Exploring the Ethical Issues of Abortion - Essay Example

Dialogue on the Ethical Issue of Abortion Chairman: I would like to take this opportunity to thank you all for accepting my invitation into this panel where we shall explore the issue of abortion in depth. Before I introduce my guests, I would like to state at the onset that debate about abortion has continued to make news headlines all over the world. It is also one of the issues that have attracted great attention both in the political, legal, religious and the secular spheres of life as different people try to unfold the mystery that lies in abortion (BBC Ethics Guide, 2003). Mainly, debate on abortion has centred on whether abortion should be treated and perceived as murder or whether abortion should be entrenched into the laws of the country in order to allow women to carry out abortion at their choice (Cline, 2011). Without pre-emptying what some schools of thoughts have held about the issue of abortion, it is imperative to note that the issue of abortion will in no doubt continue to attract intense debate from different quotas now and also in the future as people try to reach a consensus on whether abortion should be legalised or not. Having introduced the topic, I will introduce my guests who are also the panellists that will offer their insight about the issue of abortion. I have on the panel Mr. John Geoffrey, the Chief Clergy of Evangelical ministries. He represents the Christian views about abortion. Mr. Salim Mohammed El Kainan, the Chief Sheikh of the Downhill Mosque. He will represent the views of the Islamic religion on the issue of abortion. Mr. Sospeter Kelvin will represent the views of atheism society regarding the issue of abortion. Once again, welcome gentlemen to this debate. Chairman: I believe that in one way or the other we have all heard about the issue of abortion. Briefly, what clicks into your mind when abortion is mentioned? John Geoffrey: Thank you. What clicks into my mind when abortion is mentioned is an EVIL that is slowly streaming into the society with numerous justifications as to why it should be allowed into the society (Neil, 2006). I also wish to quote from Kantian ethics that “it is not the consequences of actions that make them right or wrong but the motives of the person who carries out the action” (Neil, 2006). Hence, carrying out abortion for selfish reason is morally wrong. Salim: Thank you. When abortion is mentioned, what clicks into my mind is another form of human murder that the society is slowly accepting and justifying because the previous forms of human murder have continued to be painful on the culprits (Paul &Thiry, 2001). Hence, it is a reflection of the rotten nature of the contemporary society in which we are living. Mr. Kelvin: Thank you. From my viewpoint, it is evident that the issue of abortion has been misinterpreted and argued with little regard on the rights of women. In this regard, when the issue of abortion is mentioned, what clicks in my mind is an avenue that has come to disentangle women from their persistent pain and problems of carrying unwanted children and foetuses which they do not appreciate or will never appreciate (Clifford, 2003). Abortion to me is therefore a remedy for dealing with the immense problem of having street children in our midst as well as liberating women from the pain and the burden of rearing children they do not appreciate. Chairman: Thank you for your opening remarks and your thoughts about abortion. I would like us to look at the issue of human life? What are your thoughts and opinions about the value of human life? John Geoffrey: In contributing to the issue of human life, I would like to state at the onset that human life is a sacred gift from God. Think of the scripture Genesis 1: 26. God created man and breathed life in him. This means that life originated from God and is therefore sacred. In this perspective, I would still hold onto the opinions held by philosophers and theologians such as John Locke, Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant that human life is a loan or a gift advanced to us by God and thus we have no right over human life (Richard, 2005). This means that we have got no right to take away human life or engage in any activities likely to damage human life. Hence, human life is not our property. For instance, when you get a loan from the bank, the loan is somebody else property and not your property which means that the property should be taken care of with utmost dignity and watchfulness because it has to be returned to the owner in the future. Sheikh Salim: Just like my colleague has ably stated, human life is a sacred gift or loan advanced to human beings by God. In this respect, we have to show appreciation of the gift we have received by respecting the sanctity of human life (Paul &Thiry, 2001, p.25). However, From the Islamic standpoint it is important for me to state that no matter what the circumstances, human life remains the property of Allah the maker and the giver of all things. Hence, no one should even think that they own their lives or the lives of other people. Mr. Kelvin: I completely disagree with the arguments presented by my colleagues above that human life is a gift or a loan from God. The reason for this is that when a person gives you a gift then it remains at your discretion to decide what to do with it. There are no conditions that should be attached to a gift because if conditions are attached then it ceases to be a gift. I therefore wish to present the following objections as to the value of human life as a gift from God. First, if life is a gift, it means that the beneficiary has full discretion to do with it as he/she pleases. Second, there is no way we can continue to be grateful for unworthy gifts. For example, some