Moral Philosophy of Abortion

PART FIVE: MORALITY AND ITS CRITICS

The ethical discourse surrounding abortion engages with profound moral questions.
Quote from Noonan: "What cause can ever avail to excuse in any way the direct killing of the innocent?"
Critics argue the gravity of situations, such as a mother’s peril, does not justify murder and explicitly outline the ethical conflict.

Context: Address to the Italian Catholic Society of Midwives.
Key Assertion: "The baby in the maternal breast has the right to life immediately from God."
No external authority can grant valid grounds for directly ending an innocent life, reinforcing the notion that a fetus holds the same right to life as a mother.

Purpose of the Essay: To present a moral case against abortion, emphasizing it is seriously wrong except in rare instances.
Exclusions for Consideration: Cases like abortion post-rape or during the first two weeks post-conception may not fit the standard arguments for abortion's immorality.

Abortion: An intentional act aimed at causing the death of a fetus for the well-being of the pregnant woman.
Fetus: Defined as a human entity from conception until birth.

Marquis argues that abortion is fundamentally wrong for the same reason that killing an adult or child is wrong. He presumes that killing someone is wrong without attempting to detail a complete ethical framework.

Conflicting Arguments:
- Anti-Abortion Stance: Fetuses are human and alive; thus, their right to life overrides a woman's right to control her body, making abortion wrong.
- Thomson's Counter: Connects rights of the fetus to an analogy of being connected to a famous violinist in dire need of blood. Thomson posits that disconnection is permissible.

An involuntary connection entangles bodily autonomy with moral obligation.
This serves to illustrate that in pregnancy, a woman is not morally bound to sustain the fetus like one would not be obligated to sustain the violinist.

Both sides of the abortion debate are divided on the inherent rights relating to a fetus's right to life versus a woman's autonomy over her body.
Each side fails to clarify central rights consistently, ultimately landing on a stand-off concerning the moral grounds of abortion.

The crux of the abortion debate lies in the determination of whether fetuses possess a right to life.
Anti-Abortion Arguments: Appeal to being human as the criteria for a right to live.
Pro-Choice Arguments: Rely on criteria of personhood marking the distinction of right to life, suggesting fetuses do not qualify.

Each argument exhibits scope issues:
- A premise that all biologically human entities possess the right to life faces issues of inclusion (e.g., cancer cell cultures).
- The pro-choice perspective raises its own difficulties, particularly regarding non-persons like infants and the severely retarded.

Premise: Killing is wrong because it deprives individuals of a future of value.
Emphasizes what a person stands to lose from premature death, relying on considered judgments about life's value.

Considered Judgment Argument: Aligns with common human sentiments of loss concerning death.
Worst of Crimes Argument: Killing deprives an individual of their entire future, thus making it morally worse than lesser crimes.
Case Appeal Argument: The FLO theory aligns with common beliefs about the ethics surrounding euthanasia and unconscious patients.
Analogy to Animal Rights: The devaluation of a being's future reflects an inherently unjust act, mirroring arguments made concerning animal cruelty.

Potentiality Objection: Questions the legitimacy of potentiality arguments; countered by the assertion of genuine capacity for future value irrespective of the current state.
Interests Argument: Challenges whether nonsentient fetuses have moral standing; countered by examples like temporarily unconscious beings who also lack consciousness but still have interests.
Equality Problem: Notes the implied inequality in murder wrongness; addressed by suggesting varying aspects of moral worth balance the equation.
Contraception Objection: Challenges why contraception does not elicit moral concerns; defended by the lack of a determinate individual being harmed in contraceptive scenarios.

Overall Claim: Except in rare and extreme circumstances, abortion is seriously wrong based on the fundamental moral argument regarding the deprivation of a future of value, a principle echoed across various ethical discussions and judgments.

Marquis, D. B., "A future like ours and the concept of person: a reply to McInerney and Paske," The Abortion Controversy: A Reader.
Noonan, J., "An almost absolute value in history," The Morality of Abortion.
Singer, P., "Not for humans only: the place of non-humans in environmental issues," Ethics and Problems of the 21st Century.