Warren beings her argument by acknowledging that abortion “…usually entails the death of a fetus. ( Social and Personal Ethics: The Moral Status Of Abortion, Marry Anne Warren, Page 109)” Shockingly enough, at least to many individuals, Warren still holds firm that safe abortion is both morally permissible and under no circumstance should be illegal. Warren recognizes that it is almost futile to argue with those who believe that abortion is equivalent to murder unless it is argued that fetuses to not have the same right to life as other human beings. She does this by
Whereas relative is has loads of expectations and depends on the ethics of the situation. Absolute morality tends to be more religion orientated. In the Ten Commandments, there is one saying ‘Thou shalt not kill’ meaning ‘murder is not allowed.” Christians won’t question these rules, as they are from God. This is an absolutist rule. Someone who doesn’t follow a religion may tend to be more of a relativist, and they may say “Murder should be prevented, unless murdering one could stop the murder of more.” Using Kant’s famous example, if a murderer with an axe came to your house asking the whereabouts of your children, you’d have to tell him so that you are being moral as the murderer is his own moral agent and you are not responsible for his choices, you are only responsible for your own and it’ll be wrong to lie, even if it is to protect your loved ones.
To say that someone is "pro-life" is to say that the person believes that the government has a right to preserve all human life, regardless of intent or quality-of-life. The "pro-choice" view is that a baby does not have human rights within the mother's womb. Pro-life believes- that even incapable growing babies and undeveloped human life is sacred and must be protected by the government. Abortion they therefore believe must not be legal, nor should it be widely done on an illegal basis. Pro-choice believes- that abortion is the belief that women have the right to choose to abort a baby from their body.
From a non-biblical standpoint, it is based on whether a woman finds it ethically right to terminate a pregnancy and what effect it would ultimately have on her happiness. Therefore, abortion is not philosophically incorrect. In this paper, we will discuss how natural law, utilitarianism and ethical relativism cause opposition to these theories. Abortion is defined as: “The deliberate termination of a human pregnancy." However, if only the debate over the abortion issue was as simple as the definition provided.
The movement of anti-abortion was created and was also expanding. Creating two sides: pro-life which are against abortion, stating that abortion is murder. They believe that the fetus is a person, and has rights like all humans, and shouldn’t be killed. And the other side is pro-choice, entailing that those against abortion are against choice. They don’t see the fetus as an individual, they think that it’s mother’s decision to stay pregnant or not.
Even then, there is someone who would take the baby and raise it as their own. Too many girls and women, who are sexually active, do not take precautions to prevent pregnancy, and many just say that abortion is always a possibility. If someone is going to have unprotected sex, she should be prepared for pregnancy whether she chooses to keep the baby or allow another deserving family to raise the baby through adoption. There are so many men and women who want to have children but are not able to conceive. Finding someone to take a baby is never a problem.
Pro-life is the opposing argument to pro-choice, and that abortions should be made illegal like in Northern Ireland unless the mother’s life is at serious risk. Many Religions have the traditional view that abortion is a sin. It is argued that if a teenager becomes pregnant and has an abortion they may come to regret this in later life, because at the time they were only a minor. The argument for Pro-life is a choice by people who feel that it is wrong to take a man life, weather that human has been born or not is irrelevant. Abortion is seen as no different to murder.
Despite the fact that both she and the fetus has the equal right to life, opponents of abortion would still consider it wrong to preform an abortion with reasons ranging from killing an innocent person is always wrong and is murder to one must always prefer letting a person die to killing a person. J.J. Thomson would respond to say that these reasons are all false if we consider that the mother is only preforming an abortion in order to save her own life and not for personal interests. Hence abortion should be considered morally permissible in such situations when the life of the mother is threatened by the fetus. In order to determine whether abortion is permissible in cases where the mother’s life is not in immediate danger, we should analyse whether the fetus truly has the right to live. Take for example, rape.
It is your right to believe in what you want, so is abortion good or bad? Abortion is the “termination of a pregnancy”. So for the anti abortionist this is considered slaughtering the baby. They believe that the fetus is actually a separate human life form. So if one has an abortion it is considered murder.
Even in the case of rape, the RC Church does not support abortion - the foetus would be paying for someone else’s crime. “Human life is sacred”. Humanae Vitae, 1968: “The unborn human being’s right to live is one of the inalienable human rights” Pope John Paul II, 1985 "Abortion is a serious sin. Everyone, whether Catholic or not, should have a proper respect for human life. "Declaration on Procured Abortion, 1974: "From the time that the ovum is fertilised a new life is begun which is neither that of the father or the mother.