Introduction
Humans, on a daily basis, are faced with a never-ending battle with themselves – the voice that tells them what to do and not do. Therefore, when faced with the same ethical dilemma, the decision arrived at vary from one person to another depending on the type of ethical system followed. Ethics 20.5 strives to provide a basic understanding of ethical systems and how to think about them. The question therefore remains, why should people make different choices when faced with the same ethical situations? To answer this question, it is important to understand how non-Christian ethical systems such as utilitarianism and deontological ethics relate and influence Christian ethical systems. However, the discussion in this paper will revolve around how the two systems view and resolve the issue of abortion. Ideally, the Christian ethical system approaches the issue of abortion through God’s image and character while utilitarianism is concerned with maximizing happiness.
Chosen Ethical System
The chosen ethical system for consideration in this paper is Christian virtuous ethical system. As discussed in class, this system is concerned with the fruits of the Holy Spirit and the beatitudes. Similarly, Christian’s main goal is to honor and obey God their creator1. According to Christian virtuous ethical system, when God saves a person, He changes their very nature. More specifically, once they are saved, their rebellious heart is replaced by a desire to become Christ-like. This implies that a person, who was initially incapable of doing good, is filled with a new set of desires and righteousness2. This system also holds that the only way of becoming virtuous is through Christ who transforms their lives – the virtue develops in them through the process of becoming Christ like. As evidenced in class readings, Christians’ main goal is to be like Christ and unite with God the creator. Therefore, when faced with a dilemma, the focus is not on identifying the best outcome but instead ensure the decision reflect the character of God.
Chosen Topic
The topic selected for discussion is abortion which is defined as the termination of pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo from the womb before it is ready for birth. The two commonly practiced forms of abortion are spontaneous and induced. The former can occur through miscarriage while the later involves ending a pregnancy with medication3. Induced abortion is widespread in most developed countries including the U.S. According to Biggs et al. this form is considered the most common and safest medical procedure in the United States – approximately 40 percent admit they have terminated a pregnancy at least once4. The authors further maintained that abortion is increasingly being performed by women from all walks of life with the majority being white, unmarried and above the age of 40 years5. While the reasons for terminating a pregnancy vary from one person to another, most of them opt for it because they were victims of rape or incest.
Abortion is one of the most controversial public issues of the 21st century. This is because the subject forces people to make a decision on when life begins and whether one should prioritize the life of the mother or fetus (Hendricks, 2019). Of the two, induced abortion continues to elicit mixed reactions among different scholars. On the other hand, spontaneous abortion is where the fetus is involuntarily expelled due to disease or accidents. The “pro-life” and “pro-choice” positions further make the issue more controversial. The pro-life position, as elucidated in Hendricks’ (2019) study holds that induced abortions is morally wrong and prohibited6. The pro-choice position, on the other hand, argues that termination of pregnancy is morally permissible or allowable. The critical issues in this topic are the moral and metaphysical status of the embryo as well as the moral rights of a person.
Christian virtuous ethical system
Christian virtuous ethical system is the right approach when it comes to discerning the right decision about the issue of abortion. This system help ensure individuals understand why it is important to act righteously. It argues that people can make the right decision with regard to abortion as long the agent is following the virtues prescribed in the nature of God. This means that the agent does not have the freedom to determine what those specific virtues ought to be. God gave Christians a new nature and promised to continuously be part of their lives, especially during decision-making processes7. Therefore, Christians can make a right moral decision not by maximizing happiness but because they are new creations of God. Their goal of being like Christ means that He is constantly guiding them in the moral decision-making process.
This Christian system further holds that human life should be respected and protected because it is a gift from God. Through His love to all humans, He gave value to life. Therefore, human should love life because God loved them first as explicated in the gospel of John. Christians should understand that the right to life and the responsibility of protecting it were secured through his love for humanity. God’s love is steadfast unlike human beliefs which can be broken or challenged. This system emphasizes the need to value prenatal life and to view the fetus as one called and chosen by God. It is important to note that the decision to abort cannot be made lightly even in cases where one is a victim of rape. The book of Genesis says that humans are created in God’s image. Similarly, one of the God’s commandments cautions against killing another life. The scripture does not differentiate between humans at early life, later stage of development or those conceived through rape or otherwise. Human life is valuable must be protected against harm.