people live in abject poverty and pain. Does this mean that some gifts are meant to inflict pain on the beneficiaries? Therefore, I do not believe that there is a “God” or “god” that can advance life as a gift to a human being only for it to be a source of pain to the benefactor. Chairman: Mr. Kelvin has raised very weighty concerns and objections about human as a “gift” from God. Do you have any response to his arguments? John Geoffrey: Absolutely. First, I appreciate the fact that as an atheist, Mr. Kelvin does not believe in the existence of God. However, I would like to state clearly that when a person is given a gift, it does not give him the absolute right to do with the gift as he deserves. The benefactor still carry and hold moral obligation to guide the beneficiary on how to use the gift for his/her own benefit both because of its status as a gift or its intrinsic value. Hence, the beneficiary does not have the right to squander the gift or use it wantonly or carelessly because this would reflect a high level of immoral character which would mean that the benefactor is entitled to intervene in the process in order to avoid the malformation of the gift. Hence, human life is a gift from God and God reserves the moral obligation to guide human beings on how to use their lives. Sheikh Salim: I am very disturbed that at this point in life, Mr Kelvin claims that he does not believe in God (Allah) who has sustained him to this point in time. However, notwithstanding his disbelief, I would like to state and inform Mr. Kelvin that just like systems and subsystems work and function to compensate each another, particular frustrations cannot be avoided in human life because they also add up to the totality and completeness of human life. Pain and suffering as well as happiness and satisfaction compensate each other (Brockopp, 2003). Hence, we are obliged to be grateful even for unsatisfactory gifts because they have a role to play in making life complete. We cannot gauge the fulfilment of human life in terms of only the good opportunities that we experience but also on the bad experiences we go through. Chairman: We have dealt with the issue of the value of human life as a gift or a loan advanced to us by God with the objective of finding whether we are obliged to carefully use the gift as per the conditions laid down by the benefactor. When do you think life begins and what is your take about the rights of the foetus? Mr. Kelvin: I would like to reiterate that it is wrong to argue that life begins at conception as is the view held by many people particularly in the religious sphere. From the biological perspective, it is wrong to treat a newly fertilized ovum as though it had the same value as a fully developed human being. A newly fertilized ovum, in my view, can just be likened to an object such as a wood or stone and thus if it does not have any significance in the life of the woman carrying it, it should be terminated or eliminated. Hence, the foetus can be regarded just as a “bundle of cells” and the mother reserves the right to either carry the bundle of cells or reject the bundle of cells and thus carry out an abortion to eliminate the bundle of cells (Channer, 1985). John Geoffrey: I completely disagree with the views presented by Mr. Kelvin. In doing this, I would like to state equivocally that human life begins at conception. Hence, the actual fertilisation of the egg by the sperm gives birth to a new human life. The ensoulment starts immediately the egg and the sperm meet and the egg gets fertilised. This is an important consideration because it then helps us differentiate between the egg, the sperm and the embryo because the sperm and the eggs are just cells but they transform into a human life when they meet and form an embryo (Bourne, 2002). Hence, human life begins at conception. In the Old Testament and particularly, Exodus 21:22, anybody who hit a pregnant woman and she miscarried was punished through a death penalty. The reason for this is that the pregnant woman was deemed to carry a human life and thus miscarriage was equal to killing an innocent person. It is important to note that the foetus grows from one stage to the other into a fully grown foetus. The first stage of the foetus is when they egg and the sperm meet and form the embryo. This is the time life begins and consequently grows through other stages. Hence, life begins at conception and the removal of the foetus at any stage from its conception amounts to killing of an innocent person. Sheikh Salim: In Islamic religion, the foetus in the womb must be protected because it is the life of another person. However, the ensoulment of the foetus (Ruh) is a subject of debate because different segments of Islamic religion are divided on the time of Ruh (ensoulment). Some argue that ensoulment begins at conception while others argue that Ruh begins after 40 days or 120 days after conception or 12 weeks (Donna, 2004, p54-55). The reason for these differences is that neither sunna, hadith nor Quran say anything about the issue of abortion. However, the Quran insists on the value of human life and thus it is clear that the Quran is explicitly clear about respecting the rights of human life including the unborn children. In fact, in Quranic scripture 23:12-14, it is evidently clear that even the sperm counts in the formation of a human being. What this means is that human life begins at conception and thus every other stage of foetal development comes about after conception. Therefore, from my view and the view presented by Quran, life begins at the ensoulment stage which is 40 days after conception (Jones, 2004). Any termination of the foetus after 40 days is prohibited and thus termination of the foetus before 40 days is allowed. Nevertheless, due to the fact that