Many Pro choice advocates dislike the idea of self induced abortion, stating that it gives a woman the ability to induce a harmful process unto her body. Pro life activists are completely against the idea of placing a future childs’ destiny in the hands of the irresponsible mother. Nonetheless, it is abortion- in another fashion. Until a contraceptive is researched, tested, and marketed, there is no real way to prevent a pregnancy, unless a woman abstains. There are the cases of pregnancy incurred from rape. If this so just be the case, and a woman has access to “the morning after pill”, then it is acceptable for her to take the pill to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. There is not a completely effective means of birth control available yet, to the public. If there were, then abortion could be abolished, and unwanted pregnancies wouldn’t occur. In conclusion, abortion is the intentional termination of pregnancy resulting in the death of the fetus. A fetus is a person and has a right to life. I believe Immanuel Kant would suggest that maybe a woman has a duty to abort a child for the mere fact that she has a duty not to bring that child into the world. On the other hand, he might state that she has a duty to give that child the right to live life to the fullest. The child may lead a prosperous life that leads to happiness and aborting it would deprive that. We as people have a moral duty to do what is ethically correct for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism is acting so as to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our actions according to John Stuart Mill (51). Legalizing abortion affects us all. If no one were able to have an abortion, then everyone would have an equal right to life. Who is to say that is not for the greatest balance of good over bad for everyone. Abortion is seriously wrong except perhaps in rare cases. ...
