...demonstrations held every day, yet somehow abortion is still legal in the United States. In the decision of the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade, it was ruled that women have the right, given to them by the Constitution, to have an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy (Infoplease). Hundreds of protesters gather outside clinics that offer abortions and try to present their position on the issue, but it seems as though their cries and complains are never heard. The main question that we must decide on is this: is it just to take away human life before it even has the chance to be lived? Several countries around the world have outlawed the practice of abortion. When deciding the abortion issue, its women’s rights as citizens of the United States versus the religious beliefs of a majority of citizens. What is more important, the sanctity of life or allowing murder on the basis of one’s right to choose? Given the abortion procedure allows women sexual and reproductive freedom, it has unconsciously led to a trend where abortion is being used as a method of contraception. In the United States, 49% of the pregnancies are unintended and American women used abortion as a tool to terminate almost half of these pregnancies (Infoplease). Abortion was not meant to be used in accidental pregnancies, but its purpose was to cease pregnancies that could possibly result in the death of the mother or if the baby had major genetic defects that could possibly be fatal. Abortion was never meant to be used as...
Words: 3303 - Pages: 14
...an abortion if she determines that she has been impregnated by the assaulter. It depends on how you feel about abortion. From the opinions of many the woman should go through with the full term pregnancy because the long term effects of having an abortion outweigh the love that can be given to the child in its lifespan.,In a study conducted by, Dr. Sandra Mahkorn found that 75 to 85 percent of women who were sexually assaulted did not have abortions. The welfare of a mother and her child are never at odds, even in sexual assault cases. As the stories of many women confirm, both the mother and the child are helped by preserving life, not by perpetuating violence. But what happens in the case of the woman who wants an abortion because she simply does not want her assaulter’s child. The reason women want abortions in these cases is because it will help them to put the assault behind them, recover more quickly, and avoid the additional trauma of giving birth to a “rapist’s child.” Is it right or is it wrong? Though my opinion can be viewed as a pro-choice view, I think that the woman has the right to choose. I feel that the decision should be made by the individual woman and not the opinion of someone’s cause. She should be able to freely make the decision without any repercussions to the decision she has made. The woman not only has to deal with the fact that she has been sexually assaulted but even tougher she would have to tangle with the fact that if she has an abortion the...
Words: 2156 - Pages: 9
...AS Religious Ethics Some key terms: Teleological – the idea that the ‘end’ (effect) of an action should be considered when deciding whether the action is right or wrong. Relativism – morality depends on the situation an individual is in. So one thing can be right in one situation and wrong in another. This approach is adaptable to the situation and it is natural to think of the effects of our actions, however we cannot always accurately predict the effects of our actions. Deontological – the idea that acts are inherently right or wrong; they are right or wrong by their very nature. Absolutism – the idea that things are right or wrong, and remain so in all situations. This approach is clear-cut as it leads a list of what is right and wrong, however it is inflexible; it doesn’t consider the situation, and who decides what is right and wrong? Subjective morality – when moral judgements are based on individual opinions. Respects individual opinions and people can take responsibility for their own actions, however do all individuals opinions deserve respect? This may lead to disagreements. Objective morality – when moral judgements are based on external values/systems/rules. This approach gives authorities the ability to give guidance and advice, however there is disagreement about which authorities to trust. Utilitarianism (Teleological/Relativist): Is an ethical theory, which aims to help us work out what is right, and what is wrong. It focuses on bringing...
Words: 2216 - Pages: 9
...AS Philosophy & Ethics Course Handbook 2013 to 2014 [pic] OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/type/gce/hss/rs/index.aspx OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) You are studying Philosophy of Religion and Religious Ethics and will be awarded an OCR AS Level in Religious Studies. The modules and their weightings are: |AS: |Unit Code |Unit Title |% of AS |(% of A Level) | | |G571 |AS Philosophy of Religion |50% |(25%) | | |G572 |AS Religious Ethics |50% |(25%) | If you decide to study for the full A Level you will have to study the following modules at A2: |A2: |Unit Code |Unit Title |(% of A Level) | | |G581 |A2 Philosophy of Religion |(25%) | | |G582 |A2 Religious Ethics |(25%) | Grading | ...
