FOR DR. CLOVER ONLY

RUNNING HEADER: PROLIFE VS PROCHOICE 1

Women’s Rights and Abortion

Jaden Thomas

PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning

Prof. Moreland

June 10th, 2019

- 1 -

[no notes on this page]

Part 1: Ethical Question

Does banning abortion infringe on women’s rights?

Part 2: Introduction

Abortion in the United States refers to the action and procedure of terminating a

pregnancy. Anti-abortion laws, since the 1900s, have been enforced in the U.S., varying

from state to state. Nevertheless, to this day, it is still one of the most controversial and

debatable topics in the United States. Roe v. Wade was the 1973 landmark case in which

the U.S. Supreme Court ruled and secured a woman’s right to abortion. However, this

right that was given to women is now being infringed. Kanyoro and Hessini (2017) wrote

that today:

“…women’s sexual and reproductive rights, including the right to

safe, legal, and affordable abortion are being attacked and rolled back by

those in position of power.”

Roe made it possible for women to terminate their pregnancies for virtually any

reason within certain gestational time limits. Since the Supreme Court decided the 1973

Roe v. Wade case, to legalize abortions, states have constructed a “…a latticework of

abortion law, codifying, regulating and limiting whether, when and under what

circumstances a woman may obtain an abortion” (An Overview of Abortion Laws, 2019).

Currently, positions have been in negotiations on abolishing a woman’s right to abortion.

- 2 -

[no notes on this page]

As this argument continues to rise, many are choosing sides on this argument, the sides of

being pro-choice or pro-life.

Someone who is pro-life “…believes that the government has an obligation to

preserve all human life, regardless of intent, viability, or quality-of-life concerns…"

(Head, 2019). Whereas someone who is pro-choice “…believes that individuals have

unlimited autonomy concerning their own reproduction systems, as long as they don’t

breach the autonomy of others…” (Head, 2019). Advocates who are pro-life and are a

part of the anti-abortion movement, generally argue that human life begins at conceptions

and that the human zygote or fetus is a person and therefore has a human right to life.

On the other hand, pro-choice advocates argue and support the view that women

should have the right to an abortion. Abortion-rights advocates say that whether a

pregnant woman continues with pregnancy should be her personal choice, as it involves

her body, personal health, and future (United States abortion-rights movement, 2019).

Most importantly, pro-life/abortion-rights advocates or nonetheless of pro-abortion

advocates, instead they frame their arguments in terms of individual liberty, reproductive

freedom, and reproductive rights.

Moreover, the conflict between pro-life v. pro-choice arises on the issue of

abortion. According to our textbook, the U.S. remains divided on the moral

decision/support of abortion, in fact, “…results show that 47% of those surveyed

identified as pro-choice, and 46% as pro-life… (Saad, 2016)” (Thames, 2018, Ch. 6).

This paper will dig deeper and showcase the applied morals and ethics on both sides of

- 3 -

[no notes on this page]

the argument in support of the legalization on abortion in respect to women’s rights, or

the banning of abortion in favor of preserving all human life.

Part 3: Explanation of the Ethical Theory

According to the text, utilitarianism is described as the consequentialist ethical

theory that holds that morally right actions, laws, or policies are those whose

consequences contain the greatest positive value and least negative value compared to the

consequences of available alternatives (Thames, 2018, 3.1). In other words, utilitarianism

is an ethical theory with the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for the

benefit of a majority.

In relation to the ethical theory of Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill was an English

philosopher of Utilitarianism. In 1861, Mill wrote Utilitarianism in which Mill provides

support for the value of utilitarianism as a moral theory. Mill defines utilitarianism as a

theory based on the principle that:

"actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong

as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended

pleasure and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of

pleasure” (Mill, 1861/2001, p. 7).

