Tag Archives: Abortion

A Woman’s Right to Life

Objectivist ethics is a morality of rational self-interest—or of rational selfishness.

 

To most rational women an unplanned pregnancy is nothing short of a disaster, and it is a woman’s right to life and selfishness, as in – her fundamental right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness that she has as a human being, that gives her the right to terminate that pregnancy, if it is in her own best interest or desire to do so. It is her own right to life to make this decision, and phrases such as “right to life” are hypocritical when used by anti-abortion activists, who simply don’t deserve to be called “pro-life”. In reality, they are anti-life. A woman has a right to her own life, which is sacred only to living beings, not potential beings. The rights of a woman are tragically and heinously ignored by anti-abortion activists, which at its root is one of the biggest issues here. It is the actual living person who counts, not the potential of an embryo. Claiming that an embryo has a right to life over that of the woman is hideous nonsense.

To objectively observe the issue of abortion one must define what constitutes a human life, and not get that confused with what is surely only the potential of life. In its earliest stages, an embryo is essentially a small growth of cells which do not constitute an individual. This tiny cluster of cells is not physically individual from the mother, and further, a woman is not obligated to that cluster of cells over her own desires for her own life that has already begun. To some women, that cluster of cells may as well be cancerous, and who has the gall to tell that woman to let it grow? 

The attitude of the anti-abortionist is simple: “To hell with the individual lives of women! Give up your God-given rights and the pursuit of your own happiness for this embryo that is only the potential of a person. Forget your finances, your mental and physical health, your goals and dreams for yourself. You don’t matter anymore. The cluster of cells is more important than your actual, real, existing life”.  Anything that threatens the ideal fulfillment of a person’s life, their desires, their goals, dreams, their own selfishness, should be discarded. If something hinders or threatens an individual’s life, or does nothing to further that individuals life or happiness, it is not good and should not forcibly be pursued.

Comments Off on A Woman’s Right to Life

Filed under Rand

Generalized Abortion Laws Are Inhumane

The subject of this essay is the limit of government exercise of its will over a pregnant individual, and its use of a general decision to decide the common good in all cases. The expectation of happiness for a developing fetus cannot be foreseen; therefore, consideration of the fetus’ happiness is neutral. A heartbeat does not equate to consciousness. We know that this occurs when people have brain stem injuries and have no consciousness, yet they still have a heartbeat and can be removed from life support, comparable to an abortion post-heartbeat but pre-consciousness. The ambiguity of consciousness precludes any generalized rules forcing or preventing abortions on obscure timelines, such as the 6-week law.

Furthermore, since there is no immediate happiness that exists within an unconscious being, the immediate happiness of the mother and others involved are the secondary concern, while the primary concern is society as a whole— the happiness of the community. If a couple is forced to birth a child that they do not want or cannot afford, this will cause psychological and emotional distress to the couple and very possibly transfer an economic burden to the community. I have noted that “to bring a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able, not only to provide food for its body, but instruction and training for its mind, is a moral crime, both against the unfortunate offspring and against society; and that if the parent does not fulfill this obligation, the State ought to see it fulfilled, at the charge, as far as possible, of the parent,” (On Liberty, Chapter 5).

According to the government’s own research, any pain the fetus might potentially experience during an abortion does not exist until at least twenty weeks; therefore, this aspect of consideration for the pain of the fetus must in the least require that expectant mothers have fourteen more weeks (twenty weeks, rather than six) to execute an abortion and must be weighed against the pain of others. As for the mother, how would one know the variance in potential pain from the sixth to the twentieth week? There is no relative proof that waiting fourteen more weeks causes a mother more pain. In fact, it provides more time for a mother to consciously decide about the potential of emotional happiness or pain that the pregnancy could produce for herself and her family. I maintain that each person “is the proper guardian of [his/ her/ their] own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual” (On Liberty, Chapter 1). Also, many women are unaware of their pregnancies until about five weeks in or beyond. I repeat that “independence is, of right, absolute. Over [himself/ herself/ their-self], over [his/ her/ their] own body and mind, the individual is sovereign,” yet there is no consideration for the sovereignty of an expectant woman who does not even know she is pregnant and needs to make a choice about ending her pregnancy according to the law (On Liberty, Chapter 1).

It is impossible to make generalized laws about abortion because each particular case has its own endlessly fluctuating variables. I have before asserted that the “potential aggregate of qualities in the individual must be fostered as an antidote to the ills of a drab social uniformity,” meaning that our individuality expresses in “differences of conduct and practice, in diverse displays of spontaneity and energy, and in distinct styles of living” which explains the inherent variability that makes generalization of the law inhumane (On Liberty: Individual, Society, and State). Blanket rules about when birth can no longer be terminated do not agree with a hedonistic-utilitarian model because each situation requires holistic consideration.

Comments Off on Generalized Abortion Laws Are Inhumane

Filed under Mill