many women may not keep accurate records from the time when they engaged in sexual activity up to 40 days, termination of foetus through abortion is not allowed in Islamic religion because this might be an avenue for cheating and lying in order to do away with unwanted pregnancies (Jones, 2004). Chairman: If this is the case, then do you think that abortion is permissible at some point in the woman’s life? Mr. Kelvin: Yes. Without beating about the bush, a woman has all the rights to carry out abortion because she is the sole determinant of her path in life. Allow me to argue from the philosophical point of view basing my arguments on utilitarianism perspective advanced by philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bethany. It holds that an action can be considered to be proper when it maximises the happiness of many. For instance, if the woman was gang raped and subsequently became pregnant, such a woman is likely to experience more pain when she delivers and continuously feel pain when she sees the child that reminds her of the painful ordeal she went through when she was raped (Parrinder, 1993). In order to maximise her happiness and the happiness of many other women that go through such painful experiences abortion should be allowed. Abortion in this case would be the action that maximises the happiness of the majority of women. Sheikh Salim: As I have stated earlier, it is against the will of Allah for any man to commit murder or kill another person. I would like to base my argument from the philosophical point of view on categorical imperative. In his arguments on moral philosophy, Immanuel Kant argued about “categorical imperative” (Brockopp, 2003). He defined categorical imperative as moral obligations which every human being is entitled to obey if he/she is to be regarded as a morally upright individual. Hence, categorical imperatives must be obeyed by all in all situations. From this argument, it is evident that abortion is not a categorical imperative because it does not generate the concept of duty (Englefield, 2004). For example, a pregnant woman is obligated and has the duty to carry the pregnancy to the time of delivery. Hence, no matter the situation, a pregnant woman should not be allowed to abort the foetus and hence abortion is not permissible at any point in life (Paton, 1971). John Geoffrey: I only hold one opinion which amounts to criticism of theologians that oppose abortion. Theologians have opposed abortion without due regard to medical complications during pregnancy. Abortion should only be permitted when it endangers the life of the mother due to a given level of complications (Franowski & Cole, 1987). However, the level of complications should be left to the medical specialist to determine the extent and the nature of the complications. At this point, this should not be regarded as abortion but it should be regarded to as a medical case or emergency. Any other issues such as deformity or likelihood of the child to be born with disability should not be used as reasons for encouraging abortion because the life of the disabled child is given by God and therefore that life should be protected. Hence, abortion should not be permitted in any stage of pregnancy if it is not for medical emergency or medical reason. Chairman: Thanks you very much for your input in this issue of abortion. As you have witnessed the topic attracts varied opinions with different schools of thoughts raising their arguments about the issue of abortion. It is evident that reaching a consensus on whether to legalise abortion or not calls for further and numerous consultations with all stakeholders in order to make a decision that maximises on the wellbeing of women and their children. It is the role of each one of us to research further and interact with different segments of the society to get further information about this issue of abortion before a policy is implemented on abortion. Thank you all. References BBC Ethics Guide. (2003). Introduction to the abortion debate. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/philosophical/introduction.shtml Brockopp, J. (2003). Islamic Ethics of Life: Abortion, War and Euthanasia. Oxford: Oxford University Publishers. Bourne, R. (2002). The Status of the embryo in religious perspectives: Abortion. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Channer, J. (1985). Abortion and the Sanctity of Human Life Exeter: Paternoster. Cline, A. (2011). Ethics of abortion: Is it Moral or Immoral to have an abortion? Internet Journal of Law, Healthcare and Ethics, Vol 12, No.4 Clifford, G. (2003). Understanding Morality about abortion. Journal of Religious Ethics, vol 6, No 7. Donna, L. (2004). “Contemporary Muslim Ethics of Abortion” in Brockopp, J. E. (ed) Islamic Ethics of Life: Abortion, War and Euthanasia, pp.51-80, pp.54-5. Englefield, R. (2004). Kant as Defender of the Faith and Morality in Nineteenth-century England", Question, 12, 16–27, Pemberton, London Franowski, S., & Cole. G. (1987). Abortion and Protection of the Human Fetus: Legal Problems in a Cross-Cultural Perspective Dordrecht: Nijhoff. Jones, D. (2004). The Soul of the Human Embryo: An Enquiry into the Status of the Human Embryo in the Christian Tradition London: Continuum Neil, M. (2006). Christian Ethics: SCM Study Guide, p.175. Richard, H. (2005). “Delivering Public Policy: The Status of the Embryo and Tissue Typing” Studies in Christian Ethics 18:1, 57-74. Pp.65-6. Parrinder, G. (1993). Sex in the World’s Religions Oxford: OUP. Paton, H. (1971). The Categorical Imperative; a study in Kant's moral philosophy, University of Pennsylvania Press. Paul, H. &Thiry, B. (2001). System of Nature; or, the Laws of the Moral and Physical World, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, Vol. 1, p. 25. Read More