Privacy
Even though the appeal to rape is very
popular, I would probably rank the right to privacy the next on the list
because many people find it appealing. This argument, as best as it makes
sense in my own mind, would go something like this:
Ø Women should be allowed to make their own decisions in their private lives.
Ø An abortion is a decision that a woman
has the right to make since it is a private decision in her own life.
Ø Therefore, women should be allowed to
have an abortion
This is a
valid argument in that the conclusion follows from the premises. The only
question is whether the premises are true and justified. Take premise 1 for
instance. It seems plausible in its own right but there seems to be a problem
with it. It does not clarify the kinds of decisions a woman would make in her
own privacy that would distinguish choices based on preference versus morality.
What about premise two? This premise, like the appeal to rape, is also guilty
of begging the question. Would anyone really buy into the idea that the woman
has the right to torture her 3-year-old son, starve him, and kill him based on
an appeal to privacy? Since that line of reasoning is not used for killing a
toddler but is for a right to an abortion, it follows that the argument is
fallacious. Since the argument is invalid, the conclusion does not follow the
premises.
No comments:
Post a Comment