Abortion is a subject of heated discussion and presents ethical and moral quandaries. In the 1973 Roe v Wade case, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s entitlement to terminate her pregnancy within the initial six months. Nevertheless, conservative Presidents have modified the legislation, granting states the authority to enforce limitations on abortion (Practical Ethics, Peter Singer).
In this paper, the contrasting perspectives on abortion held by Pope John Paul II and philosopher Peter Singer are examined. The views of these two individuals on the issue of abortion are notably different. Pope John Paul II strongly opposes abortion due to his religious beliefs. He supports his stance by referring to biblical verses, religious texts, and quotes from clergy members and priests. To begin his argument, he highlights the importance of obeying the ten commandments in order to lead a virtuous life and attain eternal salvation: “Jesus replied, ‘If you would enter life, keep the commandments'” (Mt 19:17).
In The Gospel of Life by Pope John Paul II, the first commandment is “You shall not kill.” However, it is crucial to love, respect, and promote life. This entails embracing God’s plan for procreation with love and an intention to multiply. Engaging in an abortion contradicts this commandment and God’s plan as it involves taking the life of an innocent human being and ending the life of a child who belongs to God. It is vital to remember that man does not possess ultimate authority over matters concerning life and death; rather, man serves as a mere “minister of God.” Pope John Paul II underscores the sacred and inviolable nature of human life.
The main idea of the text is to emphasize the sacredness of life, which is believed to be a valuable gift from God. It asserts that as humans are created in God’s image, we are constantly under His watchful eye throughout our entire existence, from birth until death. The text strongly condemns the act of terminating the life of an innocent person, especially an unborn child who embodies pure innocence. Instead of being responsible for destruction, mankind has a responsibility to protect and preserve the innocence found within individuals. According to the author, those who harm innocent lives have been deceived by Satan himself – the only one who takes pleasure in disobeying the commandment “You shall not kill.” This commandment serves as an inviolable boundary that should never be crossed and aims to inspire people to cherish and promote life through love.
Christianity upholds the belief that taking others’ lives is a fundamental principle, explicitly stated in the Didache, the oldest non-biblical Christian writing. This ancient text clearly forbids both abortion and infanticide as acts of terminating human life. Engaging in these actions not only undermines God’s creations but also carries significant sinfulness. Throughout history, the Church has consistently emphasized the importance of obeying this commandment. Murder has always been recognized as one of the most serious transgressions, even during Christianity’s early years. It is unsurprising that ending the life of something made in God’s image is considered a grave offense.
The main principle of ‘You shall not kill’ mainly pertains to innocent human beings, particularly those who are defenseless and vulnerable such as unborn children or infants. Ending the life of an innocent person, especially during early or late stages, is highly unethical. This intentional and voluntary act will always be regarded as morally incorrect and cannot be justified as necessary, whether it is for a desired result or as a method to achieve something positive.
“Regardless of the circumstances, no one can support the killing of an innocent human being – whether they are a fetus, embryo, infant, or adult…no one can seek this act of killing for themselves or for someone they have responsibility over…Additionally, no governing authority can legitimately advocate or permit such action” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).
Every innocent human being holds the entitlement to life.
Every person, regardless of gender or age, holds inherent worth and deserves safeguarding rather than objectification. The Second Vatican Council classifies abortion and infanticide as “unspeakable crimes” to underscore their profound gravity. When these actions gain widespread acceptance and legalization in society, it signifies a troubling erosion of the moral boundaries that differentiate what is right from what is wrong. This trend becomes particularly concerning as it jeopardizes the fundamental right to life. Opting for an abortion can be a distressing and devastating ordeal for the mother since she not only terminates a potential life but also experiences personal sorrow.
Paul II’s The Gospel of Life states that the mother’s health and the welfare of the child after birth may be taken into account when deciding whether to terminate a pregnancy. However, no matter how serious or tragic these reasons may be, intentionally ending the life of an innocent human being cannot be justified. Ultimately, it is solely up to the mother to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy. Nevertheless, there are several individuals who can impact her decision. The father of the child can exert influence through coercion or by abandoning her. Additionally, her family and friends may also play a role in influencing her choice.
The text suggests that blame is attributed to legislation permitting abortion, advocacy groups supporting abortion rights, and individuals promoting sexual behaviors. Pope John Paul II consistently refers to a fetus as an innocent human being in his argument. In contrast, Singer challenges this perspective by asserting that various stages of development should be considered when determining whether a fetus can be classified as a human being.
The initial stage is consciousness, followed by quickening which is when the mother first feels the baby kick. In the past, quickening was seen as a religious indication that the baby possessed a soul. However, with the absence of religious beliefs, quickening is not a definitive indicator that the fetus is human. Ultrasounds have demonstrated that a baby starts making movements that the mother may not feel as early as six weeks after conception (Practical Ethics, Peter Singer).
The third trimester marks the point at which a fetus becomes viable and capable of surviving outside of the womb. However, this timeframe can vary depending on medical resources available, and viability may not occur until birth itself. Consequently, since every woman’s experience differs in terms of when viability is achieved, it cannot be considered a definitive factor in distinguishing between a fetus and a human being. The act of birth is what signifies the arrival of a baby and indicates that a fetus ceases to be considered human until it exits the mother’s womb. Nevertheless, should the location of the fetus determine its status? Does its brief time spent in the birth canal dictate whether it is classified as a fetus or fully human? Given that none of these stages offer an absolute answer regarding when exactly a fetus becomes human, there exists no clear demarcation line.
In regards to determining the status of a fetus, whether it should be recognized as a human or merely as a fetus, and establishing its rights to life if not acknowledged as a human, this poses challenges. Singer proposes that there is a differentiation between being classified as a human belonging to the Homo sapiens species and being recognized as a person. Individuals possess self-awareness, emotions, logical thinking abilities, and decision-making skills. Additionally, they have interests and an inclination for survival.
According to Singer’s viewpoint, the questioning of a fetus’ value and personhood as a member of the homosapien race arises. Singer argues that if a fetus lacks specific characteristics, it cannot be classified as a person. Therefore, since no fetus meets the criteria for being a person, they do not possess an equal right to life (Practical Ethics, Singer). This brings up the question of immoral actions. Immorality entails causing harm to others, whether physically or emotionally. Psychological harm affects an individual’s uniqueness. If a fetus lacks personhood and the capacity to feel pain, it cannot be harmed. As a result, terminating a fetus through abortion or other methods is not considered immoral.
While abortion prevents a fetus from experiencing life, it is important to distinguish between potential life and actual life. Pope Paul II opposes abortion primarily due to religious beliefs and teachings. The prohibition of killing, as stated in the first commandment, does not hold religious significance for Singer. In his book “Practical Ethics” (Singer), he addresses the topic of abortion from a non-religious ethical standpoint.
