Right To Life Essay

Arguments Against Right To Die
Another argument against the right to die is the fact that a specific illness does not define a
human. There is more to mankind than simply what is wrong with them. An example of this is a
sufferer of AIDS. The disease itself does not mean the sufferer is a deviant. The morality of the
person is not defined by a disease they live with. Illness is not what makes a person who they are,
character does that. Therefore it cannot be inferred about what will happen with their life. This
is why it would be wrong for anyone to kill themselves for the sake of an illness. Simply, the reason
for homicide due to illness is unjustified (Arkes). For a person to use a patient's illness as a reason to
die solely based on the illness, it does a disservice to
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

National Right To Life Committee Essay
The National Right to Life Committee, founded in 1968, is this country's oldest and largest pro–life
organization. Their mission is to use education and legislation to protect the most vulnerable of
society, the born and unborn children, disabled peoples and elders, from abortions, euthanasia, infant
homicide, and assisted suicide. They assert that these acts rob people of the very right outlined in
the Declaration of Independence. According to the Declaration of Independence, we are all
"endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life..." (Jefferson)
and for this reason, their right to life should not be taken away by giving them the option of abortion,
euthanasia, etc. It is as though their belief is that

The Right To Life : Abortion : Right Or Wrong?
Each and every day throughout our universe, professionals in the medical field suck thousands of
babies from their mothers' wombs in a procedure known as abortion. The law not only protects
but provides consent to both the mother and medical professionals for these unjust procedures.
Life begins at the exact moment of conception, and an innocent life should not be taken away
under any circumstance. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on whether or not abortion is
deemed right or wrong. However, when it is all said and done, the babies discernibly have no
right of protection or life themselves, because of an argument that regards when a fetus is decided
to be a life. The right to life is the most important right that we the people have. The argument of
this essay will provide evidence to why abortion is wrong. For the same exact reason as killing the
audience reading this essay is also considered wrong. I will just establish, rather than assume, that
killing the audience is severely wrong. Consider the following standard anti–abortion argument:
Fetuses are both alive and human. Humans have the right to life. Therefore, unborn babies have
the right to life. Most certainly, women have the right to decide what they do with their own
bodies, but the right to life overrides the right of a woman wanting to possess control over her own
body. Therefore, abortion is unlawful. The life of the woman is not and should not be the sole
concern and the life of the baby should be

Essay about The Right to Life for an Embryo
In this paper, I will investigate the right to life for an embryo based on Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan's
article "Abortion: Is it Possible to be both "Pro–life" and "Pro–Choice"?" My conclusion is that an
embryo is a potential person then it has the right to life. Sagan and Druyan argue that an embryo
does not have human characteristics, thus it is acceptable to abort it. I will show that an embryo is a
potential person thus it has the right to life.
Is an embryo a person? If the "person" means, in biology, is a member of Homo sapiens, then after
14 days when primitive streak or after 16 days when gastrulation (Damschen, GГіmez–Lobo and
SchГ¶necker), an embryo is a person without doubt, because at this point, the process of
individualization...show more content...
Hydatidiform mole, anencephalic, Siamese twins, even fetus–in–fetu, or some fetuses develop to a
certain stage and discontinue, and even some patient presented in brain–dead state(unlike
vegetative), these are all the members in Homo sapiens, all of them can be formed biologically as
Homo sapiens, but they would not be considered as a person.
Notably, even in today's general understanding, avoid using substance or essence of rationality to
talk about the person, but rather with the way the matter has rational function to determine whether
it has the personhood. However the concept of personhood, in fact, is inseparable from the meaning
of some kind of metaphysical entity. It is more obvious when discussing about personal identity
problem, that personhood at different points in time all have the identity, the same person cannot
have more than one identity with two different individuals.
Finally, and perhaps most crucially, "what is a potential person" or "who has the potential to
develop into a person". A potential person is a vague and ambiguous semantic expression, it could
mean "someone is a potential person, if and only if he/she is already a person right now, and has
some causal possibility to manifest his/her qualities as a person in the future". The biggest issue in
this argument is that it treats an embryo directly as a person, like unreasonably treating chicken eggs
as chicken.

Essay On Pro Life
Raj Yaligar Mr. Gibb HSB 4UI– 01 21 November, 2015 The Right to Pro–Life Abortion can be
interpreted as various surgical methods for terminating a pregnancy. This is an issue that is very
controversial as well as states many viewpoints from both fronts, pro life and pro choice. The
following essay will analyze that abortion must be illegal. Terminating a pregnancy should be
outlawed in Canada for many unethical and illicit reasons. Abortion is disastrous to the woman's
body and women should face the consequences under any circumstances. Likewise, abortion is
utilized as a last resort contraceptive. Based on the facts presented in the paper, it is imperative that
the medical procedure be illegal. As a matter of fact, abortion is harmful to the woman's body and
can face many complications. For instance, the nine most regular "real" complexities are "infection,
excessive bleeding, embolism, ripping or perforation of the uterus, anesthesia complications,
convulsions, hemorrhage, cervical injury, and...show more content...
As an example, there are approximately 100,000 abortions performed per year! That is an
insanely large number and the reason for this outcome is because individuals are utilizing this
method if other forms of contraception fail to work. Additionally, society has maintained that
abortion should be kept in case of any medical complications such as saving a mother's life. The
fact is that less than 1 percent of all abortions are performed to save the mother's life. This validates
that there are stronger reasons for why the woman wanted an abortion. As a matter of fact,
communities will question about in the cases of rape or other forms of sexual assault. According to
Abortions Rights Coalition of Canada, women's decision (on abortion) is based on the reality of
everyday practicalities (such as

John Locke Right To Life Liberty And Property
One of John Locke's philosophical theories was the right to life,liberty,and property. These rights
have been violated by militants and is threatening the lives of innocent Muslim people.All people
have a right to subsist safely, make their own decisions,and to be able to live in their own homes.
The people's freedoms are being jeopardized. The government's responsibility is supposed to be to
enforce these rights but they are part of the problem.

Essay on The Right to Life: Pro-Life
Opinions, views and emotions run high and passion is their fuel. Pro–Choice activists declare it is a
woman's right to choose what she does with her own body. The biology versus medical definitions
proclaim that an embryo is not yet a human life; as conception begins two to three weeks after
implantation occurs, a heartbeat is heard, and a the embryo can sustain life outside of the womb.
The laws vary from state to state and in our home state of Texas political parties clash so hard the
state shakes with a jolt felt across the country. Arguments weigh in from all over the globe against
abortion and none more prevalent that of churches all over the world. For Pro–Life activists, there is
no middle ground; human life begins at the moment of...show more content...
Recently, a 31 year old Indian woman died after becoming septic as a result of her fetus dying and
she was denied an abortion. While Arch Bishops gathered in protest for the "life of the child", the
woman died as a result. Her death is currently under inquest. Adoption is encouraged however the
information on adoption is limited on the grand scale. Adoption statistics in Texas alone are low.
While Adoption is the main focus, these children are not being adopted. Pro–Choice advocates rage
if one Pro–Life family would adopt one child, there would be no children in need of homes. All
the billboards of babies being saved by abortion have higher rates of being adopted while older
children stay in foster care or state and federally funded agencies and homes. More recent
information was not available, however from the U.S. Department of Child Health and Human
Services official website the following statistics are available. The numbers are staggering and the
website details state by state. The following are the numbers for Texas alone.
Demographics: Child Welfare Summary
Texas: 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 2008200920102011
Total Children Under 18 Years6,765,835 6,895,969 6,879,384 6,960,738
Child Maltreatment Victims70,976 69,169 67,269 65,740
Foster Care Entry Rate2.0 1.8

The Right to Live
The Right to Live
Imagine that each day that you wake up, thousands of people have been arranged to be murdered.
Well, that's actually the case. According to the National Right to Life, nearly 4,000 abortions are
performed daily. When you think about it, that's a great deal of unborn children that are just
"discarded" or erased, like a sheet of paper containing an awful mistake. An abortion, by definition, is
the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death
of a human embryo or fetus (spontaneously or by induced expulsion). Abortions have been
performed for centuries, and surprisingly, are still legal today. Women shouldn't be given the choice
to terminate a pregnancy due to the availability of family planning services, number of families
wanting to adopt, and the post effects of the procedure.
Rape and incest are two circumstances that are usually considered exceptions to the abortion
controversy, regardless of whether an individual is pro–choice or pro–life; but, what about women
who are getting abortions for other reasons? Aside from rape and incest, females are getting
abortions for the wrong, illegitimate reasons. Like most things in life, people tend to abuse any
privileges given to them, especially the privilege of abortion by choice. Elective abortions are being
carried out for purposes such as convenience or sex selection. Wm. Robert Johnston explained,
"About 98% of abortions in the United States are elective,

A Fetus Does Not Have The Right To Life Essay
There is not simple justification that our society can provide to distinguish who has a right to life
and who does not. My view is that just because a fetus and nonhuman animals do not fit exactly
under Warren's list of characteristics to being a human, does not mean it does not have a right to life.
Any animal, terminally ill human, growing fetus, or extraterrestrial being that is living has a right
to life. Some may argue that a fetus does not have a right to life because there is no specific stage
of fetal development that makes a fetus resemble a human enough. However, despite this claim to
be true, it does not provide a solid bases to claim that it does or does not have a significant right to
life. Therefore, both claims above do not make since because you cannot claim one to have a right to
life while denying the other; both human fetuses and nonhuman animals have a right to life....show
more content...
Now, in this situation, yes, a fetuses rights would be outweighed and over ran by the mother's
rights because hers are far more important and clear. A grown adult clearly has a right to life while
a fetuses may be questioned. However, this cannot possibly be enough to justify a growing fetus
to have or not to have a right to life. All Warren says is "the more like a person" you are "the
stronger its right to life is". This does not say a fetus is not human nor does it say a nonhuman
animal is not a human. It just says, the more you resemble a human, the stronger your right is,
which is also not a solid bases to claim that a fetus or nonhuman animal does or does not have a
significant right to

The word Holocaust can be defined as destruction or slaughter on a mass scale. Another definition
defines this as the killing of millions of Jews and other people by the Nazi's (1). This one simple
word has much more meaning attached to its name in world history. Just like Jews and other group
of people were persecuted, animals have been mistreated just as these human beings have. Just as a
holocaust is defined as a mass scale killing, thousands of animals are killed every day in the most
inhumane ways you could think of. Another point one might argue is that animals were given for us
to eat. As an animal activist I disagree with this argument due to the fact that both humans and
animals were given life on this earth and both should be...show more content...
Almost everything including their businesses and belongings were taken from them or broken.
Specifically, this act occurred at the start of the physical action taken against the Jews on November
9, 1938, in which is remembered as Kristallnacht or also known as the Night of Broken Glass (5).
Just like Jews, animals do not have the rights they should in order to live peacefully on this earth.
They are rounded up, taken to slaughterhouses and killed. Some are used for the testing of
experiments with make up or cosmetics causing these animals defects. Animals have been deprived
of the chance to live their lives in the way they were meant to: in homes with families and social
groups, tending to their young, and fulfilling their basic need. They are locked in cages, and have
their whole lives twisted and stole by vivisectors. Every experiment that is subjected to is a crime
against the animals. People can't forget that animal experimentation means the suffering and
destruction of sensitive, individual creature (6). Unfortunately, these issues with how animals are
treated are still occurring today. A book title Animal Liberation written by Peter Singer talks about
becoming vegetarian and vegan as well as animal rights and so much more (7).
A term that I have heard used on multiple occasions is that the Jews were "treated as animal". To me
this is implying that it is okay to treat animals in such way. Examples being,

Research Paper On Refugees
Introduction
The term refugee has been used a lot lately on news and other media outlets. As Americans when we
hear or think about a refugee, we always think of others. We think of the misplaced Syrians and the
children of war in Africa, we think of refugees from Afghanistan and those migrating here from
MiddlEast fearing prosecution of their oppressed governments; hardly ever we give a thought of
such term in association with an American. It does not accrue to us that stronger nations have fallen,
their territory taken, infrastructure destroyed and population displaced; such faith can befall in
America. Would an American passport still hail strong and win us access to another country, would
our currency remain strong or do we have to...show more content...
Under the International Refugee Law the rights of the refugees has been protected by a series of
Laws and standards both internationally and regionally. The list below names some of the
international laws and involved parties aiming to upkeep the rights of a refugee.
1.1951 convention relating to the status of the refugees
2.1967 protocol relating to the status of the refugee
3.Stats parties to the 1951 convention relating to the states of the Refugees and/ or the 1967 protocol
Financially the UNHCR has a 1 Billion dollar budget which is distributed to countries with
refugees aiming to help such countries provide for their refugees (UNHCR, 2011). Though the
hosting country has the primary responsibility to provide for the refugees, in this regards by
providing the land, basic needs, and medical needs of their refugees; neighboring countries, donors
and voluntary organizations also provide help by providing monetary aid, man power and basic
goods.
Recommendations
As mentioned by the scenario, most of the refugees traveled long distance without access to health
care, food, water and etc. Such individuals are expected to have major health concerns upon
arrival such as viral, bacterial disease, low immune system and lack of high gene (Circle of rights,
2000). The main focus upon arrival should be the health concerns since most of the refugees live in
small space and a simple disease could travel fast and infect large

Everyone has the hunger to be free. We want to be left alone. We want to go about our lives, not
having to conform to other people's demands. We want to be able to bear a firearm, to assemble
peacefully, to vote in fair elections, to speak freely, and to practice religion, all without the
government or a powerful group ordering us what we can and cannot do.
The Bill of Rights laid out the liberties and rights of its citizens. We are allowed to speak badly
about our government. We are able toprotest when we feel we have been wronged or we want
something changed. We can bear firearms freely. We have the right against being detained without a
speedy trial. We have the right not to self–incriminate ourselves. We have the to right to vote...show
more content...
There was nothing to do, no work, no school, no way out of their situation. The protests in Tunisia
showed the people lashing out against a corrupt government, and winning. Within ten days of the
protests beginning, Tunisia was free. The military often protects the dictator; however, this time the
military consisted of ordinary people. Since the military did not intervene, the transition was
relatively smooth and peaceful.
In Egypt, people used social networking to organize the uprisings against Hosni Mubarak. The
protesters poured into Tahrir square to demand the ouster of their dictator. Over 18 days, hundreds
of thousands of protesters cried out that they wanted change. Mubarak ruled with an iron fist for
over 30 years! He would not be stripped of power easily. The very day before he was removed from
office, Mubarak went on state television declaring that he would continue his regime until the next
election, but the protesters wanted change quickly. They would not accept repression anymore. The
military, instead of backing the dictator, chose the people's cause. After the successful uprising,
Tahrir square became a symbol of hope for all countries wanting to be free. "Copycat" protests began
springing up throughout the Arab world.
In Bahrain, Pearl Circle became the center for the Bahraini revolution. The country is relatively
small, with a population of only 1.2 million. The problem is that most the country is of the Shia sect
of

Essay on The right to live, the right to die.
Euthanasia, along with all other forms of medical involvement concerning the ending of human life
has been a subject of great controversy for some time, dating back to the times of Socrates, and is a
topic which has long attracted the attention of both medical and legal professionals, ethicists, and is
often brought up in general public debate (Huxtable & Campbell, 2003) The term euthanasia derives
from the Greek 'eu', which means 'good', and 'thanatos', meaning 'death' (Ladd, 1979). In a medical
context, the Hippocratic Oath popularly believed to be undertook by all practising physicians
suggests all medical practitioners will endeavour to ensure all patients' well being, it is all too easy
to misinterpret the oaths' meaning in order to...show more content...
This therefore implies that human beings inherit the implicit right to do as they please, whilst
simultaneously stating to do as one pleases in the context of euthanasia is profoundly wrong; thus
presenting an innately paradoxical case. However, in terms of empiricism, it could be argued that
religious connotations ought to be separated entirely from medical, thus scientific endeavours.
Despite this, the system of natural law is often tied to religious beliefs; going against all aspects of
self–preservation, thus deeming euthanasia as entirely unnatural (Phillips, 2004) However, in terms
of a patients' right to die, this does not hold any legal connotations, thus deeming both religion and
natural law as entirely subjective to the patients own beliefs. Furthermore to the topic of a patients
'right to die', although not necessarily acknowledging an inherent 'right' to die, the Suicide Act
(1961) made the act of suicide legal in the United Kingdom. However, as euthanasia is the
assisting of suicide, much consideration ought to be made for cases of assisted suicide. In the case
of James Brady (Schwartz, Preece & Hendry, 2002) who's brother Paul assisted in the ending of his
life through suffocation after a failed temazepam overdose, on purely compassionate grounds,
believing "...that he was acting in accordance with his brother's wishes on the evidence that James
had made

The Argument Of The Right To Die And Honoring
Beyond the argument of the right to die and honouring life lies man's explicit and fundamental
right to choose. Because we are human, we have the right to live our lives and determine our own
course. This explicit right touches on everything from what you you will do when you wake up in
the morning, to your actions and beliefs. The modern society that we lvie in is based on this very
right, and evolves because our inherent nature is explored. Naturally, this same self–determing
capacity by the nature of humans gives us the right to choose how we die.

Persuasive Essay On Right To Life
Right to life, that life of every human being is very valuable, is a core concept of human
civilization. All the major religions and philosophies declared that human life is inviolable. None has
any right to take the life of another. If anybody takes the life of another, s/he will be punished with
death penalty. This basic proposition has been accepted by most of the earlier human societies and it
has not been questioned until the modern humanitarian movement has taken momentum. Death
penalty is a relevant issue for every human society and it constitutes a "dilemma of hidden human
divinity versus hubristic death penalty." The concept of a right to life is central to debates on the
issues of capital punishment, euthanasia, self defense, abortion and war.
In 1776, the United States Declaration of Independence declared that all men are endowed with
certain inalienable rights, and that "among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly declared in article three:
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person."
In 1966, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was adopted by the United Nations
General Assembly.
"Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall
be arbitrarily deprived of his life."
–Article 6.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
In 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms enshrined that
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived
thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."
A central principle of a just society is that every person has an equal right to "life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness." Within that framework, an argument for capital punishment can be formulated
along the following lines: some acts are so vile and so destructive of community that they invalidate
the right of the perpetrator to membership and even to life. Those who violate the personhood of
others, especially if this is done persistently as a habit must pay the ultimate penalty. This
punishment must be

The Human Rights of Life, Liberty and Property
When Jack Donnelly said "Human rights are a social practice that aims to realize a particular vision
of human dignity and potential by institutionalizing basic rightsГўв‚¬В¦." I immediately realized that
to achieve this, the rights of life (race, religion, and gender), liberty and property are most vital. They
are the most important rights in order to attain the aforementioned dignity in that they are the rights
that touch our individual lives the most often and consistently. These three main rights, which make
up our Human Rights Code, cover a variety of different areas dealing with human rights but are also
able to fuse what really matters to human...show more content...
Religion should be a human right that everyone is entitled to choose because it provides a sanctuary
for people in our extremely diverse world.
The last right that's important to human rights pertaining to life is that of gender. Gender is very
important to human beings/rights because the world is separated into two distinct genders: male
and females. If one group was to go against the other than the world would be divided unequally
(leading to possible discrimination). This would not be beneficial to either males or females for the
reason that neither side could ever reach a general consensus about different subjects and issues.
Through this conflict, it would force both sides to stay separate and break the line of
communication between the two that is necessary to developing positive lives for everyone. Human
rights that deal with race, religion and gender are incredibly valuable as they help ensure that
everyone is treated equally while limiting the separation, as well as preventing conflict, between
different groups of people.
Liberty is a major part of our Human Rights Code in that it empowers us to freedom and speech,
freedom of association and freedom from arbitrary arrest and confinement.[2] Freedom of speech is
a very important asset for one to possess because without it many intelligent people would never be
heard. There are many people in the world

The Right to Life
The Right to Life
Introducation
The taking of human life has been strongly strongly criticized by most world religions and patterns
of thinking/ideas over the centuries. International human rights law has in turn tried to uphold this
most holy and untouchable of rights in a number of agreements between countries. The life of a
person is clearly protected from being randomly taken by the state.
The right to life is not, however, as (an extremely important thing that must not be changed or
damaged in any way) as it might seem at first sight. There are a number of situations where states
may take away from people of life itself and to which international human rights law does not raise
an objection. The use of the death penalty is one such example. Human rights law does not prohibit
the use of the death penalty as a punishment for crimes but does encourage its permanent ending and
try to limit its use. The use of violence in self–defence lies at the base of other (good reasons for:
thinking or doing something, or for the existence of something) for the taking of human life.
Killing is permitted at times of war save for the murder of people not in the military and prisoners
of war. Human rights law this way tries to respond to the many (having to do with right and wrong)
two–headed problems raised by the right to life by beginning and building on a range of prohibitions
and strong encouragements.
Rights at Stake
Every human being has the built–in right

Pro-Life Essay examples
Pro–Life
English I
1
Abortion, when the topic comes up, it is usually something people do not like to discuss. People
may tend to avoid this issue for fear of offending or angering others but it is extremely important
that the horrors of this brutal practice be addressed. During the years 1965–1996 over 515 million
babies have been murdered, this is if you add the number of chemical and surgical abortions
(www.rockforlife.org). This is what we need to understand: abortion kills and we need to know where
it came from.
The legalization of abortion started in Mississippi in the year 1966; it was used in the cases of
rape. Then other states began to expand the use of abortion. For instance, if it was the case of rape,
...show more content...
One way is called Partial Birth Abortion (D&X); it can kill babies up to thirty–two weeks old.
The abortionist (murderer in this case) removes all of the baby from the mother except for the
head, he then jab a pair of scissors in the back of the babies skull and then he uses a suction hose to
suck out the babies brain. Then he uses forceps to crush the babies' skull and pull the rest of the
babies' body out. Salt poisoning is also used, where salt is injected and the bay dies of convulsions
due to salt poisoning (www.rockforlife.org). If they can say this is not murder, then what is?
Abortion is not painless for the mother either. Over ninety–seven percent of women have reported
feeling pain it is often described as intense, severe, or very severe. Abortion is also not without side
effects. Complications such as bleeding, hemorrhaging, menstrual disturbances or inflammation of
the reproductive organs. Sometimes abortion can cause damage to the uterus and make the woman
infertile for the rest of her life. (Abortion some medical facts pamphlet.) Also if you are a women
and have had an abortion you increase your chances of having breast cancer by fifty percent.
Abortion has no good results in for the mother or the poor murdered baby. In the end it will always
cause physical and emotional pain.
What do religious beliefs have to do with abortion? They have everything to do with

Life Essay : Choosing The Right Path In Life
Choosing the Right Path in Life
Thorough out life we need to choose a path in life. This is the hardest decision we can make
because this is what determines our future and not choosing the right one can lead to poverty or
sadness for the rest of our lives. Choosing between our parents can be one decision but which parent
do we chose? We love both of them equally but how will they feel when you pick the other?
Another issue is choosing what to do with your life in total. Not all of us know what we want to
do in life and our parents just telling us to do what's best doesn't always help. Which path do we
take? How do we know what's better for us? Even having to choose can lead to sadness, so what do
we do?
What is best? This is a question that all of us ask ourselves throughout our life times numerous
times. Choosing what is best for us is hard because we don't know what will work out perfectly and
what we will fail to achieve. In the short story The Boat the only boy in the family is not being told
what to do. His parents have expectations for him to follow but it is his decision on which one to
chose. One parent will end up being disappointed but it is what the boy thinks is right to do. The boys
mother wants him to follow in her family's footsteps. She wants him to continue in the life of the
boat and not the city like his father wants him to. At the end of the day it is what the boy thinks is
right and what makes him happy. In the short story Mother To Son the boy does

Thomson Right To Life Analysis
Judith Jarvis Thomson, author of one of the most famous philosophical articles on abortion discusses
the distinction between "the right to life" and "the right to be given at least the bare minimum one
needs for continued life." Thomson uses these terms as well as her famous violinist story and other
examples to illustrate the morality and righteousness of abortion. Contradictory to most ethical
writings on abortion, Thomson deviates from the argument regarding the fetus development and
when/if a fetus becomes a person. For purposes of Thomson's article, a fetus is a person from
conception.
Thomson defines 'the right to life' by stating "the right to life consists not in the right not to be
killed, but rather in the right not to be killed unjustly."(441) Unjustly is defined as "depriving
someone of what he/she has the right to." Thomson elucidates this by showing an example of two
brothers jointly given a box of chocolates for Christmas. If the older brother takes the chocolates
and denies his brother the right to any then he is unjust to him because he has taken away his right
to the chocolate. If the box of chocolates was only given to the older brother and not jointly given to
both, we would say he ought to share but is not acting unjustly because...show more content...
Contradictory to a rape; a man and a woman fully aware of the consequences of intercourse have
given the right to life to the unborn person, therefor an abortion would result in a morally
impermissible action. In conclusion to Thomson's definition of the 'right to life', abortion is morally
acceptable in cases that do not result in "unjust" killing, including rape and failed contraception. It
can be concluded that abortion is morally impermissible in situations where the right to the use of
the woman's body has been granted and then taken away by

Right To Life Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Best Paper Writing Services

More from Best Paper Writing Services (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Right To Life Essay