Annotation3 Whether the fertilized ovum is a human?
Why do some people disagree taking abortion? Why do
they add a stigma on it? You probably think that because life is sacred and
precious or that no one could take away the right for the innocent embryo to
grow up. However, you should ponder that what is a life and that whether an
embryo could have rights before protesting abortion strongly. The book«
Life’s Dominion» which is written by Ronald Dworkin, points out
many questions about taking abortion.
Ronald
Dworkin is a laws scholar. He wants to find a way to solve the disputative
issue about life by analyzing constitution, cases, and human belief. He divides
those who are against taking abortion into two parts- one is derivative
objection which means they think taking abortion is to deprive babies’ rights
and benefits, while the other is detached objection, which means they believe
that human life is sacred and valuable. However, from many surveys and cases,
Dworkin proposes the contradiction to the two parts. First, how to define a
start of a life? It depends. Some people’s answer is when the ovum got
fertilized, and some people’s answer is several weeks after the ovum got
fertilized. According to a public announcement of a priest of Jew, David
Feldman, it said: “In Jew’s laws, an embryo is not a human. Until it quits the
womb and comes to the world, it will become a human.” There is no clear and
exact timing to define the start of life, how can you regard taking abortion as
a murder?
The next problem is whether an embryo has
rights. Dworkin said that: “Unless something owns, or has already had some
forms of senses, and that is a kind of mental and physical body life, it will
be no meaning to suppose something has its own rights.” He even takes Dr.
Frankenstein for example. If he could make the body come alive, then the stop
of this experiment would be also seen as a way to take away its right. However,
no one thinks that it is unfair to the body or that the body has rights.
Therefore, the derivative objection is facing the contradiction.
Dworkin thinks detached objection could
make sense, but it also faces challenges. He mentions that they think it is
acceptable for a mother to take abortion when the pregnancy is threatening her
life. He continues: “They will usually tolerate more exceptions. Some
conservative people accept abortion not only because it could save the mother’s
life, but also accept abortion in morality. When the pregnancy is resulted from
a rape or incest, then they can also accept abortion. The more exceptions they
accept, the more clearly we can see that the reason why they are against
abortion is not based on embryos have rights of life.”
To sum up, people who are against abortion
could add stigmas on it, and form an overwhelming stress to women but on the
basis of unclear reasons. For those young girls who do not want babies, if taking
abortion could release their pressure from money and responsibility or the environment
is not prepared for the coming baby, then it is cruel and unfair that you call
those pregnant women as murderers.
Source: Dworkin, R.
(2002). Life’s dominion: an argument about abortion, euthanasia, and
individual freedom (Ya-Ru Chen,Zhen-Ling Guo, Trans.). Republic of
China: Business Weekly Publications.
|
I think your idea is clear. You clearly delivered your topic to your readers. Moreover, your paragraphs is well organized. I like how you cut your paragraphs, it makes the reader easy to read your annotation. However, I think you can add more of your opinions after each statements. The whole annotation is mostly constructed with sources, which is good because it makes it convincing to the readers, but I think some short thoughts of yours can be added to make it more powerful. Also I think you can use more sharp words in your first paragraph to hold your states against the opposed. After all the idea of annotation is to convince those who are against you.
回覆刪除Your article was well constructed and i have some suggestions for you.
回覆刪除1.maybe you can divide paragraph 2 into 2 paragraphs
2. at the beginning of para2, you wrote that Ronald Dworkin is a laws scholar. There should be no *s*after law. And you can give more information about the author. Because I think a sentence is not enough.
3.In para2 line 5, you used*however*, but i think however is not appropriate here since the context do not be opposite enough.
4.in para3 line1,''Unless something owns, or has alr......'',unless is a conjunction, so you need subjects and verbs.
5.in para3 line4,from if to last line last word, contradiction, i think it would be better to use quotation marks.
6.In the book you used, people accept abortion as the pregnancy is resulted from a rape or incest, but the type of college pregnant girls we limit is not the same as by rape or incest. Consequently, i think this part is not strongly connected to your points.