Abortion and Person Essay

Submitted By Brandonisanahole27
Words: 1045
Pages: 5

A Acevedo Acevedo1
Professor M Konig
Contemporary Moral Issues
Right to Life Argument Premise 3 in the Right to life Argument, states that Abortion is a denial of a right to life. Attacking this Premise I disagree. Abortion is not a denial of a right to life. There are many circumstances in life where an a Abortion has to be performed. Lets look at a situation with a pregnant woman who’s aware that her unborn child is dead. In this circumstance an abortion most be performed. You may ask why? If an abortion is not performed in this situation, a woman may have more injuries from her body miscarrying then getting an abortion. surprisingly, an abortion is much safer than a woman’s body miscarrying. Miscarrying a child may be something natural for a woman’s body to do. But, it is the most dangerous occurrence due to the possible injuries and risks associated with it. Surprisingly, An Abortion on the other hand doesn't have such high risks as a miscarriage. Looking at another situation, lets say a woman's body cant seem to sustain a pregnancy till full term. Meaning, the more she has a baby growing inside of her, her body gets weaker to the point of impending death. Does she choose her life as a right to life, or does she continue with her pregnancy just to save her unborn child ? In my opinion its all up to that woman and what her believes are. However, I feel most average women probably would want to save their life first especially if they find out their at high risk for death from the beginning of their pregnancy. I feel it would be wrong of the government to not legalize abortion. There are so many heath Acevedo 2 risks and life threatening situations where an abortion is necessary. If the government were to say its illegal to have an Abortion no matter the circumstance Im pretty sure the death tole in women would rise in America. To say that abortion is Morally Impermissible period, is irrational and ignorant. Thats like the Government saying, a person doesn't have the right to physically please themselves because its immoral . At the end of the day a person has a right to do what ever they want to their bodies. Just because too much of one thing may be bad for you, not doing that thing can be bad for you also. Premise 2 states it is immoral to deny a right. Yes , it is immoral to deny a person’s right, but in what circumstance? Abortion, believe it or not has a broad spectrum. It has the ability to actually save a woman’s life. Looking back at the situation with a woman who would have to choose between her life or her child’s life, Premise 2 can be viewed both ways in that situation. Not in just saving an unborn child from an abortion, but saving that mother’s life from the pregnancy. However, although in premise 1 it states every person has the right to life witch person in this particular situation has the right to life? So, to say in conclusion . Therefore, abortion is immoral is false. From the break down of various situations where an abortion might be necessary, Premise 1, premise 2 and premise 3 don't fall in that conclusion. Right to self-Determination Argument Premise 1 states that every competent person has a right to self-determination, which includes the right to choose to end their life (whether by suicide or euthanasia). If a person on Hospice

Acevedo 3 decides that they would rather be a DNR (Do not Resuscitate ) patient they have the right to make that decision. Imagine your doctor told you that you were suffering from an incurable disease and now you have less