Jaugstetter, Mitchem
PHI 237 - Paper 2
Dr. Simson
November 21, 2016
The Supreme Court’s position in Roe v. Wade
The U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade remains controversial to this day. With a country divided on beliefs relating to this case, over 40 years later it is still relevant in politics and government. The Supreme Court’s decision attempted to cater to both the interests of a pregnant woman in deciding whether to carry her baby to term and the interest of the government in protecting prenatal life. The Supreme Court took a position in the case with the majority opinion defending it. Philosophers Mary Anne Warren and Judith Thomson make compelling arguments that defend the woman’s right to decide whether or not to carry her pregnancy …show more content…
Wade morally defensible and to what extent is a hard call. For the most part, yes, I would consider the Supreme Court’s position in Roe v. Wade morally defensible. I believe that the right to an abortion falls within the right to privacy under the 14th amendment. I support the decision in Roe v. Wade. I do not think the government should have involvement in telling a woman whether or not she should be able to receive an abortion. I believe it is a right, as it is her body. Mainly, I would consider myself pro-choice. While I do understand that abortion might be totally against some people’s personal beliefs or religion, I do not believe that abortions should be restricted. While I am pro-choice, I am not a supporter of late terminations of pregnancy. I am glad that in Roe v. Wade states have the ability to regulate the abortion during the second and third trimester. While it is hard to say for sure when life begins, I seem to believe that as the second and third trimester approach the baby reaches further development and possibly …show more content…
These include the ability to feel pain, reason, participate in self-motivated activity, communicate, and be self-aware. While originally when I read this article, I was not convinced by Warren’s argument, the more I studied the material I understood where she was coming from. She did clarify that a “person” does not have to show all of these traits and not one of them is absolutely necessary to be considered a “person.” Her story about a space explorer coming across extraterrestrial life and then trying to apply the criteria to the lifeform to determine personhood helped me understand the criteria and where her argument was going. (Warren 341) Judith Thomson also presents a compelling argument in favor of abortion in “A Defense of Abortion.” She gives us the example of a famous violinist that has kidney failure and is hooked up to our body for nine months in order to survive. She continues to say that we did not volunteer to hook up our body. This was an interesting point to include as it relates to unplanned pregnancies and rape cases. This article focuses on the moral aspect of abortion. One of the big questions that Thomson argued was “who is more entitled to the right to life?” Thomson says there are two people involved when a mother has health issues related to pregnancy, one whose life is threatened and one who threatens it. While both are innocent,
PHI 237 - Paper 2
Dr. Simson
November 21, 2016
The Supreme Court’s position in Roe v. Wade
The U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade remains controversial to this day. With a country divided on beliefs relating to this case, over 40 years later it is still relevant in politics and government. The Supreme Court’s decision attempted to cater to both the interests of a pregnant woman in deciding whether to carry her baby to term and the interest of the government in protecting prenatal life. The Supreme Court took a position in the case with the majority opinion defending it. Philosophers Mary Anne Warren and Judith Thomson make compelling arguments that defend the woman’s right to decide whether or not to carry her pregnancy …show more content…
Wade morally defensible and to what extent is a hard call. For the most part, yes, I would consider the Supreme Court’s position in Roe v. Wade morally defensible. I believe that the right to an abortion falls within the right to privacy under the 14th amendment. I support the decision in Roe v. Wade. I do not think the government should have involvement in telling a woman whether or not she should be able to receive an abortion. I believe it is a right, as it is her body. Mainly, I would consider myself pro-choice. While I do understand that abortion might be totally against some people’s personal beliefs or religion, I do not believe that abortions should be restricted. While I am pro-choice, I am not a supporter of late terminations of pregnancy. I am glad that in Roe v. Wade states have the ability to regulate the abortion during the second and third trimester. While it is hard to say for sure when life begins, I seem to believe that as the second and third trimester approach the baby reaches further development and possibly …show more content…
These include the ability to feel pain, reason, participate in self-motivated activity, communicate, and be self-aware. While originally when I read this article, I was not convinced by Warren’s argument, the more I studied the material I understood where she was coming from. She did clarify that a “person” does not have to show all of these traits and not one of them is absolutely necessary to be considered a “person.” Her story about a space explorer coming across extraterrestrial life and then trying to apply the criteria to the lifeform to determine personhood helped me understand the criteria and where her argument was going. (Warren 341) Judith Thomson also presents a compelling argument in favor of abortion in “A Defense of Abortion.” She gives us the example of a famous violinist that has kidney failure and is hooked up to our body for nine months in order to survive. She continues to say that we did not volunteer to hook up our body. This was an interesting point to include as it relates to unplanned pregnancies and rape cases. This article focuses on the moral aspect of abortion. One of the big questions that Thomson argued was “who is more entitled to the right to life?” Thomson says there are two people involved when a mother has health issues related to pregnancy, one whose life is threatened and one who threatens it. While both are innocent,