Abortion: True or False?

Question

True or False: It is a woman's body, she has the right to do whatever she wants with it, including getting an abortion.

True or False: It is a person's hand, they have the right to use it to pull a trigger and kill a person.

True or False: It is a person's body, they have a right to do whatever they want with it, including committing suicide.

Answer 1

In American political philosophy there are three basic principles that guide our laws/moral code/constitution. The first scenario (abortion) pits these principles against each other.

1. The principle of liberty:
We ought to have the choice or freedom to determine the direction of our lives with very few limitations imposed on us from society. Liberty however has some limits (see below).

2. The principle of life:
We each have a right to live our lives according to the principle of liberty and we should be free from the harm of individuals while at the same time we should not cause harm to others. My liberty ends where your's begins. (The harm principle). The principle of life also applies to me when I attempt to harm myself. (The legal paternal principle).

3. The principle of happiness/property/utility:
We each have the right to experience more pleasure than pain in life (egoism). And we each should ensure that this pleasure is experienced by others. This is called altruism.

The abortion issue is a classic case of which principle is to be honored above the other. Does the principle of life come before the principle of liberty or the principle of happiness? Does a woman's right to liberty and happiness come before the fetus' right to life?

The Supreme Court in Row vs. Wade ruled that since we cannot establish whether the fetus is an actual "life"; science, philosophy, theology was inconclusive on the state of the fetus, we ought to honor the principle of liberty over life. We know for sure that the woman is alive; therefore she is guaranteed the right to life and liberty. And the pursuit of happiness. The principle of life took the back seat.

This is why the abortion debate is so heated, it is a conflict between three principles we hold dear.

Logically I do not think that the last two scenario's can be compared directily with the abortion issue as it appears that is the connection you are trying to make.

The second scenario is not a conflict of legal principles. The harm principle prevents me from killing you. The third violates the principle of paternalism and non maleficence. In American law you are not allowed to kill yourself.

I would suggest that you take a class in philosophy or political theory.

Answer 2

Q.U.#1.) False. But, I do wish that all the Liberal's mothers had considered them a "choice."
Q.U.#2.)True. The original Hebrew translation of the bible says, "Thou shalt not murder." It never said what most believe today of, "Thou shalt not kill." There's a big difference, its King James fault.
Q.U.#3.) True. If the individual is only taking their own lives.

Answer 3

1. False premise: The unborn child is NOT the woman's body. This argument works better to support the SALE of organs.
2. False: You don't have the right to violate the rights of others. The right to LIFE is as fundamental as rights get.
3. No comment.

Answer 4

WHAT??? your definately Pro lifer.. your talking apples and oranges here. Its against the law to shoot somebody for one, people do commit suicide and succeed if they really want to die and I don't believe I've heard of a case that where the said party succeeded charges were brought against said party. If said party fails they send you off to the funny farm for a short stay until you convince the doctors you won't do it again. Abortion is based on what constututes a living human being and after a certain time has passed you cannot get an abortion. That heart beat you Pro Lifers like to refer to is nothing more than the formation of the brain stem controlling it which has no means of thought.

Answer 5

In the USA, a woman has the right to an abortion. The government has no right to tie her to a bed and force her to give birth.

In the USA, you can not commit murder.

In the USA, attempted suicide is illegal but successfully committing suicide is not.

Do not confuse what is moral with what is legal, they're not always the same. Goldman Sachs, a financial powerhouse on Wall Street, totally devastated the finances of a small town in Montana about 6-7 years ago. What they did was completely legal but absolutely immoral in my view.

Answer 6

False: While it is her body, and normally this would be true, in this case another body is affected. In fact another life is being taken. The right to live should take precedent over any other right.

False: Again no one should have the right to take another life, unless that their own life or another's life is being threatened. In a case of Death Penalty, the right to life was forfeited by the violator when he took another's life.

True: As long as you are not violating another's rights, then you should have the right to do whatever you want; including killing yourself.

Answer 7

The second is obviously not true. The third is of course true. Only the crazy religious types feel it's "offensive to God" when you don't want to live through the bulls.hit that this planet is. I wish God would find it offensive that thousands of people starve to death and die of AIDS every day and urge our great pro-lifers to _do something to feed and clothe and love all the human beings they want to create on the earth_.

You cannot compare any of these three items, though you are obviously attempting to. _A fetus is not equivalent to a grown human being, a child or mother or father or grandmother_. A fetus does not have a name or relationships with other fetuses. It cannot talk or move or comprehend or recognize its parents. It does not have children or grandchildren like some people who _are_ murdered. _A human being already has and does all of these things_.

Answer 8

Incorrect. Your suicide argument might be valid onyl that the law does not consider a fetus life yet.

The murder analogy is all wrong because again the law does not see a fetus as a life but obviously killing someone murder.

Answer 9

False
False
True
As long as any thought or action only affects the person him/herself, there should not be criminal or moral recrimination.

Answer 10

the first one is true...the goverment should have no say on what is inside the female uterus.
second on is false... thay dont have the right to take someone elses life away. only you are responsible for you and with that only you can make yourself does something and not some one else.
third is true... ties into #2...it is thier body and if that is what they are feeling then they shoukld be allowed to do that.