Life and Death: Abortion and the Death Penalty

Though Abby rejects the application of the death penalty in all instances, she does advocate the permissibility of abortion in the early stages. Despite the seeming contradiction of ethics or morals in these views, AbbyÆs views on abortion and the death penalty are more congruent than they might initially appear. This is because abortion is part of a womanÆs overall reproductive rights, guaranteed by law; while the death penalty is often applied in a biased manner and represents state-sanctioned homicide. The fact that Abby can consistently accept the permissibility of abortion in the early stages of pregnancy while rejecting the death penalty will be addressed in this analysis.

The ethical and moral deliberations involved in the decision of abortion and capital punishment are basically the same, especially with respect to defining personhood and the rifht to life. As Thomson (p. 66) argues, unless we define the ôfetusö as a ôhuman beingö from the ômoment of conception,ö then a ôvery early abortion is surely not the killing of a person.ö In this manner, AbbyÆs view on abortion is not advocating the taking of the life of a ôperson.ö In defining ôpersonhood,ö we see the conflict between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice supporters.

According to Marquis (p. 184) the typical Pro-Life or anti-abortion argument views the fetus as a ôpersonö from the moment of conception. From this perspective of personhood, anti-abortio

. . .
he right to life is an absolute right, as well as a natural and universal one. Bedau (p. 177) explains that the ôright to lifeö is considered to have emerged during the seventeenth century, a period of increased government responsibility in protection of human rights. The ôright to lifeö was viewed as a God-given right of all human beings, but Bedau (p. 177) maintains that this right vas also and oftdn viewed as both universal and inalienable, ôA universal right is a right that everyone had, regardless of where one is born or lives and regardless of sex or race. An inalienable right is a right that the possessor cannot transfer, sell, or give away to another person.ö In the above definition of the ôright to life,ö we see that Abby does not confer this right upon the ôfetusö at the moment of conception, as most Pro-Lifers do. Instead, because she does not view the fetus as having ôpersonhoodö at the early stages of pregnancy, she does not consider it covered by the doctrine of natural rights or the ôright to life.ö With respect to capital punishment, however, Abby cannot morally or ethically support the death penalty because she views it as a transgression or violation by the state of a God-given, and, therefore, natural as
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Pro-Lifers Instead, Introduction Abby, According Marquis, Pro-Lifers Pro-Choices, Pro-Choicers AbbyÆs, Pro-Life Pro-Choice, death penalty, Random House, ôright lifeö, Nevertheless AbbyÆs, Journal Philosophy, Public Affairs, capital punishment, abbyÆs views, moment conception, application death penalty, application death, marquis 184, permissibility abortion, bedau 177, definition ôpersonhoodö, moral ethical perspective, abbyÆs views permissibility, rejection death penalty, death penalty consistent,
Approximate Word count = 1759
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Life and Death: Abortion and the Death Penalty