Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
For example, Marquis uses esoteric language to flush out the wrongness of killing, per se:
"Since we do believe that it is wrong to kill defenseless little babies, it is important that a theory of the wrongness of killing easily account for this.
Personhood theories of the wrongness of killing, on the other hand, cannot straightforwardly account for the wrongness of killing infants and young children. Hence, such theories must add special ad hoc accounts of the wrongness of killing the young. The plausibility of such ad hoc theories seems to be a function of how desperately one wants such theories to work" (192).
Meanwhile, Marquis references iconic philosopher Immanuel Kant ("Kant's argument for the wrongness of inflicting pain on animals rests on a claim that, in a world of Kantian moral agents, is demonstrably false…") (Marquis, p. 194), and pro-choice philosopher Michael Tooley ("Tooley's claim that an entity cannot possess the right to life unless it has the capacity to desire it's...
198-99). Abortion is wrong, Marquis argues (202), because "Since a fetus possesses a property, the possession of which in adult human beings is sufficient to make killing an adult human being wrong, abortion is wrong."
Conclusion
While Marquis is clearly an intelligent writer, he is trying to tie the reader up in semantically skillful knots with circular, confusing philosophical meanderings. In the real world of American law, a woman's right to chose trumps any philosophical argument. The U.S. Constitution's Ninth Amendment guarantees the right to privacy, which is the basis for Roe v. Wade. Abortion is legal and it will remain legal providing the next appointee to the Supreme Court is made by a president that respects the Constitution and a woman's right to make her own decision, not one forced on her by an arbitrary government in Washington, D.C.
Works Cited
Marquis, Don. "Why Abortion is Immoral." The Journal…
Works Cited
Marquis, Don. "Why Abortion is Immoral." The Journal of Philosophy, 86.4. (1989): 183-202.
Pro-Choice Position on Abortion The abortion debate in the United States is a debate that has raged for decades, ever since abortion was legalized in the 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade. (McBride, 2008) There are some legitimate arguments for both sides of the debate, but those who have sided with one position or the other aggressively pursue their goals with utmost precedence. These supporters often choose candidates and align
Pro-Choice: The Abortion Issue -- A philosophical, as well as a legal issue of rights, responsibility, and the question of when life begins Just across the border, in the United States, one of the most symbolically significant issues in political life today is the issue of abortion. Abortion is often phrased as question of personal rights and liberties: as in, a woman has the personal right and freedom to do what
Thus we ought to take seriously the suggestion that, insofar as "the human individual develops biologically in a continuous fashion... The rights of a human person might develop in the same way (on the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion). Finally, according to utilitarianism, if something is wrong for majority of the people, it should be a rule. For example, if an illegal abortion or any other medical procedure takes
As for those who believe it is never all right to abort babies under any circumstances, these people are blinded by good intentions. It is true that killing innocent children without reason is immoral, but there are actually situations that call for abortion as the only moral choice there is. We, as an advanced society, have the power to guide the development of our world, and in order for
Generally, secular science reminds us that even the distinction between the value supposedly inherent in human life and that of other "higher" non-human life forms is very difficult to maintain logically. In fact, it may very well be that many species are sufficiently capable of complex emotions and other intellectual behavior previously considered exclusive hallmarks of "humanity" as to deserve greater moral consideration. If anything, the convergence of contemporary knowledge made
According to Cooper, writing in the journal Feminist Studies, the anti-abortion groups in South Dakota spent $2.65 million to defeat the proposition, and the pro-choice groups spent just $1.84 million. The anti-abortion groups ran television commercials that were "slick" but were not truthful, according to Cooper. One of the television commercials showed doctors (none of which were obstetricians or gynecologists) saying that "This measure [the anti-abortion legislation that was being