Argument about the risk of adopting Utilitarianism in abortion and how free will and influence will, will affect this stance. The critical and controversial topic of abortion, have been and will be a topic of discussion for some time to come, among various groups, organizations, and individuals. Abortion have always been looked at by different principles, beliefs, moral thinking, right or wrong, or personal feelings, and is the line that some of these arguments have been channeled.
This essay will be taking a critical look at the risk of adopting Utilitarianism on the topic of abortion and how free will and uninfluenced will, will affect this stance.
Abortion is defined as the termination of a pregnancy, therefore ending or terminating the life of the fetus prematurely (Webster dictionary). Looking at abortion and what society argues or debates about the right or wrong of such an action (as this can be a life changing decision), mostly begins with the moral status. So what are the risks of adopting the Utilitarianism approach to abortion? This can be quite a complicated topic or issue, but have great arguments to substantiate this viewpoint.
In Biology, a fetus is regarded as a human life, and morally speaking, to abort or destroy a fetus deliberately constitutes murder, and is unethical. Following this line of reasoning, then abortion is unethical and therefore, to abort a fetus is murder, since this action is deliberate and the taking of a human life.
Since utilitarianism in general is based on relying on the evidence that supports the widespread happiness of the many, one could argue for the justifiable performing of an abortion based on the rule utilitarianism. Consequently principle of ethics, therefore , we must generally establish a set of moral rules in which we should to be able to apply to every moral questions based on the utilitarianism findings. Applying this to abortion, we could summarize that abortion is a completely ethical principle that will provide the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people. It could be debated that statistical evidence have shown that more women suffer from depression after giving birth that after receiving an abortion (Planned Parenthood Federation of America, 1 October 2005).
But looking at the risk of taking such the Utilitarianism approach could be more than just been controversial and full of more ethical and moral questions. If it is permissible without thought or conscience to kill or abort a fetus, where is the dividing line between the murdering of a normal child or even an adult? At what point will the conscience of morality starts to develop in us as human beings? There should not be a line of demarcation between the murdering of a fully grown adult and the abortion (murder) of a fetus, as they are one and the same, stealing a penny constitutes the same as stealing a fortune, murdering an adult is paramount to aborting a fetus.
There are some people who behave like little demagogues, trying to work on peopleâ€™s emotions, to win then over on the side of abortion (murder) saying it is morally right. How can one know, or decide if the future life of the fetus would not be expectedly happy, (or at least having a balance of happiness over suffering) another risk of adopting the Utilitarianism approach could have an contradicting effect, especially if one is embracing the Christian worldview or Christian religion. The Bible teaches that thou shall not kill, therefore killing or aborting a fetus would go against Christian moral principles, and would therefore pose a problem of contrasting beliefs. Would you have to make a decision about your Christian faith or your utilitarianism belief, as they are not compatible but contradicting, as a Christian there is also a question of morality, do you have a moral obligation to see to the happiness and all other aspects of the unborn child? Or would you be morally judgmental of an abortion?
As humans we cannot create life, so we should not put ourselves in the position to destroy it, if someone who is not a Christian or do not believe in God and the Bible. The question of free will in aborting a fetus becomes another focal point. If this woman uses the utilitarianism argument, then because of free will she would be apt to embrace this free will aspect of abortion. It would be up to her to decide if it is morally wrong, and not have to think or worry about the moral of society. If she think that she may be financially, emotionally, mentally, or physically unstable or that the child is wrongfully or illegally conceived and to her it would be wrong to bring the child into the world, and the philosophy of individual would support her decision (Moore and Bruden 212, Post Abortion Syndrome).
Act utilitarianism would also support this womanâ€™s right to choose, as the â€œrightness of an act is determined by its effect on the general happiness (Moore and Bruden, 547).
In conclusion when making moral decisions we should act in a way that recognizes the objective importance of every