Competing Ethical System
Utilitarianism as a non-Christian ethical system emphasizes more on the need to achieve a specific outcome – all moral issues must end with maximum happiness for the concerned party. In answering the issue of abortion, the ethical system strives to view it through the principle of utility which supports the maximization of welfare at the local and national level8. In discussing abortion, utilitarianism often argues that there is no absolute value preserved for human life. In doing so, the ethical system aims at avoiding the question on where human life starts. Act utilitarianism is important at this point because it reinforces the need to approach each individual case based on merits, its significance and consequences to the life of the mother9. This means that cases such as rape, incest and financial instability should be considered when making a moral decision. Rule utilitarianism supports the need to adopt a regulation about abortion that will apply to all situations. This is necessary because decisions about the issue should not be based on individual welfare but societal well-being.
However, utilitarianism is a wrong approach compared to Christian virtuous ethical system because it ignores many important issues when making effective moral decisions. Moral goodness is concerned with the ultimate or optimal outcome and the right decision is one that aims at achieving the intended result. In essence, this non-Christian system argues that actions are right if they bring happiness to the individual. Therefore, it is an inadequate approach because it determines right and wrong based on the outcomes. The Christian system, on its part, is concerned with the process of arriving at the decision. The decision arrived at must be based on God’s character and the biblical teachings. The problem with this approach is that the right to life is based on an agreement or disagreement between humans.
Conclusion
Abortion is one of the most controversial issues of the 21st century. This is the case because it continues to elicit mixed reactions among Christians and secular scholars. As discussed above, Christian virtuous ethical system is concerned with the fruits of the Holy Spirit and the beatitudes. Life within this approach is viewed as a gift from God and must be respected. God created humans in their image and, as such, their actions must reflect God’s character. On the contrary, the non-Christian system and, in this case utilitarianism, emphasizes more on the need to achieve a specific outcome – all moral issues must end with maximum happiness for the concerned party. However, this is an inadequate approach because it ignores many important issues such as value of life when making effective moral decisions.
Bibliography
Biggs, M. Antonia, et al. “Support for and Interest in Alternative Models of Medication Abortion Provision among a National Probability Sample of U.S. Women.” Contraception, vol. 99, no. 2, Elsevier BV, 2019, pp. 118–24. Web.
Hendricks, Perry. “Even if the Fetus Is Not a Person, Abortion Is Immoral: The Impairment Argument.” Bioethics, vol. 33, no. 2, Wiley, Nov. 2018, pp. 245–53. Web.
Hennig, Max, and Mandy Hütter. “Revisiting the Divide between Deontology and Utilitarianism in Moral Dilemma Judgment: A Multinomial Modeling Approach.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 118, no. 1, American Psychological Association (APA), 2020, pp. 22–56. Web.
Magnuson, Ken. Invitation to Christian Ethics: Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues (Invitation to Theological Studies). Kregel Academic, 2020.
Footnotes
- Magnuson, Ken. Invitation to Christian Ethics: Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues (Invitation to Theological Studies). Kregel Academic, 2020.
- Magnuson. Invitation to Christian Ethic, 55
- Biggs, M. Antonia, et al. “Support for and Interest in Alternative Models of Medication Abortion Provision among a National Probability Sample of U.S. Women.” Contraception, vol. 99, no. 2, Elsevier BV, 2019, pp. 118–124.
- Biggs. Support for and Interest in Alternative Models. 124
- Biggs, 125
- Hendricks, Perry. “Even if the Fetus Is Not a Person, Abortion Is Immoral: The Impairment Argument.” Bioethics, vol. 33, no. 2, Wiley, 2018, pp. 245–53.
- Magnuson, 59
- Hennig, Max, and Mandy Hütter. “Revisiting the Divide Between Deontology and Utilitarianism in Moral Dilemma Judgment: A Multinomial Modeling Approach.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 118, no. 1, American Psychological Association (APA), 2020, pp. 22–56.
- Hennig. Revisiting the Divide Between Deontology and Utilitarianism in Moral Dilemma Judgment, 24