Name : ____________________________________________________ Course: Ethics

Program/ Section: ____________________________________________ Date: Nov. 21

The Morality of Abortion

In the past, when it was still lawful to abort a child, abortion was practiced. However,
Pope Sixtus V's 1588 proclamation that abortion constitutes murder temporarily ended the
practice. A new pope took over three years later and declared that abortion was not murder.
However, time passed and 300 years later, it was outlawed. This was announced in 1869, making
abortion illegal everywhere. Women have been fighting for abortion rights over time, but
whether or not abortion should be legal still depends on the situation and whether or not the baby
is considered to have the right to life.

Despite having small hands and limbs and a large head, infants are adorable. The life
of a human being is said to be a gift that must be valued at all costs, from the time they emerge
from the mother's womb until their final breath. But not every child is born from the mother's
womb.They kill the infants while they are still in the mother's womb, instantly ending the life of
the child. Whether or not this kind of circumstance is morally right or wrong is up for debate. If
abortion is morally acceptable or not, that question has not been resolved. Abortion kills the
baby, but it is morally justifiable because it doesn't kill the sprout growing inside the mother's
womb.

Even if abortion is frowned upon in our nation, it must be discussed in order to inform our
compatriots that there are advantages to it. First off, if a young woman is pregnant, neither she
nor her partner can care for the baby's needs. As a result, it violates human rights because a
child's requirements must be satisfied at birth in order for them to appreciate human dignity.
Second, because abortion is illegal in the Philippines, hospitals cannot perform it. This has the
effect of making abortion less safe for women since some people may attempt the procedure
without medical assistance, which increases the risk that the mother would perish. Thirdly,
individuals who have been the victims of rape did not give their approval for them to have a kid
with the offender. The victim's own child being abandoned will serve as a constant reminder of
what happened to them. Fourth, it is difficult for orphans to live comfortably because orphanages
in the Philippines cannot meet all of the children's needs. These are the main explanations why
why learning about abortion is important.

The act of "killing" a child by removing it from the mother's womb is known as an
abortion. You can have an abortion by getting medical attention or taking medication. However,
whether it should be legal in the nation or not is still up for debate in today's politics, religion,
and even ethics. Pro-lifers are those who advocate against abortion. Pro-lifers are those who
oppose abortion; they hold the view that doing so constitutes "murder."Whether it is
manslaughter or not ,sparks a heated debate between supporters and pro-lifers, but it will be
covered later.

Is abortion real knowledge, we now ask? According to the definition, knowledge is the
broad awareness of or possession of facts, concepts, truth, or principles. People read books or
receive schooling to learn about a particular topic in order to gain knowledge. Therefore,
abortion is a topic that can be discussed and has evidence to show that it is not manslaughter at
all, according to certain philosophers and principles.

"Abortion supporters are infant killers; their behavior must be decried! "Pro-lifers argued
this, but a philosopher who has a profound disdain for pro-lifers added a philosophical paper.
This philosopher named Michael Tooley wrote this philosophical essay titled "Abortion and
Infanticide" in 1971. According to this philosophical essay, abortion is morally acceptable before
the emergence of self-conscioussness.

To broaden the discussion, let us first define what self-consciousness is. Self-
consciousness can be defined for an individual as the awareness of his or her body in a time-
space continuum and its interaction with the environment .(Decety and Sommerville,2003)

Resuming the topic, abortion is legal since the fetus experiences no self-consciousness
over the course of the pregnancy. Making abortion legal, in light of Tooley's view that the fetus
must first develop consciousness.
 Only at the beginning of Tooley's philosophical article, the requirement for self-
consciousness is just a summary. Diving deep in the paper, Michael Tooley first introduced what
are the components for a human being to have the right to life. Tooley recorded two points:

1) X has rights is not equal to x has the right to live

2) Person and human being cannot be used interchangeably

Someone has the right, but not the right to life, according to the first number. In animals,
let's use the example of a fish, it is acceptable for predators or even us humans to consume the
fish, but it is not acceptable for the fish to live. This is an illustration of the first note, but there
are flaws in it, such as the question of whether I feel any feelings for the fish or whether it is
simply an animal that we can mistreat. To elaborate on this first point, we can state that the fetus
has rights, including the right to remain in the mother's womb and the right to get medical care as
needed. This does not, however, entail a right to life.

