Mary Anne Warren- Infanticide In history, with the exception of people not wanting children of Spartans and others along with certain genders, infanticide has almost always been looked down upon. The rights of a human are always greater than that of an animal, even though they might be “potential persons”. Relating to that, I argue in this essay that Mary Anne Warren does not defend her 2nd infanticide argument (“merely potential persons do not have a moral right to become actual-or none that is strong enough to override the fundamental moral rights of actual persons”) adequately through her reply, I will do so by analyzing potential persons, infants, and persons to argue against infanticide. Warren’s reply to why infanticide is allowed is
…show more content…
Infanticide is the killing of an infant. Infant is a newborn, not full of age. Abortion is a medicare procedure used to end pregnancy, and cause death of fetus. A Fetus is an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind. A Person is a human being, whereas to Warren a being that can think and understand (approximately starts at the age of 5, elementary school). An Adult is a human fully grown and developed. A Potential Person is a person to be, a person that will become a human being, refers to future. Warren’s stance seems to be that infanticide is okay due to a generalization about society’s stance on infanticide without creating reason; just claiming it without …show more content…
That might be because they believe as Warren that “potential persons” and infants are not able to think or understand, and so claiming them as a person is a no, no. Similarly, Marquee might argue that since the “potential person” and infant does not yet (since they are young and unless they have to fit all of A to E for FLO), have a “Future Like Ours”, they are still incapable of being called a person whereas Thompson would disagree with Marquee and Warren that a “potential person” and infant are also persons. Futhermore, Thompson and Marquee would also then agree that infanticide is absolutely wrong. To Thompson, direct killing is “impermissible” and having killed is much worse than letting die and to Marque, there are only four instances where killing is allowed: rape, mother’s life, prior to 14 days and 10%
Infanticide is the killing of an infant. Infant is a newborn, not full of age. Abortion is a medicare procedure used to end pregnancy, and cause death of fetus. A Fetus is an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind. A Person is a human being, whereas to Warren a being that can think and understand (approximately starts at the age of 5, elementary school). An Adult is a human fully grown and developed. A Potential Person is a person to be, a person that will become a human being, refers to future. Warren’s stance seems to be that infanticide is okay due to a generalization about society’s stance on infanticide without creating reason; just claiming it without …show more content…
That might be because they believe as Warren that “potential persons” and infants are not able to think or understand, and so claiming them as a person is a no, no. Similarly, Marquee might argue that since the “potential person” and infant does not yet (since they are young and unless they have to fit all of A to E for FLO), have a “Future Like Ours”, they are still incapable of being called a person whereas Thompson would disagree with Marquee and Warren that a “potential person” and infant are also persons. Futhermore, Thompson and Marquee would also then agree that infanticide is absolutely wrong. To Thompson, direct killing is “impermissible” and having killed is much worse than letting die and to Marque, there are only four instances where killing is allowed: rape, mother’s life, prior to 14 days and 10%