After our symposium talk on abortion I continued to think
about the Utilitarian view on the matter. I came to the decision that
Utilitarian would most likely choose pro life over pro choice, I’m not saying
that is what I think as an individual, but it seemed when thinking through the
issue there were greater reasons to support killing the fetus than giving birth
in many situations. Utilitarianism is the thought that actions are right if
they benefit or being happiness to a majority of the population. I have come to
think that a utilitarian’s view on abortion could be that it could be a good
thing or a bad thing. One could argue that there is an overpopulation in
today’s society which contribute to a large amount of people starving and
living in unhealthy conditions, therefore a utilitarian could say that it would
benefit the well being of the worlds population if a baby was aborted rather
than taking already limited resources. Another reason a utilitarian could
potentially support abortion would be because of the inability of a single parent
raising a child, making abortion a good option because it would put less of a
burden on society with less people on welfare or government assistance and less
children growing up in a broken family where crime and addition are more
common. Also, sometimes having a child can decrease the happiness in
relationships and sometimes lead to break ups, arguments, and divorce. Thoughts?
I agree with you that a utilitarian would probably be pro choice than than pro life in the U.S. debate about abortion. A mother being able to make the choice to abort seems to cause happiness because it attributes some freedom to fully functioning reasonable adults. It also seems to eliminate the pain in the life of unwanted children ( refer to "I hate my mom"http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Hate-My-Mother/2405)
ReplyDeleteSome may argue that abortion may cause pain for people who believe abortion is wrong. Then again, we don't really know if it's pain or if it's just simple hate about not getting everything one wants. Our brain is not like that of the fetus so we cannot sympathize and relate to the pain of the fetus. Therefore, the only pain we as adult humans could sympathize with is that of the pregnant women (both emotional and physical pain). People who are pro life probably could not sympathize with/ have not yet experienced the pain of the pregnant women who have to abort. People who are pro choice, are ones who can/would like to sympathize with the pregnant women.
Kant would say that sympathy does not count as a moral motivation. However, do all pregnant women have the duty to give birth and raise children? Do we have the duty to shame them into doing so? If not, maybe Kant would be pro choice as well, but for slightly different reasons.