Examine And Comment On The View That Religion Provides
With abortion there is a criteria that follows: two doctors must certify and allow for the abortion to proceed and n abortion cannot go ahead if the method were to cause any lasting physical or psychological damage. In most cases an abortion can go under way if It protects the life of the mother. The methods of abortion are also an important aspect to consider. There are various methods and treatments a woman can have to proceed with the abortion.For example a woman between 7 – 15 weeks can take a pill which induces the same consequences of a miscarriage; an early medical abortion. This contrasts then with the late term abortion which relies on surgery and surgical instruments being used to extract and exterminate the fetus inside the womb.
Abortion is a medical ethic which provokes argument through its many aspects of ‘immorality, ‘necessity’ and most importantly whether it is right or wrong.
Only $13.90 / page
Firstly I will observe the topic of Persephone. Persephone is a seemingly important aspect of the abortion topic.Many moral and religious principles do indeed cause hindrance within this complex ethical world. Persephone looks at the idea of a fetus’ position and rights in our world; whether it should be granted ‘person status’ or not. This idea was developed by jack Mahoney who irked to define persons. Through this idea he came up with a criterion in which human life would need to fulfill to reach this ‘person status’.
He looked at how a person needs to be able to display traits such as self -consciousness, emotions and rationality to be considered a person.When we apply these attributes to a fetus we can see how one would seem to display none of these traits, therefore a fetus, through this idea, is not a person. Religious principles are definitely a hindrance when observing this medical ethic through the religious idea of instrument. Instrument is the belief that there s a stage in pregnancy where the fetus is ‘given’ a soul”. So when looking at abortion, the termination of a fetus immediately becomes murder. Of course this would conflict with the belief that ‘thou shall not murder” which can be seen in the bible.Principles in Hinduism may cause hindrance towards abortion in the light Of amiss; the belief in reverence for all life.
A moral principle may cause hindrance within abortion through instrument through belief in conflicting claims – the moral principle of logical correctness. An example of being the suggested ‘cut’ off point where a fetus gains its oleander’s aspect of the Persephone arguments comes from the Sanctity of Life (SOL) and Quality of Life (SOL) argument. This is a highly disputed argument which many feminists and social activists may dispute over.In our society recently there are ongoing pleas for the legality of abortion. A prime example, being Ireland versus the European Union. Of course, Ireland is a highly Roman Catholic country therefore their religious principles are of course a hindrance towards abortion. Their religious principles restrict them for acting ‘personally.
On the other hand, people within the EX. care quite tryingly about the right of the matter and are very ‘pro-choice’ when it comes to deciding the future of a mother’s life. Many scholars and theists have opinions on the SOL vs..SOL argument, for example Aquinas, who draws much inspiration from the laws of nature, would see the religious principles cause hindrance because he sees it right for the natural cause of pregnancy or even in some cases, miscarriage. He wouldn’t agree with an induced miscarriage or termination. On the other hand theists like Joseph Fletcher would take an approach with the idea of love.
Situation Ethics promotes the dead that an action should inflict the most loving thing. Therefore he would sympathies and take into account the woman’s choice of abortion in this case. Alive that the SOL vs.. SOL argument is a very strong one indeed and one that won’t cease to exists as long as religious and moral principles remain in our world. Also, abortion which, through religious and moral principles, are a hindrance are the methods and approaches to abortion. This key aspect of abortion one that does result in much conflict.
For example, in China, with the aid of the One Child policy, many women have faced the consequences of this Alice. A woman who was pregnant with a child at 8 months was forced to have a late medical abortion.This would have been a highly controversial and severe event which of religious and moral principles would conflict with Bantam’s principles of Utility. This act could some appropriate as it is benefiting the majority decision, in China, of the policy. In my opinion this case study is highly controversial as it provides the idea of immorality, with principles causing hindrance within the medical ethic. I will go onto investigate is the idea of viability. Viability is the view that at what point should an abortion be acceptable, or viable?The law in the LIKE has the cut off point of up to 24 weeks which, with moral and religious principles, causes hindrance to abortion.
The hindrance being with moral principles and the cultural evolution. There have been cases where, whilst in the same hospital, women at 22 weeks are going into a premature pregnancy, however another women at 24 weeks is having an abortion. The problem here is that, with the aid of modern day technology, the premature baby will go onto live a completely ‘normal’, healthy life. Whilst the possible life of the 24 week fetus will lose its possible life.So, with certain moral principles like Mill’s Utilitarian approach of the harm principle and Bantam’s hedonistic calculus, hindrances are indeed raised. The amount of happiness, which Bantam’s Utilitarian Act seems slightly undermined with the women having an abortion because the fetus’ rights aren’t’ taken into account. With the harm principle, one would think of the fetus’ possible life and would suggest alternatives for the woman deciding abortion.
I think that however a woman’s choice should be oaken over the idea of the fetus’ rights.