Article Text
Abstract
Most opposition to abortion turns on the claim that human fetuses are full moral agents from conception (or soon afterwards). Critics argue that antiabortion theorists act hypocritically when they neglect spontaneous abortions—valuing some fetal lives and not others. Many philosophers draw a distinction between killing and letting die, with the former being morally impermissible and latter acceptable. Henrick Friberg-Fernros appeals to this distinction with his Two Tragedies Argument, contending that anti-abortion theorists are justified in prioritising preventing induced abortions over spontaneous ones, as the former involves two tragedies—a death and a killing. However, induced abortion can involve either killing or letting die, and thus this view is incompatible with the traditional anti-abortion view. Furthermore, Friberg-Fernros appears to value preventing killing attempts more than preventing actual deaths.
- abortion
- killing
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The Two tragedies argument
- Cursed lamp: the problem of spontaneous abortion
- Within the limits of the defensible: a response to Simkulet’s argument against the pro-life view on the basis of spontaneous abortion
- Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise
- The inconsistency argument: why apparent pro-life inconsistency undermines opposition to induced abortion
- Prolife hypocrisy: why inconsistency arguments do not matter
- Responding to Simkulet’s objections to the two tragedies argument
- Inconsistency arguments still do not matter
- Defending the two tragedies argument: a response to Simkulet
- Reproductive autonomy and the ethics of abortion