![]() ![]() The foundations of the dominant pro-life status stems from Aristotle’s potentiality principal, which has been adopted by Catholic philosophers to justify the moral status of embryos and fetuses. Pro-life and the “Humanness” of the Fetus Even if the embryo or fetus were empirically proven to be human, it would still stand that the rights of the woman trump the claimed rights of the embryo or fetus. ![]() Ultimately, the embryo and fetus are not human, and do not have a right to life. This is reflective of the dominant Christian doctrine of procreation, which has influenced the design of gender roles in social settings. ![]() Pro-life advocates represent the lifelong oppression of women’s rights, independence, sexual freedom and equality. ![]() In exploring these different lenses, the question of morality surrounding abortion appears inconsequential, since political rights and morality are just constructs in order to organise society so that it is predictable and stable. Building on David Luban’s rights thesis and maintaining a feminist position on abortion, this paper presents ‘humanness’ as a social construct, whereby no one writer or philosopher has managed to pinpoint what actually makes someone human other than that it is attributed by other groups of people. There are several examples throughout the world where the development of abortion legislation has been underpinned by international commitments to human rights and the rights of women. There are varying standpoints in between these two contentions, with some arguing the fetus is in a way the same as a rapist, insofar as it is unwanted and imposed on the woman, without consent to be in her body, whereas others see the opposition to women accessing abortions as a reflection of broader patriarchal issues of women’s inequality in society, and the perpetuation of the role of women as natural child bearers and child carers.Ībortion rights are also contemplated in relation to international human rights discourse, and how this relationship can conclude the debate surrounding the fetus’ right to life. The woman is already a full grown adult with rights. In contrast, pro-choice advocates argue that the embryo or fetus cannot have a claim to the rights it will inherit in the possible future adult life, and that the individual bodily autonomy of the woman trumps the fetus’ potential life and potential rights. Pro-life advocates argue the embryo and fetus have potential personhood, which means that if carried to term, the fetus will most likely grow into an adult with full social and political rights. The primary conflict between feminist philosophers and pro-life advocates is the weighing of one set of rights over another (if it is accepted that the embryo or fetus have any claim to rights). However, there is still strong opposition to the legalisation and decriminalisation of abortion from Catholic moral philosophers and other pro-life advocates. This trend has seen the increase in identifying abortion as a women’s health issue, rather than a question of the embryo’s or fetus’ right to life. Subsequently, a growing number of Supreme Court decisions and government efforts throughout the world have led to the wider recognition of the right to abortion, or in some cases, the right to privacy which leads to a right to abortion. Women’s interests and choices have been only incorporated fully in the discussion since the 1970s. In debates on reproductive rights, the moral status of the embryo and fetus is largely at the centre of analysis. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |