Revision:Abortion

TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > Religious Studies > Abortion

Abortion and euthanasia are the most controversial topics faced by the world today, people hold different views about them some are in favour whilst some are against it. In this coursework I will try to explain the different views about the abortion and euthanasia and will end all this by stating my own opinion on what I feel about abortion and euthanasia.

Abortion

First, let us look at abortion.

Abortion can be defined as: "Premature expulsion of the foetus from the womb either done by operation or by medication". The meaning of abortion is quiet clear from its definition. As far as different views are concerned mostly all sects of Christianity are against the concept of abortion, there are humanitarian groups which are in favour of it, they have their own views which are totally different then the religious views, if we look at what different groups think we will find out that there is equal acceptance and opposition on the concept of abortion. The different views are given bellow.

Opposition

Catholic Truth Society greatly oppose abortion, they give their reason as: "We have been created by the almighty God in his own image and likeness. No pregnancy is unplanned because no baby can be conceived unless almighty God intends that conception and has willed that particular unique and completely individual new person into existence. What has actually happened in our society is that clever arguments has convinced those with no anchor of belief in God to cling to, that merciless slaughter of unborn babies is morally unjustifiable, and even essential for the happiness of the individual and good of the society."

The Catholic trust says that the conception of baby is due to will of God and a human being has no right to kill that baby, it is ethically unacceptable and morally wrong. Life Campaign activist believe that: "Since human life begin at conception i.e. fertilisation, and since all human life should be equally protected by the law from conception to natural death, whether or not human being concerned is wanted or handicapped it follows that destruction of unborn life is always wrong."

According to Life Campaign after conception foetus is a living thing and its right to live should not be taken away.

In Favour

The groups in favour of abortion are mostly humanitarian groups the have their own point of view, according to National Abortion Campaign: "The decision to terminate pregnancy is so important that it can only be made by the person most involved- the women. Women must always have a choice and never have the decision forced upon them. Free abortion facilities should on the NHS for every woman who needs them. We believe that the right of women to control their own fertility is a fundamental human right. Women will not be able to take a full and equal part in the society when we can all decide for ourselves whether and when to have children."

National Abortion Campaign states the basic right of women to control its own fertility, they say that women have a full right to chose when the want to have children. Humanist Dipper supports abortion by suggesting that: "Humanist regards abortion better than bringing unwanted into the world. It is a mistake to say that Humanist are in favour of abortion; no one can be in favour of abortion, which, except in unforeseen circumstances, is result of failed contraception. We think there will probably always be a certain number unplanned pregnancies and that the mother concerned should have the complete choice of either complete abortion, or keeping the baby."

Opinion

If a man's family is starving and there is an unattended lorry filled with food outside his house should he steal from the lorry to feed his family, but in doing this break a commandment. Or should he leave the food so his family dies, but he does not break the commandment. One type of thinking would say that the commandments say, "Thou shall not steal"; so you should not steal. Another type of thinking would ask the question "which would bring about the greater good, him stealing the food or not"; and once they had looked at the individual circumstances they would probably come to the conclusion that the greatest good would come about him stealing the food.

If this way of thinking is then applied to the title, then having one strict law would be like having the commandment and should under no circumstances be broken. Having each request for abortion be judged on its own merits would be the one where someone asks the question "what would bring around the greatest good, this woman having abortion or not?"

So if each request for abortion is going to be judged on its own merits then someone has to make the decision. Who? Has a special court got to be set up in order to decide whether or not people can have abortions? This would not work because by the time the court had made a decision the mother would probably be in labour.

Is it up to her G.P. to decide? This practice already has enough pressures of it's own is it really fair to add another one to it. Also would the decision made by the G.P. be one on sound medical reasons or would it be made on personal views of the G.P. in question. How could the doctor prove that the decision they made had a sound reason. The best judge can be the woman herself who is undergoing through this problem of unplanned pregnancy. If she thinks it's religiously wrong then it's between her and God but she should have a choice to make a valid decision at the spur of time.

Comments