Can anybody give me feedback on my first LNAT essay?

There are multiple circumstances and scenarios which render the act of abortion acceptable. Inevitably, they are often personal to the individuals, yet can be categorised. Common circumstances include examples such as financial factors and internal (within the family) factors. Such circumstances can be viewed as the appropriate justification for an abortion.

It is undeniable that the act of rape is an existing problem in our society. It is highly probable that a rapist can cause a woman to become pregnant. Logically, if the victim were to give birth to the rapist’s child, the baby would naturally be a symbol, a memory, a reminder of the horrific incident. Consequently, such circumstances would justify and permit an abortion. From a victim’s perspective, abortion is undoubtedly a suitable solution, but one must consider the child. The knowledge that your father is a criminal would depress the child. The knowledge that you (potentially) remind your mother of the incident would depress the child. Would an abortion not be kinder to the child? Analysis of these factors permits abortion.

The nation’s current economic status can be viewed as a ‘crisis’. The government are being forced to make ‘spending cuts’ throughout the United Kingdom. This has (and will continue to) increased unemployment in the country, with a large number of jobs being cut in the public sector. This directs the argument towards financial circumstances. With cuts being made to our ‘benefits’ system, and an increasing number of people being rendered unemployed, many families naturally cannot afford to support and raise a child. The media has highlighted the increasing ‘costs of living’, such as in prices for food and drink, or in petrol. After an evaluation of their financial status, and without the appropriate finance, it would appear logical to permit an abortion to an adult(s) expecting a child. One can assume that this is a common issue throughout the nation, and therefore such circumstances permit abortion.

The structure of a family is a significant circumstance when evaluating abortion. Television regularly propounds to us the high statistics of single parents. Again, financial factors are significant. Can a single parent realistically maintain full-time employment to support his/her family, yet be able to provide the essential care and nurturing that the child requires? Ultimately, the parent would struggle to achieve a fine balance between employment and parenting. After postulating the importance of employment, and emphasising it, a fine balance is arguably impossible, which can justify and permit an abortion, as it can be viewed as kinder to the child.

One must ask the question, who are we to decide if somebody can or cannot have an abortion? From an ethical perspective, it seems appropriate to leave this option to the parents. The parents face the challenges of financial struggles, parental problems and other barriers, and hence we should permit abortion to the adult(s) involved. It is their decision to analyse the circumstances, and consequently abortion should remain an option.

In a Western society arranged marriages should no longer be tolerated. Discuss.

Arranged marriages, while remaining typical of some eastern cultures, have become to be seen as morally wrong and outdated in Western societies. There is however a distinction to be made between forced, and arranged marriages, dismissed by many as meaning the same thing. While forced marriages, between two incompliant parties are unquestionably wrong, it remains that arranged marriages should be tolerated in society.

Arranged marriages were at one time typical of all societies, including western ones. Often marriages were arranged as a matter of increasing social standing or wealth, and not the choice of the bride or groom. The same can be said of marriages in some cultures today. This however does not mean that the parties are being married against their will. While the reasons for the marriage may not be founded in love, this does not mean that either party is against the marriage, or that they are not, or will not one day be, in love. It would therefore be wrong that they not be tolerated, because the marriage may be as successful and loving as any ‘conventional’ marriage.

Western societies boast of their philosophies of liberty, and allowing people to exercise free will. People of some cultures, notably those cultures in which arranged marriages remain a social norm, should be allowed to exercise their free will in continuing this practice. No longer tolerating arranged marriages would be more of an infringement on people’s basic liberties in this way than it would encourage them to be exercised.

Arranged marriages in modern times are more frequently considered to be a practice of Eastern cultures. When people choose to live in a Western society, they should arguably be expected to live by Western customs. This could be extended to include disapproval of arranged marriages. Many Western societies are however renowned as being cosmopolitan, and accepting of all cultures. To not tolerate arranged marriages would be a direct contradiction of this accepting attitude, in not permitting people to exercise a tradition of their culture. Therefore it would be unacceptable to not tolerate arranged marriages.

In some cases however, either the bride-or-groom to be may object to the arranged marriage. There may be sufficient familial pressure however so that the said party does not feel they can make state this objection openly. In this way, what may have otherwise been considered a forced marriage – and therefore be immoral and not to be tolerated - may be masked as an arranged marriage. Though this does not mean that the entire tradition of arranged marriages should not be tolerated; those still entering arranged marriages should instead be encouraged to be open about how they feel about the prospective marriage, and if either party is not happy with the arrangement, then it should not be allowed to continue.

While many may simply see the practice of arranged marriages as outdated in modern societies, notably in the West, those people who are of cultures which do still maintain this practice may instead see it as a long-standing tradition to be upheld and continued. In western societies, where foreign cultures are celebrated, and free will encouraged, it would therefore be wrong to not tolerate such a tradition, and so it follows that arranged marriages should still be tolerated in Western societies.




feedback anyone? its 545 words

In a Western society arranged marriages should no longer be tolerated. Discuss.

Arranged marriages, while remaining typical of some eastern cultures, have become to be seen as morally wrong and outdated in Western societies. There is however a distinction to be made between forced, and arranged marriages, dismissed by many as meaning the same thing. Whilst forced marriages, between two incompliant parties are unquestionably wrong, it remains that arranged marriages should be tolerated in society.

Arranged marriages were at one time typical of all societies, including western ones. Often marriages were arranged as a matter of increasing social standing or wealth, and not the choice of the bride or groom. The same can be said of marriages in some cultures today. This however does not mean that the parties are being married against their will. While the reasons for the marriage may not be founded in love, this does not mean that either party is against the marriage, or that they are not, or will not one day be, in love. It would therefore be wrong that they not be tolerated, because the marriage may be as successful and loving as any ‘conventional’ marriage.

Western societies boast of their philosophies of liberty, and allowing people to exercise free will. People of some cultures, notably those cultures in which arranged marriages remain a social norm, should be allowed to exercise their free will in continuing this practice. No longer tolerating arranged marriages would be more of an infringement on people’s basic liberties in this way than it would encourage them to be exercised.

Arranged marriages in modern times are more frequently considered to be a practice of Eastern cultures. When people choose to live in a Western society, they should arguably be expected to live by Western customs. This could be extended to include disapproval of arranged marriages. Many Western societies are however renowned as being cosmopolitan, and accepting of all cultures. To not tolerate arranged marriages would be a direct contradiction of this accepting attitude, in not permitting people to exercise a tradition of their culture. Therefore it would be unacceptable to not tolerate arranged marriages.

In some cases however, either the bride-or-groom to be may object to the arranged marriage. There may be sufficient familial pressure however so that the said party does not feel they can make state this objection openly. In this way, what may have otherwise been considered a forced marriage – and therefore be immoral and not to be tolerated - may be masked as an arranged marriage. Though this does not mean that the entire tradition of arranged marriages should not be tolerated; those still entering arranged marriages should instead be encouraged to be open about how they feel about the prospective marriage, and if either party is not happy with the arrangement, then it should not be allowed to continue.

While many may simply see the practice of arranged marriages as outdated in modern societies, notably in the West, those people who are of cultures which do still maintain this practice may instead see it as a long-standing tradition to be upheld and continued. In Western societies, where foreign cultures are celebrated, and free will encouraged, it would therefore be wrong to not tolerate such a tradition, and so it follows that arranged marriages should still be tolerated in Western societies.




feedback anyone? its 545 words