The Language of Argument

3 8 7

T h e P r o b l e m o f A b o r t i o n

We have arrived, then, at a principle that seems to make sense out of a position

that is against abortion but in favor of the death penalty and self-defense. With

these modifications included, the argument now looks like this:

(1**) It is always morally wrong to kill an innocent human being

except in self-defense.

(2) Abortion involves killing a human fetus.

(3) A human fetus is a human being.

(4*) A human fetus is innocent.

∴(5) Abortion is always morally wrong.

Again, however, by making the premises more plausible, we created a new

problem: The argument is invalid as it stands, since the qualification “except

in self-defense” is missing from the conclusion. The proper conclusion of the

argument should be:

(5*) Abortion is always morally wrong except in self-defense.

Rewriting the conclusion in this way has an important consequence: The

argument no longer leads to a conclusion that abortion is always wrong.

This qualified conclusion could permit abortion in those cases in which it

is needed to defend the life of the pregnant woman who bears the fetus.

In fact, this is the position that many people who are generally opposed to

abortion adopt: Abortion is wrong except in those cases in which it is nec-

essary to save the life of the mother. Although this does not lay down an

absolute prohibition, it is still a strong anti-abortion position, since it would

condone abortion in only a few exceptional cases.

“Pro-Choice” Responses

We can now examine the way in which those who adopt the liberal or

“pro-choice” position will respond to the conservative or “pro-life”

argument as it has just been spelled out. The second premise should not be

a subject for controversy, given our definition of abortion. Nor does it seem

likely that the fourth premise will be attacked on the ground that the fetus is

not innocent. How could a fetus be guilty of anything?

This leaves three strategies for the liberal: (1) Further modify the moral

principle in the first premise to allow more exceptions. (2) Deny the third

premise—that the fetus is a human being. (3) Oppose this conservative

argument with a different argument based on a different moral principle.

Fu r t h e r Mo d iF i c a t i o n s. Even if it is agreed that abortion is justified

when it saves the mother ’s life, we still need to ask whether this is the only

exception or whether abortion is justified in other cases as well. Many pro-

life conservatives admit that abortion is also justified when the pregnancy

results from rape or incest. It is not easy to see how to modify the moral

principle against killing to allow an exception in cases of rape and incest, so

97364_ch19_ptg01_383-422.indd 387 11/15/13 5:45 PM

some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materiallyCopyright 201^3 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,

affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.