Judith Jarvis Thomson argued that while there were objections to abortion, they weren’t well supported. While some people think that abortion is morally wrong, I agree with Thomson because of many reasons. One main reason is that while the fetus has the right to life, a mother does at well. Having an abortion could also be beneficial to the mother’s health if needed. Even if the mother’s health is not at stake and she knew of the risks and still engaged in consensual sex, it’s an unexpected pregnancy that is not the responsibility of the mother. Some critics of abortion argue that regardless of it will kill the mother, she should still proceed with giving birth to the child because abortion is considered murder. Some critics also argue that
…show more content…
I still think in this situation that abortion is not morally wrong because even though there was knowledge of the consequences that could occur with engaging in consensual sex, the mother still did not ask to be pregnant. In Thomson’s paper, she provided two analogies to this argument. One example was having windows in your apartment that provide no protection and a burglar comes in. Even though you knew of the risks of having windows and how something or someone unwanted could come into your apartment, you still do not owe the burglar the permission to be in your apartment. This is analogous to abortion not being morally wrong because even if the mother engages in consensual sex without protection and knew of the risks, she did not ask to be pregnant; therefore, it is still not her responsibility to have to keep the child. Another example was having bars on the window as protection and a burglar is still able to get in because one of the bars was defective and allowed access. This is analogous to using protection because even though you knew of the risks and still used protection, there is a small chance of there being a defect in the protection. This still does not mean that the burglar has permission to enter. These analogies overall support the “abortion is not morally wrong” argument because although the mother knew of the risks and used protection and it still wasn’t effective, that was not her fault and therefore it’s not her responsibility to have to carry the
I still think in this situation that abortion is not morally wrong because even though there was knowledge of the consequences that could occur with engaging in consensual sex, the mother still did not ask to be pregnant. In Thomson’s paper, she provided two analogies to this argument. One example was having windows in your apartment that provide no protection and a burglar comes in. Even though you knew of the risks of having windows and how something or someone unwanted could come into your apartment, you still do not owe the burglar the permission to be in your apartment. This is analogous to abortion not being morally wrong because even if the mother engages in consensual sex without protection and knew of the risks, she did not ask to be pregnant; therefore, it is still not her responsibility to have to keep the child. Another example was having bars on the window as protection and a burglar is still able to get in because one of the bars was defective and allowed access. This is analogous to using protection because even though you knew of the risks and still used protection, there is a small chance of there being a defect in the protection. This still does not mean that the burglar has permission to enter. These analogies overall support the “abortion is not morally wrong” argument because although the mother knew of the risks and used protection and it still wasn’t effective, that was not her fault and therefore it’s not her responsibility to have to carry the