Abortion should be evaluated by Consequentialism and Deontology. Since abortion is a life and death situation it’s important to look at the consequences as well as the right and duties of those involved.
For instance, abortion has been used to end unwanted and unexpected pregnancy’s that involve teenagers and women who have had sex with a man. The problem is not that they have had sex, but that they made the decision to have sex knowing the possibly consequences. Then she tries to terminating a fetus because they do not want to take responsibility for those consequences. If you can make an adult decision to sleep with someone then you should be responsible for the consequences whatever they may be. The consequence of having an abortion is not …show more content…
The mother does have a right to life and her will power. Therefore abortion can be right in situations where the mother life is in grave danger because of the pregnancy or if the women was raped. In this case the mother did not choose to have sexual relations knowing the consequence, but was forced too. In the same way the mother did not choose to have poor health. It is more morally correct to save one life then loss two. However, for those situations where a women just does not want the baby because it was unplanned it is the duty of the mother to grow and take care of the child because she made the decision to have sex knowing the consequences. The baby has the same right to an equal life because it did not choose the decision to be made unwanted or unplanned for. Nobody has the right to end the life of another. We cannot play God and decide who should live and who should die. In a courtroom a mother and fetus who has been killed is considered double homicide in many states, but yet it is legal to abort a baby? What’s the difference? The only difference is the fact that one was considered living because they were wanted by the mother while the other is considered not living because they were not wanted by the mother. When does “being wanted” determine if someone is living or not? Why are we more concerned about the life of a baby when the mother wanted the child then when the mother did not want the child? The child has the right to life despite being wanted and if the child is considered living in the court it should be considered living when someone wants to
For instance, abortion has been used to end unwanted and unexpected pregnancy’s that involve teenagers and women who have had sex with a man. The problem is not that they have had sex, but that they made the decision to have sex knowing the possibly consequences. Then she tries to terminating a fetus because they do not want to take responsibility for those consequences. If you can make an adult decision to sleep with someone then you should be responsible for the consequences whatever they may be. The consequence of having an abortion is not …show more content…
The mother does have a right to life and her will power. Therefore abortion can be right in situations where the mother life is in grave danger because of the pregnancy or if the women was raped. In this case the mother did not choose to have sexual relations knowing the consequence, but was forced too. In the same way the mother did not choose to have poor health. It is more morally correct to save one life then loss two. However, for those situations where a women just does not want the baby because it was unplanned it is the duty of the mother to grow and take care of the child because she made the decision to have sex knowing the consequences. The baby has the same right to an equal life because it did not choose the decision to be made unwanted or unplanned for. Nobody has the right to end the life of another. We cannot play God and decide who should live and who should die. In a courtroom a mother and fetus who has been killed is considered double homicide in many states, but yet it is legal to abort a baby? What’s the difference? The only difference is the fact that one was considered living because they were wanted by the mother while the other is considered not living because they were not wanted by the mother. When does “being wanted” determine if someone is living or not? Why are we more concerned about the life of a baby when the mother wanted the child then when the mother did not want the child? The child has the right to life despite being wanted and if the child is considered living in the court it should be considered living when someone wants to