Illegalizaton of Abortion
Illegalization of abortion facilitates goals of democracy
Democracy refers to a form of government whereby the society is characterized by equality in privileges and rights. In a democratic state, the supreme power is vested in the people and it's exercised by elected members under the free electoral system or directly exercised by the people. A democratic government aims at providing equality, liberty, justice, security and prosperity Lansford 10.
Abortion refers to induced termination of a pregnancy by expulsion of the fetus from the uterus before it is fully developed. The controversy of the issue of abortion has been going on for several years and the sooner it is addresses can our governments focus on other issues affecting citizens such as poverty. The following discussion focuses on how the implementation of the law that illegalizes abortion facilitates the goals of democracy.
In a modern society, the philosophical beliefs about selected people do not influence the idea of democracy. Intellectuals argue that since the religious beliefs are inessential to political cohesion, they should therefore be discarded. As per Marxist, the idea of religion should be privatized for individual well being since it's irrelevant to the social order. According to Jeffersonian democracy, it is important for citizens to modify opinions according to matters of importance and make sense in our lives and can be justified Rose et al. 280.
The sides of democracy concerning the relation of the spiritual perfection to public policy include the absolutist which states that every human has the right to believe in something as long as it contributes to the practice of civic virtue. The pragmatic side states that when public policy cannot be supported by his or her beliefs, then the individual should be able to sacrifice his conscience to the expense of public appropriateness.
The apprehension between these two sides can be eliminated by the philosophical theory that all issues involving humanity should be justified with truth. In the modern society, rational justification of religion has been discredited since it is not common to all human beings. This action breaks the link between truth and justifiability which leads to division in the liberal society theory. In supporting the absolute side, it is inevitable to tackle moral and political dilemmas without evidence since everybody's opinion is considered right. If we choose to focus on the pragmatic side, we would still require a bar to distinguish between individual conscience to respect and which to discard and this will be relative according to the group we using to justify ourselves.
According to both sides, one point is stands out that liberal institutions and culture cannot and should not survive without philosophical justification that clarification has provided for them. The three claims that exist for a liberal society is that there needs to a theory that is empirical and sociological-historical about the sort of glue required for social cohesion, the moral judgment agreed upon should have advantages that outweigh the disadvantages by the noted character of individuals it produces and finally political institutions doctrine of human beings should include a clear historical character of the self. The third claim is controversial in that we ask the questions whether a liberal society needs philosophical justification or even if we require this justification, does the entire community represent an individualBernstein and Voparil 380()
According to Rawls, a liberal society needs to accommodate standard philosophical topics of inquiry and disregard topics that are irrelevant to politics. As for individual belief, we cannot precede and antedate history; instead we need to be indifferent to disagreements about philosophy and nature since we are heirs of enlightenment. Following several arguments about democracy, a liberal society will not only disregard opinions on matters such as legal oppression but also discard questions from discussions of social policy. Exercise of democracy will be against individual conscience since it leads to actions that threaten democratic institutions. According to Rawls's, fanatical believes threaten freedom which in turn threatens justice. Other areas of dispute in democracy are the questions whether democracy as a form of government should prevail everywhere, whether democracy can survive where its inappropriately institutionalized or where it does not exist and whether it can survive where it is to be perfectly exercised where it exist or does not exist. Mortimer argues that democracy should prevail everywhere because it is the only perfect present form of government. With the exception of infants man is capable of participating in self-government and should therefore be given the opportunity to exercise their political liberty. This argument is supported by Aristotle's view that men naturally are self-governing whereby other are meant to rule while others are to be ruled. This implies that democracy to a certain extent involves certain injustice for example to the minority group during the decisions to implement certain laws.
The elements of a politically just government include that the government acts to serve the general well being of the society and not satisfy the selfish interests of those in power. The same government should be duly constituted hence derive its power from the consent of the governed and finally secures the rights inherent in the governed including right to liberty and several freedoms such as speech. In areas where democracy faces obstacles, these should be overcome so as to ensure the ideology prospers. Democracy faces the obstacles of difficulty to institute a system of public education that would effectively address the needs of political democracy, social and economic inequalities and the sovereign nations being in constant war with one another that generates injustices that cannot be solved by national governments.
Mortimer adds that, we should consider other threats to the survival of democracy where it exists and where it does not in order to develop measures that are regarded as feasible to overcome the identified obstacles. If the society id democratic, the political democracy will survive and prosper because citizens will not accept or endure any other form of government. Markowitz argues that the philosophical perspective of the abortion issue ignores women and feminism.
The topic of abortion has been the subject of discussion for politicians and philosophers Sterba 175.
One point that needs to be made clear is that this is concerns women. There is a lot of speculation to the rise and reaction of feminists yet philosophical analyses do not address the issues of feminism but rather are concerned with the decision whether or not a fetus is a living person with privileges and rights like others. The issue of parenthood also raises debate but one thing is for sure, either way, the dispute of abortion will never be fully settled. Those who are for abortion legalization defends their decision based on the woman's right to sovereignty and can be able to avoid being a mother. This implies that anti-abortion policies interferes with the mothers autonomy rights. This strategy is also favored by philosophers stating it to be a feminist move. It recognizes the woman as the bearers of babies and can choose whether or not to do the same. Another defense that covers for the limits of the right to autonomy is the right of women awareness to oppression and commitment to a more democratic society. In as much as the fetus has the right to live, feminists argue that in order to have a sexually egalitarian society, women need to be in control of their reproductive lives. Feminists are usually suspicious of liberal perspectives because they tend to ignore the oppressions that exist within the society and in doing so; we cannot determine the extent of the oppression and therefore cannot effectively solve it. Liberal perspectives focus on the individual and disregard the issue of gender such as women have less power than men.
Feminist support the autonomy defense because in as much as it does not take gender into account, it supports the well being of individual women. Secondly, it supports a gender neutral right that belongs to each and every individual. Some feminists do not support the second part of autonomy in defense of abortion because it always works against women in court and the fact that it shifts attention from gender inequality. The Roe vs. Wade case was about women's right to privacy in the event of deciding whether or not to terminate a pregnancy or maintain it up to birth. The case was very controversial in a society where people were either against or for legalization of abortion.
According the court ruling, it is illegal to terminate a pregnancy until when the fetus is viable. The consequences of the case is that the father has no opinion on whether his child lives or not and giving that option solely to the mother. Another consequence is that many children were aborted who could have been valuable citizens of the society today. The consideration of gender has proved important in claiming certain rights for example the right to abortion enabling women exercise their right to reproductive practices Romaine and Wade…