Abortion Is Impermissible

Words: 1324
Pages: 6

“Abortion is impermissible as it is on par to killing an adult human being,” this statement is a representation of a conservative viewpoint in relation to foetal killing, however this statement is not well received within modern society. In most cases, common ideals allow for abortion to occur under certain circumstances. Conversely, the conservative opinion cannot be overlooked as it is still held by many individuals, mostly in religious and right wing circles. Yet, this point of view does not consider, the mother’s autonomy nor her right to make her own choices in relation to her future preferences, which may not include motherhood. Further, it allows for many absurdities within the theory; especially if the foetus is not compatible with …show more content…
The conservative argument, is established within the sanctity of life principle, which at first comes across as a compelling argument, from a shallow view point, stating that, “it is impermissible to kill an innocent human being.” Which for most people, sounds valid and intuitively persuasive. A foetus is a member of the human race, and is innocent, therefore according to this theory it is impermissible to kill them. (SORUCE) This would include, within situations where the child is born malformed, possibly terminally ill and would live a life of pain. This theory also implies a right to life; however, it can be seen more as a right not to be killed unjustly. But, if this is the case, then it begs the questions within this theory of if killing the foetus is unjust. Nevertheless, the conservative theorist would most likely hold …show more content…
This is a stronger argument against the conservative theory as it is not based solely on the rights of the foetus and does not disregard the mother’s right as a person her/themselves. J.J. Thomson is a representation of a liberal middling view with her violinist case, in which she draws on two aspects; the first being that we each have a right to control what happens in our own body, the second is that we have an obligation to be, “minimally decent samaritans.” She holds that bringing a child to term is above this baseline of morality and that the foetus (in this case the violinist) is an unwelcome invader in the mother’s body body. (SOURCE) However, this argument does not actually show what women want from an abortion, to be absolved of the responsibility of motherhood. Thomson would have to hold that if exogenesis existed that the mother would have to agree to the foetus being removed from the uterus, as her analogy only allows a woman the right to have a foetus removed from her body. (SOURCE) Yet, this seems morally counterintuitive for both the conservative argument as well as the feminist theorists. It does not do to abandon Thomson completely; however, it must be treated with some caution as it only gives a woman the right not to have the parasitical relationship of pregnancy, not the right to abandon