Bell Hooks, Gilligan, Noonan, Abortion
Different perceptions regarding abortion have been around for a long time. Just as with other discussions, the issue of abortion, its justification and criticism continue to elicit mixed emotions. It is imperative to understand the various arguments brought forth by different writers regarding the issue of abortion. In this context, the arguments are analyzed from both feminist and religious or moral perspectives.
Bell Hooks looks at abortion from a feminist perspective in her article titled Our Bodies, Ourselves: Reproductive Rights. Her purpose is to persuade the reader to view abortion as a right. She asserts that the right to abortion is part of the reproductive rights that women should enjoy (Hooks 26). According to Hooks, women have the right to decide what to do with their bodies. However, she fails to consider the effect of a woman's decision on others.
Hooks assert that sexual liberation for women comes with legal and safe abortion. She fails to talk about the need for safe sex by use of protection, which can help reduce the cases of unwanted pregnancy. Furthermore, she does not talk about the sexually transmitted infections that results from what she calls free love (Hooks 26).
[...] For instance, it is imperative to educate people on the consequences of abortion e.g. the guilt associated with it and the prospect of never having children after abortion. Furthermore, Hook's statement that even women who choose not to abort but support feminism movements are pro-choice is false. Some women may be antiabortion but still support other feminist ideologies. Hooks assertion many of my peers saw abortion as a better choice than conscious, vigilant use of birth control pills (Hooks 29)”fails to justify the need for abortion. [...]
[...] Abortion: Three perspectives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Funds, A., & Barzelatto, J. (2006). The human drama of illegal abortion: global search for consensus. Nashville, Tenn: Vanderbilt University Press. Callahan, S. C., & Callahan, D. (1984). Abortion: Understanding differences. New York: Plenum Press. [...]
[...] There can never be a justification for abortion because it goes against humanity's right to life. Noonan questions the nature of humanity, whereby he asserts that a fetus is human and enjoys an absolute (near) right to life (Noonan 89). A fetus is human because human beings conceive it whether from consent or otherwise. Therefore, an unborn baby does not have to pay for the mistakes committed by the parents. According to Noonan, humanization happens at conception when the new being receives the genetic code, the biological carrier of possibility of human wisdom. [...]
[...] Different perceptions regarding abortion have been around for a long time. Just as with other discussions, the issue of abortion, its justification and criticism continue to elicit mixed emotions. It is imperative to understand the various arguments brought forth by different writers regarding the issue of abortion. In this context, the arguments are analyzed from both feminist and religious or moral perspectives. Bell Hooks looks at abortion from a feminist perspective in her article titled Our Bodies, Ourselves: Reproductive Rights. [...]
[...] The embryo is responsive to touch and experiences in a morally important sense (Noonan 92). He argues that a fetus is just like an adult who has aphasia, which is the loss of memory. If such a person forgets all his experiences, it does not make him less human. People justify abortion by assuming that a fetus cannot be seen and is out of touch with the rest of the world. However, Noonan asserts that the sight is less reliable than feeling. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
