Christopher Kevin Grim

Ethics and Values

Abortion Presentation
Miller
4/23/07

My presentation discusses the actual choices and freewill involved with the act of
abortion. As well as the morally right obligation deontology entails, that being to choose
to give the gift of life rather than death. With my primary maxim being, it is utterly
wrong to kill a living being; especially when human intervention is the cause. The most
controversial aspect of abortion is the question of when does life truly begin, at what
point does the fetus become a human. This question has sparked so many debates and
literally has split the country in two. The religious feel that life begins at conception,
while many others see it as not beginning until birth. It is my personal belief that life
begins at conception, when the sperm actually meets the egg. It is here where two
individual cells become one. With this belief in mind, deontology dictates that the
morally correct decision is to choose to give birth, with the morally wrong decision being
to abort!

The exact definition of deontology is the study of what is obligatory, permissible, right,
or wrong, in moral terms. When choosing what is morally right or wrong under the scope
of deontology, one must keep in mind that the basis of deontology is linked to the
inalienable rights entitled to each and every human being. These rights originate from the
inalienable rights, formed by John Locke and used by Thomas Jefferson in the
Declaration of Independence, in which Kant merged into his theory of deontology. These
rights promise us the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What many people
do not realize is that these inalienable rights may only be expressed if they do not impede
or take away from someone else’s rights. To impede on someone else’s rights violates the
terms and thus puts the person at moral fault. These rights were originally formed by the
framers to give each and every American the opportunity many colonists did not have.
Our founding fathers made these rights and laws in order to defend the helpless and
protect those who could not protect themselves. What better candidate to these rights than
an unborn child, a fetus, a living organism that will eventually become a human but at
this time has no voice? Everyone has the right to freewill and to make their own decisions
but not when it jeopardizes the life of another. No person has the right to decide who
should live or who should die.

The fetus would become a human if not interrupted by human intervention. The
life cycle is halted and since the fetus resembles the likeliness of an animal more than any
child the people are able to have little guilt about it. However, many women who have
had an abortion, including the woman evolved in Row vs. Wade, have reported “the
lingering horror, guilt and regret that haunts their later, more mature attempts to be happy
and fulfilled in love, children and family.” This proves Kant’s theory that every human
has a natural understanding of what is morally right and what is morally wrong. The
sense of horror and guilt that these women are feeling is due to the knowledge of what
they did, an action that has not only affected their life negatively but has also ended the
life of an innocent other. Morally speaking, what are the rights of the females that are
aborted? Abortion prevents thousands of magnificent women from ever having the
chance to add to the moral fabric of our society, and many men from ever succeeding in
life – never given a chance because their life was snuffed out to satisfy the Unitarian need
of their mother. An interesting point here is if this fetus is truly considered to be non-
human, than why is it, in some states, when a pregnant woman is murdered, no matter
how far along the pregnancy is, the murderer is tried for two murders (as he or she should
be), one for the woman and the other for the child. It’s ironic how a fetus can be
considered a child on one issue, but in another not even human. Pro-choice advocates are
using their freewill to make bad, immoral decisions based on utilitarian or opposing
deontologist’s ideals. When you abort a child you decide to put yourself first. The
decision to abort is almost always a utilitarian one. This is because a person who is
aborting their child looks at what is best for them and not what is the morally correct
decision according to deontology!

In conclusion, I believe abortion should be looked on from a deontologist’s

perspective, as it is important to see something as great as life in a morally correct light.
Imagine if some of the world’s greatest influences were aborted, people like Einstein,
FDR, Edison, and Bill Gates. We might not have won World War II, the internet would,
most likely, not be as developed and as world wide as it is today, and who knows how
long it would have been until we would have had electricity. The world as we know it
now may not have been nearly as developed as it currently is. Just think, the baby a
woman might be aborting may grow up to be the man or woman who cures cancer.
Killing these children and calling them non-human just because they are in the beginning
stages of life seems like nothing short of serious denial and a sad justification used by
those who support abortion. Abortion is not as rare an occurrence as many pro-choice
advocates would like you to believe, it is actually a thriving business bringing in
thousands of dollars a year and providing hundreds of jobs. Abortion clinics are not
performing abortions because they want to do what is best for a mother; they do it
because they simply want to line their own pockets. Though studies show the rate of
abortion is decreasing slowly, it still is happening more than it ever should be. Life, the
most sacred thing in this world, is being tossed away without a second thought, like
unwanted garbage. It is up to us to use our freewill to make the morally right decision,
one that will pave the road for future generations to follow in our footsteps and preserve
the gift that is life.