortion, respectively. The pro-life activists believe that the development of a unicellular zygote marks the beginning of a personhood of a human being. Therefore, as per the religion stand, abortion should remain illegal by virtue of the “imago dei” of human being;otherwise, it would be a homicide. On the other hand, the pro-choice activiststhrough McDonaghargue abortion is a right for women so as to defend themselves “against the non-consensual invasion, appropriation, and use of her physical body by an unwelcomed foetus” (West, 1999).
The pro-life activists seem advantaged by defining human personhood from the very start of life. However, it may sound insane to refer a zygote as a human being. The abortionists view maybe also right because their major claim is reinforced by a popular philosophical usage of concept “personhood.” Yes, the offspring is more developed than the unicellular zygote. However, this does not imply that the pro-choice definition faces no hurdles. There is no morally relevant difference between a just-born baby and a foetus ten minutes prior to birth. This article will attempt to analyse the controversy surrounding abortion in utilitarian terms, and then contrast utilitarian against deontologists view on abortion(Ngwenya, 2013).
Theutilitarianism can be an efficient way of handlingtheabortion controversyin the current world. Utilitarian believethathumans’ majoraim is to achieve thegreatestpossiblepleasure. Utility evades the aforementioned problems since it does not share the hypotheses. Utilitarianism argues that the abortion rights should be measured by their usefulness to the society. Therefore, this article presents analysis based on the pain and pleasure amount in cases where abortion is legal and illegal.
Many individuals would expect the argument to centre on foetus’ interest since it may be destined for a happy future life, and also abortion itself is agonizing, especially if carried-out in late-stages of the pregnancy. However, these are shoddy considerations because: any pain that can arise in the process of abortion can be prevented through a timely abortion or the use of painless approaches. Hence, the overall pain experienced by the foetus cannot offer a solid reason against abortion; only the ugly exercise of it. If one assumes the foetus’ future life comprises of a feasible balance of happiness over pain, then a crucial consideration arises against abortion(Ngwenya, 2013).
Secondly, this paper considers parents and family members if adoption exists as an alternative to abortion. Some researchers claim that having a baby, even in instances where pregnancy is intentional, might reduce the happiness in a relationship. Once again, this claim is insignificant; hence, no need to consider it. According to utilitarian theory, the wrongness or rightness of abortion do not depend either on the effects of abortionon the agent or the victims but lies on the less direct consequences of the overall society. The abortion controversy, assuming the existence “rights” and guilty conscience of “baby murders,” becomes desirability of either decreasing or increasing population(Utilitarian.org, 2000).
If there is a population size that is below the optimal number, it is obvious that the utility will advocates for new birth above this number. In this instance, utility provides positive duties. If the utilitarian agree that the baby’s future happiness.............
Type: Essay || Words: 1310 Rating || ExcellentSubscribe at $1 to view the full document.
Buy access at $1