The issue of abortion, whether it should be legal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy,
highlights the question of who has rights and why do they have them.
On one side of the debate the argument goes that a woman owns her own body
(right to life) and has the right to do whatever she pleases to it.
On the other side is the argument that the growing fetus within the woman is not actually her property to do with as she pleases
and itself has the right to life and, morally, can not be aborted.
The two main issues to tackle are:
1) does the fetus have rights, and
2) if so, does it also have the right to remain in the womb against the mother's wishes.
To analyze whether or not the fetus has rights, we must go back to what specifically are rights and why men in general possess rights.
Rights define the guidelines for social interaction between rational people.
They allow society to exist by banning the initiation of force between rational men.
A fetus does not act, let alone act rationally.
There is no reason to recognize fetal rights.
Rights are not arbitrarily handed out by edicts; they are corollaries of an entity's nature.
Even if a fetus did have rights, would it have the right to stay in its mother's womb against her wishes?
The answer is no.
There are no unchosen obligations or duties.
If a woman does not want a fetus inside her she may use any means necessary to force it out
just as she would force an unwelcome visitor in her house.
Even if you invite a visitor in, you still have the right to ask him to leave.
There is very little grounds to rationally argue for a ban on abortions.
Almost all "pro-lifers" get their bloody politics from their
evil ethics, which come from their
irrational epistemology, which comes from their
mystical metaphysics that they call religion.
For more information of abortion, please visit the web site
(This page mirrored from Importance of Philosophy.com)