Thomson And Hursthouse's Perspective On Abortion Debate

As the semester finally comes to an end and I have time to truly reflect on what I have learned so far I find that my stance on abortion has actually become a bit more muddled. I do not view this as a negative simply because it has allowed me to better understand not only both sides to the argument, but question if I am making the morally correct decision and not just the emotional one. My biggest take away would most definitely be the ability to compare and contrast multiple viewpoints in the argument for abortion. I never considered the fact that the status of the fetus could in fact be irrelevant to morality up until this semester. This Ethics course is something everyone should be required to take in higher education, as it forces people …show more content…
It is not required, in most states, by law for someone to be a Good Samaritan, or even a Minimally Good Samaritan. This argument provides the strongest argument for why most individuals, regardless of stance, seem to agree that in cases where the mother has no choice to have a pregnancy due to rape would allow someone to be a Minimally Good Samaritan and have an abortion later in their pregnancy, having no obligation to birth that fetus. Hursthouse, whose ideas I personally support, are evident in a lot of the voices of my generation. Many of the millennials view pregnancy as something that is indeed special, but something that can be flexible as long as there is just cause for your decision. Living life or not being ready resonate as acceptable excuses as long as thought is put into your decision to be sexually active, and you have some sort of idea of wanting to keep an unwanted pregnancy or not. It is generally frowned upon to flip flop on your decision of abortion past the first trimester of having a child. Ill conclude this part by also saying that I found it very odd, when inquired, hardly any persons believe that a fetus has any “future” and subsequently no right to life because of