The second note repels the anti-abortionist since the unborn they are supporting cannot be
referred to as a human. But Judith Thomson asserted that the fetus exhibits human traits. For
instance, the fetus's heart begins to beat in week 5 of pregnancy, and by week ten, its face,
fingers, limbs, and toes have developed. Sir Judith Thomson's contention that the fetus contains
physiological human traits that we can include in a species named Homo Sapiens was accepted
by Tooley. The question of whether abortion is legal or illegal is unaffected by the presence of a
heartbeat or the development of limbs.

According to the scenario above, the fetus is a human being but not a person. Tooley
contends that whereas a human being is someone who belongs to a particular species, a person is
someone who has rights. This is due to Tooley's necessity for self-consciousness. An organism
only possesses the right to life, if it possesses the concept of a self continuing subject of
experiences and other mental states, and believes that it is such a continuing identity
(Tooley,2009) . Tooley essentially said that continuing mental emotions and experiences are
more significant than physical characteristics. In conclusion, we can argue that someone who
desires to exist as a subject of their own mental state and experiences has the right to life.
 If Tooley is the main piece of evidence used by those who favor abortion. Any organism
that has the potential to live has a right to life, according to the "Potentiallity Principle," which is
a belief held by pro-life or anti-abortion activists. These anti-abortionists believed that the fetus
was a member of the Homo Sapiens species, and that since the zygote was formed, the fetus had
the right to life.

However, Tooley countered with a hypothetical case, which states that if a kitten receives
an injection of a substance that gives it human characteristics, it will eventually develop
consciousness. The person who administered the toxin to the kitten has two choices: either they
will kill the cat, or they will let events unfold. This circumstance is analogous to the abortion
circumstance. We could use the moral symmetry principle in this circumstance.

Moral symmetry principle states that it makes no difference whether one initiates a casual
process leading to death D, or one merely fails to interfere in that same process to prevent D
occuring (Tooley,nd). For instance, if a pregnant mother wants to abort the child, the pro-lifers
have unsuccessfully attempted to stop this from happening. Because of the moral symmetry
principle, which holds that if it is not morally wrong to conceive a child, then it is not morally
wrong to abort that kid, neither the pregnant woman nor the pro-life actions matters.

Pro-lifers believe that all lives matter, even those who are born with physical or mental
disabilities should be allowed to enjoy their lives as would any other person. Parents might still
choose to have an abortion, particularly if they discovered problems in the fetus. Can the pro-
lifers reiterate that every life is valuable? Most likely not, as the family would subsequently face
financial difficulties trying to provide their newborns with the necessary drugs if the parents
discover any issues with their unborn children in the womb. The family will experience poverty,
which is a violation of human rights, together with the newborn child. If society allows disabled
individuals access to certain infrastructures and or equipped society with the needs to help the
handicapped, then parents will not have an abortion, even if it is requirement or not .
 Since it involves a "human being," abortion is still a contentious issue today, but one's moral
convictions will determine whether or not it is morally right. Since Tooley argued that an
organism must have self-consciousness to be deemed a person with the right to life, this
household holds the view that abortion does not actually murder a "human being" or a person,
but rather is ethically ethical. The moral symmetry principle, among other Tooley's arguments,
contributes to the evidence that abortion is not morally evil.To end this discussion, I would like
to share a quote from a philosophy teacher stating “ Does not mean it (the topic) has good
philosophical arguments, does not mean that it must be the way we approach things.”

References: