October 19, 2012
Abortion: Right or Wrong?
In the extremely sensitive topic of whether or not abortion is something that should be morally accepted or cast out of thought, there will always be opposing sides to the argument. Many people argue that variables such as rape, infection, and possible death of the mother should be considered for a fair and accurate argument but it all leads to the same question: is abortion right? Harriet McBryde Johnson was a woman that lived her life in a wheelchair but still believed that her life was just as important as everyone elses. On the other hand, Peter Singer is a man who believes that if a baby is born with a deformity or disability, the baby should be aborted to ensure the lives of the family are kept “normal.” Personally, abortion isn’t something that I believe in, but Peter Singer does do an impeccable job of proving his reasoning. To start, Peter Singer describes the definitions behind his claims. Defining the difference between words like “Involuntary Euthanasia” and “Non-Voluntary Euthanasia” help straighten out some confusion on how he views the subject. Singer states that, “If a human being is not capable of understanding the choice between life and death, euthanasia will neither be voluntary or involuntary, but non-voluntary.” Basically, Singer feels that instead of involuntary euthanasia, meaning that the human has neither been asked or has declined the choice of euthanasia but killed anyway, the human was given non-voluntary euthanasia. In a way, Singer takes the blame that people thrust on him for his views and shifts it to make it seem that the baby being killed wouldn’t have cared one way or another about being killed because it “isn’t capable of understanding the choice between life and death.” Singer also presents the argument that because an infant has never been aware of self-consciousness, rationality or autonomy, they are not normal. In which case, killing...