At any rate, it seems to me to be these are the kinds of things thatpeople should consider in determining whether or not to terminate the lifeof a given fetus when one is considering simply what is best for the fetusand the person it would become if allowed to survive, cases where others'overriding rights are not at issue (as in maternal self-defense). One shouldconsider what its future will most likely be like, and what its beliefswill likely be about the value and worth of the kind of life you are bringingit into. Anti-abortionists often say that abortion does not give the embryoa chance to be born; but if you feel the embryo will be born into a lifeof misery and suffer grievously and incommensurately from it, your replywould be that by abortion you are not forcing it to be born, born to alife that will only prolong its misery and suffering. Whether we are givingthe gift of life to our children or are simply forcing them to come intoan unsatisfactory existence are not just two ways of looking at the samething, but are radically different evaluations of the same thing.
On the other hand, most women seek abortion on the justification of unwanted pregnancies, which most say occur accidentally, which the church opposes. The religious leaders support their claim through the Bible saying that no one has any right to kill another person, including the unborn, and women should not terminate pregnancies just because they do not want them. This has been the main ethical issue in abortion where most people believe that the unborn should be protected to ensure continuity of the life cycle. If life is considered to start at conception, this means the unborn has the right to life just as anybody else and a woman should carry it to term (BBC, 2009). When a priest is the counselor on the issue of abortion, it is expected that he will counsel about sacredness of life and may not allow abortion. Oglesby (2002) says that this is “abortion on demand,” where the stand on abortion depends on evaluation of possible consequences or effects that are posed to the mother upon carrying the child to full term. This is to say that if a mother feels that a child will have some added responsibility that she might not want to have, she would have the right to abort the child. This would raise the rate of abortion considering that cost of raising a child for some women is a reason enough to procure abortion especially in an economic hardship time, which is unethical.
Debating Ethical Issues: Is Abortion Ethical
Abortion ethics - Mega Essays Abortion ethics essaysAbortion is a controversial subject that has been continually argued over for the last 30 years.
Free argument against abortion Essays and Papers
The other ethical dilemma of a priest as a counselor is whether to be pro-life or pro-choice, where the former means considering life and the later meaning choosing the better option. Pro-life people consider it unethical to procure abortion since they consider it to be murder terminating life that has already began or in process. On the other hand, pro-choice advocates consider the right of the woman in choosing what she wants; suggesting it is unethical to refuse a woman her right to decide on what affects her body (Stocco, 2010). Priest are pro-life people and only give the meaning of life and why it is important not to terminate the pregnancy, using biblical support on the value of life. Considering that a counselor is supposed to present all views on an issue, a priest is bound by his vow to be loyal to church and will only give the religious standing point, leaving the client with only one side of the issue and may not have a choice. Some of the issues a priest will not tell are such as the legal circumstances under which abortion is allowed and access to abortion. More still, since religious views will talk about the spiritual consequences or punishment of abortion, a client will feel intimidated about the issue, and lack the ability to make an independent decision.
Free argument against abortion papers, essays, and research papers.
I am simply interested in this paper in the moral arguments about abortionwithout regard to whether they might also support some particular Scripturalinterpretations or not. This paper will deal, not with unsubstantiatedand unargued, non-reasoned claims for ethical principles based on authority,but with evidence that is given either for abortions in certain cases oragainst them in others, evidence that is meant to be logical and also compassionateand understanding. Such a method is not infallible, but the mistakes itengenders are at least correctable by use of the method itself. Logic isalways open to other logical rebuttal; and compassion is always open tocompassion that encompasses more correct understanding. The nature of arational, intelligent, compassionate ethical discussion gives the hopethat if error of either sort is made, it can be discovered and correctedby further thought, understanding of experience, and discussion. Presentpolitical and judicial rhetoric and decisions do not give me that hope.I am also not given that hope by some seemingly entrenched, unreflective,and irrationally dogmatic religious views or by some of the equally unreflectiveand irrationally dogmatic supposedly "liberal" or "modern" views. Neitherthe total "pro-life" nor the total "pro-choice" side seems to me to havea monopoly on the right or even on being reasonable on this issue. In thispaper I also wish to point out the lack of merit, and sometimes even thetotal lack of relevance, of some of the more politically popular or well-publicizedarguments on both sides of the abortion issue. I think there are betterand more relevant considerations that can shed more light on the subject.