Extrinsic Reasons: Objections
	CONTINUE ON

If you accept this argument, you must reply to at least two objections. In the first place, someone may charge that the conclusion does not follow from the premises. The welfare of women as it is influenced by restrictions on abortion is obviously an important concern in this situation. But there are other concerns that are at least as important. If we make a decision to withhold rights from the embryo/fetus, then we should make similar decisions in similar cases. But there are many borderline cases such a severely retarded children, people in comas, people with terminal diseases that require expensive treatment, and so on. Many of these individuals will be women. If we begin to withhold rights and personhood from all of these, we will be creating a culture in which only the healthy and the strong will have rights.

Furthermore, this approach violates the ordinary dictates of morality governing situations in which we are uncertain about what to do. For example, if a hunter sees something behind a bush but cannot tell whether it is an animal or a person, most of us would agree that he or she should not shoot. We should 'play safe' when killing someone may be the outcome. Likewise, in the case of the embryo/fetus, if we cannot deduce whether it is a person or a non-person, we should play safe. In other words, abortion should be restricted precisely because we are uncertain about the personhood of the embryo/fetus.

Ariadne Home	Abortion Bibliography	Abortion Home