‘Norval Morris and Gordon Hawkins, The Honest Politician’s Guide to Crime Control, 1970 – “Abortion may be sinful or immoral, but it is not the function of the law to enforce the whole of morality. It is difficult to understand what religious or moral principle, what divine or human purpose, is served by compelling underprivileged women to undergo pregnancy for the full term and to bear unsought and frequently unwanted children or to risk sickness or death at the hands of incompetent and frequently lecherous and importunate abortionists. No doubt the fact that the price of maintaining this principle is paid almost exclusively by the poor has delayed its critical examination.”[1]
There are many things that are seen as immoral by some people, but which must, nevertheless, be upheld as a right. As is argued above, the fetus has no absolute right to the woman’s body, and therefore the woman has a right to “unplug” (abort). This is the case no matter how “wrong” we might believe the act of “unplugging” and killing the fetus to be.
No
This is a circular argument: If you look at it, this argument is saying: it is a woman’s right because it is a woman’s right… Specifically the argument says: “Abortion may be immoral, but it is still a woman’s right”. Well things that are immoral, that hurt other people are illegal. All things that are immoral that hurt other people are illegal. The question is if abortion is immoral, or if fetuses count as people… People can argue about those two points, but you can’t say we can’t enforce morality… All good laws try to prevent people from doing, what the society thinks is immoral activities to others…
If we can all agree that abortion is immoral, then we should make it illegal.
Comment & Debate