Words: 13036 - Pages: 53
...What is Morality Introduction to Philosophy American Intercontinental University David C. Koopmans September 23, 2012 Abstract This paper discusses whether infanticide is universally morally wrong, or morally right withing certain contexts. The focus of the paper is going to be that infanticide is universally morally wrong. Infanticide is the practice of killing a newborn baby that is practiced in many other cultures, but is deemed illegal in the United States. The question is, is this practice universally morally wrong, or is it morally right within certain contexts. Cultures exist that make having multiple children an extreme financial burden, or due to population control, illegal to have more than one child. Even within these contexts, does it make it morally right to practice infanticide? No, it does not! The practice of infanticide is universally morally wrong. Infanticide is practiced in several cultures, one of which is Pakistan. According to cultural relativism, this practice is deemed morally right. Cultural relativism deals with actions that are specific to a culture and the individuals within a specific culture. The beliefs and customs of a particular culture are relative to the individuals within that culture. What may be morally right in one culture may not be right in another (gotquestions.org, 2011). Relativism deals with the fact that individual societies may deem, for themselves, what is right or wrong. Since truth...
Words: 1527 - Pages: 7
...Explain how the various formulations of the Categorical Imperatives might be applied to an ethical issue? [25] Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is best known for his ‘Copernican Revolution’ in the theory of knowledge. He argued that space, time and causality were features of the way our minds organise experience, rather than features of the external world. Kant’s ethical theory was deontological and absolute. We use reason for morality acceptance. His categorical imperatives are part of Kant’s ethical theory, they require the sense of reason (which he believed that a human possess). He believed that if you combined ones duty with goodwill it will result in a moral act. Mixed emotions will not do in a moral situation, you need to exclude all possible emotions to make a perfect moral action. This will then result to summum bonum (an afterlife with God). However, to work out what your duty is, is an ethical dilemma. We can link Kant’s Categorical Imperatives (CI) to euthanasia. Euthanasia is terminating a patients life, painlessly, who is suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. Terminating someone's life can be voluntary (someone helps a person die) or involuntary ( where a patient is capable of ending their own life). Euthanasia can also be passive (food and water deprivation) or active (injected a patient with a medicine which will painlessly kill them). There are many churches and religions which will deny this mercy killing. Natural law followers...
Words: 923 - Pages: 4
...survivor “I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.” This is the third line of the Hippocratic Oath in its second English translation. This Oath, commonly attributed to Hippocrates, is the binding document that requires physicians to practice medicine honestly and to uphold a number of professional ethical standards. (Miles, 2005) From early times, the medical profession has had a strong commitment to ethical behavior in professional practice. In modern times, physicians argue that” the Hippocratic Oath is inadequate to address the realities of a medical world that has witnessed huge scientific, economic, political, and social changes, a world of legalized abortion, physician-assisted suicide, and pestilences unheard of in Hippocrates' time.” (Tyson, n.d.) The Declaration of Geneva was adopted by the General Assembly of the World Medical Association at Geneva in 1948. It was felt that the Hippocratic Oath needed some modernization of the humanistic goals of medicine in lieu of the tragedies experienced in World War II. The precepts of the Oath of Geneva include this sentence, I will practice my profession with conscience and dignity; the health of my patient will be my first consideration. Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide and more loosely termed mercy killing, means to take a deliberate action with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable...
Words: 1511 - Pages: 7
...individual emotions? Metaethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves. Normative ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on others. Finally, applied ethics involves examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion, infanticide, animal rights, environmental concerns, homosexuality, capital punishment, or nuclear war. By using the conceptual tools of metaethics and normative ethics, discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these controversial issues. The lines of distinction between metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics are often blurry. For example, the issue of abortion is an applied ethical topic since it involves a specific type of controversial behavior. But it also depends on more general normative principles, such as the right of self-rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for determining the morality of that procedure. The issue also rests on metaethical issues such as, “where do rights come from?” and “what kind of beings have rights?” 1. Metaethics The term “meta” means after or beyond, and, consequently, the notion of metaethics involves a...
