A View on the Immorality of Abortion vs Its Protection according to the Concepts of Social Darwinism – Term Paper Example

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper “ A View on the Immorality of Abortion vs Its Protection according to the Concepts of Social Darwinism" is a dramatic variant of a term paper on social science. Abortion is fundamentally immoral and unconstitutional and even though there are laws that permit it, they do so by misinterpreting the meaning of the term human life and purporting it begins at birth, not conception. The primary basis on which it is opposed is that it constitutes taking away a human life that no one has the right to take away.

Given that if the embryo is left alone it would gradually develop into a full-grown human being recognized as an independent legal and moral entity with rights; thus, they should be just as protected as everyone else should. Abortion is in direct contradiction of the moral and social dictates every so-called civilized society since it essentially involves the cold-blooded killing of unarmed and defenseless humans. The reasons given for abortions are innumerable with the main ones being to get rid of unwanted pregnancies or to preserve the freedom of the mother and even for population control (May 317).

However, the fact that someone has to be put to death to further any of these agendas deems the perpetrators no better than convicted killers. The concepts of social Darwinism on which despots like Adolf Hitler based their acts of genocide against innocents are actually the same ones used to justify abortion. Briefly, implies killing someone simply because one feels they have no place in the society or they think they will not be productive, and the victim is however never given a chance to state their case.

Furthermore, contrary to claims that fetuses do not feel pain, there has been scientific evidence opposing this and many doctors actually believe that the process of abortion is an extremely painful and torturous one. The fact that there is no consensus on the matter leaves space for reasonable doubt on how the fetus feels when it is being torn apart or suctioned. This should at least discourage people from carrying it out even if on a humanitarian basis for the sake of the pain they have to put the fetus through before it dies.

Pro-abortionists on the other hand claim that abortion is moral since a woman has a right to her reproductive system and should not have to be forced to raise a child of she were not willing to. However, while conceding they do indeed have such a right, and it can only exist in as far as they are not pregnant; however, the moment they get pregnant they automatically waive it. This means that anyone wishing to take control of their reproductive system should not get pregnant in the first place.

Finally, despite the claim that fetuses are not conscious of their own existence and that abortion should not constitute a crime to kill them. This is an impractical and illogical excuse for wanton killing and it is no more sensible than claiming that it should legal to kill someone who is unconscious or in a coma. Ultimately, despite the arguments to the contrary, abortion remains morally unacceptable and should be viewed as a universally legally reprehensible action.

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us