Philosophy Term Paper
Sometimes problems of mental disability and illness arise within a fetus during human development. Questions arise whether or not those fetuses should live or not (abortion). I believe that they do have a right to live. No one can play God and decided whether or not a being should live. We cannot judge whether or not a person is going to be mentally ill or not. We do not know the full potential of that person and we cannot predict whether or not he will always stay mentally challenged. How do we know that person will not get better? How do we know that he really is mentally disabled? We have no right to take a life because we THINK that we may be are helping that individual by not bringing him into a life of hardship and complication. This can be compared to “ending the misery” of an old person because we think he is pain. This is absurd and wrong. I believe that the double effect principle is not in accordance to the catholic natural law. The catholic natural law states that evil may not be done that good come of it. This means that you can never have something good come out from something evil. Hence, if the double effect states that it is ok to take the life of the baby to save the life of the mother, we are saying it is ok to kill the baby to save the mother; even though killing a person is unjustifiable. This goes against the natural law because the natural law says there is no good from something evil. So, if killing a person is evil there is nothing good that could come out of it. This is why the two ideas are not accordance. In fact, they are completely contradictory- one justifies the abortion and the other doesn’t. 3)
I do agree with the both of his principles because he assumes the zygote and whatever comes after it a form of human life and will potentially becomes a person. Devine describes humanity as stages. The way kids turn into adolescent, adolescent into adult, adult into elder. This can also imply that there...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document