Words: 6480 - Pages: 26
...because he does not believe in killing people or controlling ones fate. Kate’s decision to abort her unborn child based on her own experience in foster care and because her lack of support, is not valid reason to take a life. A fetus is considered a potential life and she is taking potential of life away by aborting child. This decision would violate Kant’s theory of the end-itself. This means one should never kill or experiment on one’s life without consent and an unborn child can not consent to this decision. For Kant’s theory of categorical imperative: Kate’s ought to use protection or practice abstinence if she isn’t ready for a child. 3. Analyze Kate’s decision from a utilitarian perspective. Utilitarian’s ethics theory focuses on the consequence stage of the decision making process. Kate’s decision to abort her unborn child would bring the overall maximization of utility because she is taking the life of her child without torturing it. The abortion would make Kate happy because she doesn’t have the responsibility of a child and the child doesn’t have to...
Words: 412 - Pages: 2
... Aristotle – Virtue Ethics | Mill – Utilitarianism | Kant – Deontology | Consequentialism | Noddings – Care Ethics | For Aristotle, good is “every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim.” (Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1) | For J.S. Mill, decreasing pain and increasing pleasure is good. However, not all pleasure is the same. Mill argues that intellectual pleasures are superior to bodily pleasures (Mill, Utilitarianism, Chapter 2). | For Kant, good will is exercised by acting according to moral duty/law. Moral law consists of a set of maxims, which are categorical in nature – we are bound by duty to act in accordance with categorical imperatives. | Good is a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence. | | What path or rule do you follow to achieve the good? (1–2 sentences) Aristotle – Virtue Ethics | Mill – Utilitarianism | Kant – Deontology | Consequentialism | Noddings – Care Ethics | For Aristotle, virtue is the way to achieve the good. Moral virtue is a state of character and can only be acquired by habit. In other words, we need to practice being morally virtuous in order to be virtuous. Aristotle describes moral virtue as a mean. We act morally, if we do the right thing, at the right time, “with reference to the right objects, towards the right people, with the...
Words: 987 - Pages: 4
...a) Explain how a follower of Natural Law theory might approach the issue surrounding abortion. The Natural Law Theory has developed over time since the era of the ancient Greeks, and it is not necessarily based on one single theory. Natural law is the belief that God has created the universe to work in certain ways. The structure of Natural Law is not accidental; it is deliberate and has important implications to the human race (this can also be used to argue the existence of God in the teleological argument). Humans have a duty to conform to Natural Law. If they do not conform it is morally bad. St Thomas Aquinas linked his idea of Natural Law with Aristotle’s view that people have a specific nature, purpose and function. Aristotle said that not only does everything have a purpose, but also it achieves supreme good when it fulfill its purpose. Aristotle stated that the supreme good for humans is to achieve happiness, which can be related to mill’s utilitarianism where our aim is to gain happiness by avoiding pain and gaining pleasure, but Aristotle did not follow the consequentialist nature of utilitarianism. Aristotle said we were to achieve the final goal by living a life of reason based on what we experience, and this follows the deontological nature of Kantian ethics. Aquinas said that humans beings have an essential rational nature given by God in order for us to live and flourish, even without God reason can discover laws that lead to human flourishing, this is...
