Running head: ABORTION

Judith Thomsons Argument for the Moral Permissibility of Abortion

ABORTION Judith Thomsons Argument for the Moral Permissibility of Abortion Every creatures life starts when it first sees a ray of light; when it first inhales fresh air and darkly watches the mothers smile (or feels a female animals touch). But there are arguments that we going to be considered like live beings even when we are in our future mothers belly. If an unborn child was planned by loving parents it can be reputed a human being and deserves normal life in future. Unfortunately, sometimes children do not even have a possibility to see a world by their own eyes by reason of adult indifference. But are they always adult who get pregnant? Or they just pretend to be responsible for their life and the lives of their possible future children? To resolve this controversial issue we have the ideas of Judith Thomson, known as American moral philosopher. She states that people are in right to decide what to do with their own bodies due to the right of Self-Ownership. In accordance with Thomson, we are the only ones who can decide how to live and whom to take care of. She admits that women have a right to protect themselves, so if pregnancy violates females bodies they are allowed to get rid of a fetus. So, there is no need to think over the future of unborn child because according to the right of self-ownership, it provides people with an absolute priority over all other individual rights. In other words, people can take care of themselves only and organize the life they want to have instead of being worried about the future of their unborn lives. It is definitely difficult issue to talk about, as moral problems always have several ways to be resolved, or get left to be not discussed at all. Morality is a word that has a great amount of meaning, as there are so many human thoughts, that is why there is a right to deliver a separate opinion towards certain problem. For instance, for somebody a

ABORTION bird death is a heart-breaking event, and for another one it is just a funny game. So, very often majority opinion is not taken into consideration during abortion resolving issue. Judith Thomson presents positive ideas of the moral permissibility of abortion. I am more likely to be against her moral permissibility of abortion, wherethrough we, human beings are not in right to decide who can have a life. We are all in God's hands and do not have to tempt the Lord. It is absolutely unreasonable to resort to abortion, as a woman who has an intention to abort was given a life before, is not in right to deprive her unborn children of future life of full value like she has. She was given a life; therefore she is obliged to give a new life too, as it is her moral duty. We are totally in right to control and protect our bodies, but at the same time we have to pay for the life we were given by sacrificing our lives and every day lifestyle. I am totally agree with Warrens conclusion about a woman who is voluntary involved in sexual relations has to be morally responsible in a way that negates her right to use her body as she wishes. People received a possibility to live on the Earth, so we have to respect the world existence rules to be alive according to the nature demography process. If the physiology is the main vehicle of human existence

development, humans body is a property of God, so we have obey this rule, as we were born the same way. Maybe a fetus does not posses the properties of persons, as Warren says, but it has a chance for a valuable life in future. Despite all the positive and negative dispute ideas, abortion is a killing and not a way to perfect the life of an individual.

ABORTION References Judith Thomson. Argument for the Moral Permissibility of Abortion. AbortionLecNotes.doc