Moving forward, there are three principles that makeup Utilitarianism. One of

those principles that ultimately, pleasure and or happiness are the only things that have

intrinsic value. Utilitarianism gets its name from "utility,” which means pleasure and

happiness, and according to Mill, "...the ultimate value by which we compare the

outcomes of actions—is happiness or, more specifically, pleasure and the absence of

- 4 -

[no notes on this page]

pain" (Thames, 2018, 3.1). Morally, to say that something has intrinsic value means that

it is simply excellent (Thames, 2018, 3.1). Yes, we as humans do value more than just

pleasure or happiness. However, in objection, Mill argued that there were different kinds

of pleasure; some of them inherently higher than others (Thames, 2018, 3.5). Happiness

consists of a variety of pleasures.

The second principle of Unitarianism is, in fact, controversial. This principle

states that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as

they tend to produce the reverse of happiness (Thames, 2018, 3.1). This principle makes

Unitarianism a consequentialist since it states that its consequences decide the morality of

an action.

And thirdly, equal consideration. Equal consideration, as described in the text, is

the principle that everyone’s happiness, suffering, preferences, welfare, or other interests

should be accorded equal weight when determining the best outcomes of an action; that

is, no one’s interests should figure than anyone else’s (Thames, 2018). In other words,

everyone's pleasure and happiness count equally.

Overall, although the principles make up Unitarianism, I believe that the core idea

of utilitarianism is that an action is right if it results in the happiness of the greatest

number of people in a society or a group.

These three principles apply to a moral question by withholding the theory that

morally right actions, laws, or policies are those whose consequences contain the greatest

positive value and least negative value compared to the consequences of available

alternatives, as mentioned earlier in the paper.

- 5 -

[no notes on this page]

For example, 'Is it wrong to kill to protect others?', like for instance, a school

shooting. Utilitarianism focuses on the outcome of one's actions and whether the positive

outcome outweighs the negative outcome. Concerning Utilitarianism, I think that the

greater outcome in the result of killing a potential school shooter is saving the lives of

others. In this case, the positive of saving many outweighs the negative of killing one.

Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory

Utilitarianism is about acting in a way that has the best consequences. Act

utilitarianism is the view that each action should maximize utility, which is good, and the

good is often taken to mean pleasure. An evident strength of Utilitarianism when

discussing abortion is that there is no absolute value placed on human life, meaning it

avoids moral questions about when human life begins (Holly, 2018). Act Utilitarianism is

particularly useful, as it prefers to judge each individual case on its own merits, meaning

abortion would be up to the mother, and what the consequences would be for her life. The

consequences could range demanding on the woman herself. From her current

circumstances, financially stability, rape, incest or even her health. However, this is

where it becomes controversial about utilitarianism because the long-term consequences

are not specific or cannot necessarily be established for all women in entirety. In

conclusion, ultimately, Utilitarianism is not the best ethical theory to apply when

discussing abortion. Despite the consideration for all circumstances provided by Act

Utilitarianism, finally it is too difficult to establish the full consequences of an abortion.

References

- 6 -

[no notes on this page]

Abortion Access. (n.d.). Retrieved

from https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/issue/abortion-access/

Abortion is murder. (2012, January 19). Retrieved

from https://www.archbalt.org/abortion-is-murder/

Abortion rights: New oped for September 28 Global Day of Action. (2017, November

07). Retrieved from https://www.globalfundforwomen.org/abortion-rights-september-

28-opinion/

An Overview of Abortion Laws. (2019, June 03). Retrieved from

https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws?

gclid=EAIaIQobChMIs_LZhprf4gIVDLXACh2rdwc4EAAYASAAEgJe9vD_BwE

Head, T. (2019, May 04). A Look at What Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Supporters Believe.

Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/pro-life-vs-pro-choice-721108

Pros & Cons - ProCon.org. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://abortion.procon. HYPERLINK

"https://abortion.procon.org/"org/

Thames, B., (2018). How should one live? An introduction to ethics and moral reasoning

(3rd ed.). Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu

- 7 -

[no notes on this page]

United States abortion-rights movement. (2019, June 05). Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_abortion-rights_movement

- 8 -

[no notes on this page]