Premium Essay

Pro-Abortion, Deontologically and Utilitarian

In:

Submitted By dkaz
Words 1124
Pages 5
The issue of abortion is one that has been at the recent forefront of many political discussions in the United States and around the world. There are people spread across both sides of the argument whose opinions vary in intensity and depend on different sources of information to back up their points of view. For the purpose of this paper, abortion will be defined as the deliberate termination of human pregnancy. It is my opinion that abortion, completed early enough in a pregnancy, is not an unethical act and should not be considered to be a decision that is immoral. My argument is based on ideas that are rooted in both utilitarian and deontological ethics as I will show throughout the essay. One of the few religions to condone acts of abortion is Hinduism. This is not to say, however, that Hinduism is blindly accepting of all kinds of abortion. In Hinduism, the belief is that one should make a decision based on what kind of effect it will have on all those involved. This is a very utilitarian way of looking at abortion because it looks at the decision and determines which choice will cause the least amount of harm to the mother, father, fetus, and society (BBC, 2013). Traditionally in Hindu culture, when considering circumstances where abortion is a possible solution to a problem, it is usually found that the procedure is not the appropriate response to the situation and aborting the baby would have negative social and spiritual consequences. I believe this is important because although Hinduism isn’t “pro-choice”, like many democratic liberals in our country, it still allows for abortion to be an acceptable option in circumstances where not performing the procedure would cause more harm than the abortion itself. Another argument that surrounds the discussion of whether abortion is right or wrong is in regards to cases where the unborn fetus is known to have

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Phil 235 Course Notes

...Chapter 1: Ethical Theory Meta-ethical positions include: * Ethical non-cognitivism (concept that ethics is a matter of feelings) * Ethical relativism (concept that ethics is relative to a particular point of view) * Ethical objectivism (notion that ethics is objective in nature). Meta-Ethical Positions Ethical Non-cognitivism The basis of ethical non-cognitivism is that ethical disagreement can be a highly emotional affair where no amount of reasoning is likely to convince the other party. * Example: “Let’s just agree to disagree” Ethical Relativism * Ethical relativism says that while ethical statements are cognitively meaningful, they do not hold in any objective sense because they depend on our point of view. * If we accept ethical relativism, then ethical disagreement among people who do not share the same perspective becomes impossible. * It assumes that if people agree on something, then it must be true. * Ethical relativism is suspect for a pragmatic reason: it is fundamentally at variance with our social practice. * Example: “To each his own”, or the belief that what’s right for one group isn’t necessarily right for another Ethical Objectivism * Ethical objectivism holds that right and wrong are objective phenomena. * Example: “I’m right and you’re wrong” What is Ethics? * As a discipline, ethics is a branch of philosophy. * It deals with questions of right and wrong conduct, and with what we ought to do and what...

Words: 23725 - Pages: 95