Is the fetus as it is up to the

 

 

 

Is a fetus a person?
– http://www.economist.com/node/631241

http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Philosophy
and the moral issue of abortion, By Ned Resnikoff – www.msnbc.com/the-ed-show/philosophy-and-the-moral-issue-abortion

www.dictionary.com/browse/person

Works
Cited

 

 

There is a n argument about DNA giving a fetus human
characteristic because it has the same DNA of a human and that should give the
fetus the same as human rights. Logical capabilities that separate humans from
other classes of animals are a number of physical, social biological, and
emotional behaviors. We have a lot in common with mammals like the chimpanzee,
but we still have a lot of different capabilities that will distinguish us to
be different. We can speck, wright, uses
tools (other animals also use tools but not like us.) we can hold
conversations. So, dose that mean and a robot can’t do the same, with out
having the same DNA as a human. If a robot can be programed to have a conscious
would it be morally bad to destroy it after it has a conscious. I say yes. But if
the robot still does not have a conscious like a fetus then I would say yes, it
is ok to be terminated. But it is up to the woman that is caring the fetus as it
is up to the programmer that is programing the robot.

Some pro-choicers have a mixed
felling about the idea of a fetus being a
person. On the fortieth anniversary of Roe v. Wade’s Salon’s Mary
Elizabeth Williams a pro-choicer maintained that “a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the
woman in whose body it resides.” (See Philosophy and the moral issue
of abortion, By Ned
Resnikoff) on the other hand Judith Jarvis Thomson Mad a comparable accusation in
A
Defense for Abortion that an abortion of a fetus can still be ethically
permitted fine even “if the fetus has already become a human person well before
birth,” for the reason that “the right to
life consists not in the right not to be killed, but rather in the right not to
be killed unjustly.” There have been no rights unreasonably violated because
the fetus dose not have any rights because it is residing in a woman’s body.
So, no rights have been violated if she terminates the fetus.

The ethical stand for
pro-lifers claim it is a sin to take another person’s life but if the fetus is
not really a person yet can you rally
call it “taking a person’s life”, is it really a sin? This moral thinking
mostly comes from pro-lifer’s religious beliefs instead of personal beliefs. If
a person does not believe in a god, why would there be any moral laws that
contradicts their beliefs. Aren’t they just adding unjust laws when there is
supposed to be a separation for church and state.

            The question of morality and abortion to a fetus comes
down to aa individual’s certainty that a
fetus is a person or not. In the dictionary a person is referred to in
“philosophy as a self-conscious or rational being.” Can a fetus be
self-confident an individual is it a man/woman or child? If you say yes to that
question, then you as a person can say yes, a fetus is a person. But if you say no because
really a fetus is not an individual because it is existing in another person’s
body like say a cancer tumor or is the fetus self-assured can it move around on
its own in the world dose if have its own
aptitudes or character? If you say no to this question, then no a fetus is not
a person.

 

12 January 2018

PHIL200

Professor Chapla Verma

Jose A. Knight