Abortion.

Thursday is a day I especially look forward to because of my Ethics class with Dr. William Hale. As I've said before in a previous entry, this class challenges my thought process and just is just downright interesting.

Tonight we were required to bring in our paper we wrote on where we stand with the issue of Abortion.

Here is what I wrote half an hour before class started, so forgive the errors:

Abortion

In today’s day and age there’s a major debate over abortion. The main question within the topic of Abortion is when the an embryo actually becomes a life-being. The age old question of “When does life begin?” We are all unified in the thought that murder in itself is unethical and wrong. Murder is taking away the life of another individual. Does a fetus have ‘life’? Is it considered Murder? To decide if abortion is ethical or not, we must decide if the aborted fetus/embryo has life.

What are the facts? There are many differing scientific views as to when life actually begins. I choose to go with the Genetic View. The Genetic View takes the position that life actually begins when unique human characteristics are formed. This happens right at the union of sperm and egg cells, also known as fertilization. One set of genetics from the sperm and another set of genetics from the egg are combined to form a completely unique and distinguishable set of genetics. From that point on, the developing embryo has all the traits that will go with that human for the rest of his or her life.

With this information, we deduce that life starts with the combination of a sperm and egg cell. What this means is that past the point of using a condom or a birth control pill, a human zygote has been formed. Life has begun

If we are to believe that life begins at the point of fertilization, then it is not okay to ever interfere with that developing human being in any negative way. While the argument is there that a mother has the right to do what she wants with her body, when can she say she doesn’t want a child? This forming zygote or embryo is another human being that is both part of her and unique and independent in it’s own special way. The Fairness Principle developed by Emanuel Kant implies that you have the right and freedom to do anything you want until you infringe on the rights of another person. This includes murder. You do anything you like to your own body, but you cannot impede on the rights of the human being that is inside of you.

This view also coincides with the moral principle of Agape which implies that one must act in such away that the consequences of that person’s actions produces the greatest amount of Christian love. What this entails is that the revocation of someone’s life is not an act of Christian love.

The consequences and implications of such a view is that past condom use and birth control pills, once fertilization occurs, it is an immoral and unethical act to abort a human embryo. This also means that even in cases of rape and sexual abuse, which are both immoral and unethical, a mother cannot abort her child ethically if she does in fact become pregnant. It goes along with the principle that two wrongs do not make a right. Because someone acted unethically upon you does not give you the right to act unethically upon another human being. There are many alternatives to abortion such as placing you child up for adoption if it is the best thing for the mother and often times the child, as the mother may not have the necessary resources to best take care of that child.

In conclusion, with the view that life begins at fertilization, it is immoral to abort a child. Condom use is okay because there is no union of egg and sperm. A zygote is not formed. Birth Control Pills are also okay because it prevents ovulation from occurring. If there is no egg to be fertilized, then obviously there will not be a zygote formed. However past the point of fertilization, any interference with the natural growth of a human embryo is thus immoral and unethical because it unfairly infringes on the right of that human being.

Tonight's discussion was very interesting because Dr. Hale took the issue to something I've never even thought about before. We discussed how often times abortion clinics are most prevalent in the poorer regions of cities. Middle class citizens with private doctors and insurance usually don't have a problem with abortion. However, with today's overcrowding in public schools and the poverty in our country, one has to think about the advice our citizens from a less fortunate economic background are receiving. A clinic will most likely give advice to a poor woman to abort the child, not necessarily for the choice of the mother, but because it would be a benefit to the community. Bringing a child into this world and providing for their education up through college will cost us tax paying citizens more than it would for us to pay for that woman pregnant with the child to get a free abortion.


Although this is one aspect of why one could be a proponent for abortion, the issue still stands that murder is wrong. Tonight we learned a new philosophic principle that is so powerful.

Prima Facie Duties in summary tells us this:

"I have a moral responsibility to tear down any artificial barrier which would prohibit any individual from achieving their full potential not for just their sake, but for the sake of the whole."

What this entails is that it is our obligation by the virtue of being a human being to do all we can to make sure people are allowed to be the best they can be. Not just for the well-being of that person, but also for the potential benefit that person can and will be to our world community.

The principle of Prima Facie Duties, or the Prime Duties, can be used in defense of the "Pro-Life" argument. Applying this principle, we can ask the question, "What if you just aborted the man who has the potential for coming up with the cure for cancer?" or even "What if Einstein, Beethoven, or Winston Churchill were aborted? How different would our world be?"

Dr. Hale said several very profound things in relation to the Prime Duties;

"I cannot truly be free as long as racism, biggotry, sexism, prejudice, and the like exists. It limits myself and our society."

"Imagine if in 1776, if our country was formed on rational reasoning instead of culture, think of where we could be as a nation. If blacks and women were equal from the get-go, imagine the possibilities."


Something to think about...