The Marquis de Sade, also known as the "Divine Marquis," was a French aristocrat, revolutionary politician, and writer known for his philosophical and fictional works that often contained themes of violence, sexual depravity, and immoral behavior. One of Sade's most controversial philosophical arguments is his stance on abortion.
In his work "Dialogue Between a Priest and a Dying Man," Sade argues that abortion is not only morally acceptable, but also necessary for the betterment of society. He asserts that abortion is a means of population control and that it is necessary to prevent overpopulation and the resulting social and economic problems.
Sade argues that abortion is a necessary evil because it prevents the birth of unwanted or undeserving children. He believes that some individuals are not fit to be parents and that they should not be allowed to bring children into the world. According to Sade, these individuals include those who are poor, ignorant, or otherwise undesirable. He believes that allowing these individuals to have children only results in more suffering and misery for both the parent and the child.
However, Sade's arguments in favor of abortion are highly flawed and do not hold up to ethical scrutiny. His belief that some individuals are undeserving of the right to have children is inherently discriminatory and goes against the fundamental principles of human rights. Every individual has the right to reproduce, regardless of their social or economic status.
Furthermore, Sade's arguments in favor of abortion as a means of population control are also problematic. While it is true that overpopulation can lead to social and economic problems, abortion is not a solution to these issues. There are more effective and ethical ways to address overpopulation, such as implementing policies that promote sustainable population growth and access to birth control.
In conclusion, the Marquis de Sade's arguments in favor of abortion are flawed and do not hold up to ethical scrutiny. While it is important to address the issue of overpopulation and the well-being of children, there are more ethical and effective ways to do so than through the practice of abortion.
Marquis on Abortion
Therefore, abortion is wrong. Does the fetus in our example have a future that is less valuable than that of a normal one? Although I do not believe in abortion, I believe a woman should have the right to decide whether to have a baby or not. Also, the mother has a choice to give the She gives the example that the mother is trapped in a tiny house with a large baby that is already pushing her against the walls and soon will crush her to death. In other words, It explains the regret and sense of loss felt by those who know they are dying, such as those with AIDS or some form of Incurable cancer. It is just hard to believe that this weak argument is considered the best anti-abortion argument in the literature. I will grant Marquis that his progression of logic is rational; if a fetus were allowed to fully develop, it would indeed become a sentient being with the capacity of enjoying a prosperous future.
Arguments Against Don Marquis
Even though a mother may consent to intercourse with the knowledge that it is possible for her to get pregnant, she is still responsible for the fact that the fetus now has a future. Here, Thomson point is that there is one thing for sure, that you have the right to unplug yourself to save your life. Both the mother and the child are in dire situations, and it is obvious that the mother would have been in a better current situation had the fetus been aborted, as uncomfortable as that contention may make us. Say, for example, a couple finds out that their fetus has some sort of affliction that will make him terminally ill. There were actually certain types of women who took advantage of the type of the new law; these women were referred to be young, poor, unmarried, etc. Comparing Rosalind Hursthouse's Virtue Theory And Abortion 1529 Words 7 Pages Rosalind Hursthouse in her paper Virtue Theory and Abortion, handles with the moral standpoint of abortion from a virtue ethics perspective. Of the two arguments that are presented about abortion, the argument given by Judith Jarvis Thompson is the weakest.
Don Marquis On Abortion
Thompson identifies that some opponents of her argument would say that someone could simply choose to live in a home with bare floors and furniture or a home with sealed doors and windows to avoid the threat of a people-seed, but Thompson then likens such an arrangement to choosing to get a hysterectomy, Just so a woman can safeguard resell against the possibility of being raped and impregnated. Objection is that of the potentiality objection. It follows then, that because it is wrong to kill humans, it is also wrong to kill potential humans, and so abortion is prima facie seriously wrong. Next, Thompson follows up the argument about the violinist with her argument about the expanding child: A mother is trapped Inside of a house with a rapidly growing child and will be crushed to death within minutes unless she decides to kill the child. To put everything together, abortion is morally wrong because it essentially deprives a fetus of having a valuable future. The two ethicists who present strong arguments for their position, and who I am further going to discuss are that of Don Marquis and Judith Thomson. She concedes to the idea that the fetus is a person to bypass that argument and get into situations even assuming the the fetus is a person.
