Abortion and Infanticide Michael Tooley Term Paper

Abortion and Infanticide Michael Tooley - Term Paper Example The researcher states that in his article Abortion and Infanticide Michael Tooley argues that embryos, fetuses and very young infants do not have a right to life due to their failure to satisfy â€Å"the self-consciousness requirement.† Argument of Tooley’s In the year 1972, Micheal Tooley has written the article ‘Abortion and Infanticide’. This article covered various aspects of abortion and infanticide from the Tooley’s perspective. The essay dealt with the morality issue of abortion and infanticide and questioned based on moral principles. These moral principles defined the basic rights of life. The author compared human fetus and infants to the adult members of various species like dogs, cats, polar bears and others and argued over the right to life issue. The author points out the morally relevant difference of newborn baby and earlier stage of development of human being. There are different views over the issue of abortion among the conservativ e view and others. Tooley argues that abortion issue differs from the moral issue as it appears in extreme positions from the conservative point of view of looking at it as a person. In the case where is not identified as a person than how it can be wrong in destroying it. Tooley explains infanticide from an emotional angle and regards it receiving the similar reaction from the society as it does in the cases linked with taboos of masturbation or oral sex in the past. However, the response to the infanticide is much stronger. Tooley differentiates the terms person and human beings and regards a person to be a moral concept. He explained the arguments of Roger Wertheimer in the opposition of abortion as Wertheimer used the term human being and person interchangeably and explained that from the moment of conception a fetus is a human being or a person. Tooley further compared the issue of abortion to the issue o Negro slavery. Tooley agrees to the same and draws the similar meaning fr om the term human being and person. The argument goes further in justifying that a person means a right to life. Tooley discusses that the strength of life with the simple explanation of being self conscious entity is incomplete as it will qualify all the animals in our everyday life to be person who are getting murdered for our preferences i.e. â€Å"Once one reflects upon the question of the basic moral principles involved in the ascription of a right to life to organisms, one may find himself driven to conclude our everyday treatment of animals is morally indefensible, and that we are in fact murdering innocent persons. † There have been three counterexamples of the claims of rights and desired in which desire can be absent due to emotional disturbance, it can be of a situation of temporarily unconscious of a previously conscious person or it can be absent due to manipulation. The arguments of morality can be different from each of the case. Tooley reinforces the need to h ave a demarking line where infanticide can have a clear cutoff point. There should be a line that can guide people to the safer side of the morality. Objection to Tooley’s Article Arp and Mahaffey explain the definition of person to be the one with the capacity of being rational or have intelligence, mental states on the issues like beliefs, desires, emotions, and self-awareness is strong and robust; use language, involved in relationships with other people and is morally responsible for one’s actions. Tooley’s essay treats the issue of abortion and infanticide with the vulnerable way for the understanding of the definition of the person is a self-conscious entity. A fetus or infant cannot be compared with animals or any other living beings as animals or animal babies do not have the similar potential of developing as a person to qualify on this definition. There are different definitions and circumstances of abortion. In medical terms, the life starts from the moment embryo is formed and it grows every day to become similar to the miniature form of a person.