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 nonhuman, 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.