Abortion remains one of the most contentious and emotionally charged topics in public discourse, often leading to polarized and poorly constructed arguments. This article delves into the nuanced debate surrounding abortion by examining it through the lens of social contract theory, considering the moral and legal implications of pregnancy as a form of agreement between a mother and her fetus. We will explore the conditions under which this "contract" may be considered valid or void, and the philosophical challenges of equating abortion with murder.
Abortion is a topic that stirs deep emotions and frequently results in arguments that lack thorough consideration. The questions of whether abortion is immoral or constitutes murder are often conflated, leading to confusion and heated debate. The pregnancy and the resulting fetus are sometimes discussed in terms typically reserved for natural disasters or unwanted intrusions, with comparisons made to cancer or invaders. However, such analogies fail to recognize the voluntary nature of most pregnancies.
When a woman engages in voluntary sexual intercourse without contraception and becomes pregnant, it can be argued that she has entered into a contract with the fetus. A contract implies the existence of free will, and if fulfilling a contract's obligations could be life-threatening, it is reasonable to assume that no rational free will was involved. No reasonable person would willingly enter into such a contract with another individual, though they might with society at large.
Judith Jarvis Thomson, in her work "A Defence of Abortion," posits that pregnancies resulting from forced sex or those that are life-threatening can be morally terminated. In these cases, the contract was not entered into willingly or reasonably, rendering it null and void. Similarly, if a woman takes reasonable measures to prevent pregnancy through contraception, her intent not to enter into a contract should be recognized, and any resulting contract should be considered void.
The embryo, however, presents a more complex issue. It lacks consciousness, a prerequisite for entering into a valid contract. Can a contract be valid if one of the signatories lacks this essential trait? The answer lies in the larger Social Contract, where society represents those who cannot represent themselves, such as minors, the mentally incapacitated, and the unconscious. Society has the right and moral obligation to intervene when the powers of the parties to a contract are unbalanced.
A typical contract outlines the rights of the parties involved, assuming the existence of a social contract that applies universally. Thus, an explicit contract may address property rights without mentioning the right to life, free speech, or happiness, as these are presumed to be covered by the Social Contract.
The mother is undoubtedly a rights-holder, but the status of the unborn fetus is more contentious. Some argue that the embryo has no rights until certain conditions are met, while others base the right to life on the desire to live or the cessation of experiences upon death. Don Marquis, in "Why Abortion is Immoral," suggests that terminating a life is wrong because it deprives a person of a future filled with value and meaning.
However, the debate may be unnecessary, as there is no inherent conflict between the rights of the mother and those of her fetus. By entering into an agreement, the mother has compromised some of her rights. The rights of the fetus are derived from the mother's behavior, and many contracts are implicit, formed through behavior rather than written agreements. Legally and morally, the mother has committed to certain obligations that cannot be unilaterally annulled.
Using modern contract law, we can determine that a contract can be annulled if signed under duress, involuntarily, by incompetent persons, or if one party made a reasonable attempt to prevent its signature. Rape, contraception failure, and life-threatening situations are all cases where the contract may be voided.
The potential for a fetus to lead a happy, meaningful life is akin to a one-minute-old baby's potential. The contract between a mother and her fetus is a service provision contract, where the mother provides the necessary goods and services for the fetus to realize its potential. This contract continues well beyond birth, as seen in the provision of education and other forms of nurturing.
Classifying abortion as murder introduces numerous philosophical problems. The main crime in abortion is seen as a crime against potentialities, but this raises questions about the moral significance of destroying sperm and eggs, which also contain potential for life. Moreover, if abortion is murder, how should we address moral dilemmas such as natural abortions or the impact of a mother's lifestyle choices on the embryo?
In conclusion, the issue of abortion is complex and cannot be easily categorized as murder. It involves the termination of potential life, which is philosophically distinct from the termination of actual life. The contractual perspective offers a framework for understanding the moral and legal considerations involved in abortion, emphasizing the importance of free will and the conditions under which a pregnancy "contract" may be considered valid or void.
The right to life is a fundamental principle in most moral theories, implying obligations or duties of third parties towards the right-holder. This right has various aspects, including the right to be brought to life, to be born, to have one's life maintained, not to be killed, to have one's life saved, to save one's life, to terminate one's life, and to have one's life terminated. Each of these rights carries with it a complex set of ethical considerations and potential conflicts.
In the calculus of rights, we must consider the hierarchy of rights, the difference between killing and letting die, and the moral implications of killing the innocent. These issues are critical in the debate over abortion and the sanctity of human life, as they touch upon the very essence of what it means to have a right to life and the responsibilities that come with it.
The Ubiquitous Britannica 2015
Encyclopedia Britannica is now online and as a DVD. The print edition has been discontinued.
Pears Cyclopaedia 2014-5 Edition: Human Knowledge Encapsulated
Pears Cyclopaedia is the last remaining one volume reference work.
Envy as the Foundation of Capitalism
Envy is either destructive, or, as in the case of capitalism, constructive.
