Defense of Freedom of Abortion: An Analysis Based on the Case of Dobbs vs. Jackson Womens Health Organization

Abstract

This paper delves into the great complexity of the right to abortion. The paper defends the freedom of abortion through perspectives of womens health, the premise that fetuses are human beings, and rights-based theory with reference to arguments by prominent philosophers. The paper discusses the famous thought experiment of the violinist analogy, claim rights, and liberty rights by Judith Jarvis Thomson to argue why abortion should be morally permissible. Moreover, the paper dissects objections to these arguments, revealing their inherent limitations by stating that traveling to other states for abortion is unjust. The paper also uses the minimal decent Samaritan argument to address possible objections. The paper strongly argues that the right to abortion is a legal and moral imperative to fulfill. The paper aims to justify the right to abortion and that people should recognize the current threat to the right to abortion with the case of Dobbes vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization.