Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A Defense of Abortion is a moral philosophy essay by Judith Jarvis Thomson first published in Philosophy & Public Affairs in 1971. Granting for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, Thomson uses thought experiments to argue that the right to life does not include, entail, or imply the right to use someone else's body to survive and that induced abortion is therefore morally ...
An argument first presented by Judith Jarvis Thomson in her 1971 paper "A Defense of Abortion" states that even if the fetus is a person and has a right to life, abortion is morally permissible because a woman has a right to control her own body and its life-support functions (i.e. the right to life does not include the right to be kept alive ...
An affirmative answer would support the (1) claim in the central anti-abortion argument, while a negative answer would support the (1) claim in the central abortion-rights argument. Another family of arguments relates to bodily rights—the question of whether the woman's bodily rights justify abortion even if the embryo has a right to life.
In an essay written for Vogue, Halsey shared details of how an abortion saved their life after having suffered three miscarriages before her 24th birthday. “One of my miscarriages required ...
Anti-abortion feminist Derr contextualized Anthony's words not to abortion but to Anthony's opposition to a law which held that, if a child was unborn at the time of its father's death, custody of the newborn infant could be taken away from the mother if there was a guardian appointed in the father's will. [1]
This is who is affected by abortion legislation.
Judith Jarvis Thomson (October 4, 1929 – November 20, 2020) was an American philosopher who studied and worked on ethics and metaphysics.Her work ranges across a variety of fields, but she is most known for her work regarding the thought experiment titled the trolley problem and her writings on abortion.
The arguments made by antiabortion states to sugarcoat their manifestly misogynistic policies have always borne the acrid odor of cynicism and hypocrisy.