Words: 2221 - Pages: 9
...animal or irrational human being could conceive of such a concept, such a duty, such a way of life. The rationality required for moral duty leads the individual to recognize that "the moral worth of an action does not lie in the effect expected from it, nor in any principle of action which requires to borrow its motive from this expected effect" (Timmons 156). Only reason will act according to the worth of an action in and of itself, without consideration for the gain or loss of any effect. CHAPTER 2: THEORY The categorical imperative holds that "I am never to act otherwise than so that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law" (Timmons 156). Kant allows no exceptions to this imperative. He apparently believes that once one brick is taken out of the wall--say, a justifiable lie or false promise is told because of the gains won or losses avoided--then the whole wall is in danger of immediately collapsing. This makes the moral duty "imperative" for him. It is not a matter of what is "prudent," for example, in the case of telling a lie to bring a positive result or avoid a negative result. It is only a matter of what is "right," based on the consideration that all human beings will act in the same way. If one person justifies a lie based on the effects, then everybody can justify lies based on the effects as they perceive them or hope them or fear them to be. Kant gives a number of examples, such as the man contemplating borrowing...
Words: 2226 - Pages: 9
...However, many religions have morally absolutist positions as well, regarding their system of morality as deriving from divine commands. Therefore, they regard such a moral system as absolute, (usually) perfect, and unchangeable. Many secular philosophies also take a morally absolutist stance, arguing that absolute laws of morality are inherent in the nature of human beings, the nature of life in general, or the universe itself. For example, someone who believes absolutely in nonviolence considers it wrong to use violence even in self-defence. In the 18th century, German philosopher Immanuel Kant developed this theory of ethics. He was a prominent promoter of Moral Absolutism, and his formulation of the deontological theory of the Categorical Imperative was essentially absolutist in nature....
Words: 849 - Pages: 4
...The branch of ethics that discusses the meaning and indeed the validity of the word good is called Meta-ethics, meaning ‘beyond' ethics lies ethical language. From here there are two separate branches, cognitive; where "goodness" can be known as an analytic (Moore) or synthetic (naturalists like Mill) property of the world and non-cognitive; where "goodness" cannot be know as a property of the world. Within the non-cognitivists are another group called emotivists, they uphold the view that the word good is merely an expression of feeling. I partially agree with the emotivists view that moral statements are merely an expression of feeling, but I also think that as the ‘good is so exceedingly ambiguous' (Stevenson) that any of the meta-ethical theories have validity to them. Emotivism says that moral statements merely express positive or negative feelings; it is mainly based on better to say, "it's an empirical tradition which stems from..." the work of the Scottish philosopher and empiricist Hume and the idea of Hume's fork. "When you pronounce any action or character to be vicious, you mean... you have a feeling or sentiment of blame." - David Hume. This idea was taken forward by A.J. Ayer who also believed that moral statements were primarily expressions of emotion, hence Emotivism, his theory has been called Hurrah-Boo theory An example of this is to imagine you and a friend are at a football game supporting different teams. When one team scores you cheer and your friend...
Words: 1216 - Pages: 5
...The branch of ethics that discusses the meaning and indeed the validity of the word good is called Meta-ethics, meaning ‘beyond' ethics lies ethical language. From here there are two separate branches, cognitive; where "goodness" can be known as an analytic or synthetic property of the world and non-cognitive; where "goodness" cannot be known as a property of the world. Within the non-cognitivists are another group called emotivists, they uphold the view that the word good is merely an expression of feeling. Some would agree with the emotivists’ view that moral statements are merely an expression of feeling, but may also hold the view that as the ‘good is so exceedingly ambiguous' that any of the meta-ethical theories have validity to them. Emotivism says that moral statements merely express positive or negative feelings; it is mainly based on better to say "it's an empirical tradition which stems from..." The work of the Scottish philosopher and empiricist Hume and the idea of Hume's fork. "When you pronounce any action or character to be vicious, you mean... you have a feeling or sentiment of blame." This idea was taken forward by A.J. Ayer who also believed that moral statements were primarily expressions of emotion, hence Emotivism; his theory has been called Hurrah-Boo theory. An example of this is to imagine you and a friend are at a football game supporting different teams. When one team scores you cheer and your friend boos. According to this view, saying ‘euthanasia...
Words: 1224 - Pages: 5
