Women Studies: A Comparative Analysis of Abortion and Animal Rights

This essay, submitted by a student for publication on Desklib, delves into the intricate ethical connections between animal rights and abortion. It examines the arguments of animal rights activists, particularly those with vegan viewpoints, who often equate the sentience of animals and fetuses, advocating for their right to life. The essay explores how these perspectives are applied to morally permissible killings, such as in cases of self-defense for animals or when a woman's life is at stake during pregnancy, drawing parallels between the two scenarios. Furthermore, the essay discusses animal sanctuaries and shelters, analyzing their impact in relation to the neo-liberalization of animal rights and the challenges they face in providing adequate conditions for the animals they house. The essay references key articles and viewpoints, including those of Abbate, Hua, Ahuja, Bekoff, Carron, and Kaczor, providing a comprehensive overview of the ethical and practical considerations surrounding animal rights and abortion.

Running head: WOMEN STUDIES
WOMEN STUDIES
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author Note

1WOMEN STUDIES
Question 1
Animal rights activists, who supposedly turn vegan or at least support the vegan way of
life which eradicates meat and egg consumption from their dietary patterns, generally tend to
believe in the fact that animals and fetuses, both are sentient beings, therefore, both deserve as
well as have the rights to live and breathe. However, in certain cases, the animal rights theories
as well as the abortion theories changes or modifies accordingly. Questions might arise in case of
“morally permissible killings” of animals. According to the article of Abbate, an act of abortion,
according to the pro-abortion activists is morally permissible in certain sensitive cases where the
health of the woman (the mother) is at stake. In such cases, the fetus would be considered as an
“innocent threat”, a living being who does not create anything wrong but can possess threat
because of its existence, in certain sensitive biological cases for which neither the fetus nor the
mother is responsible or accountable (Kaczor). Just as the vegan animal rights activists believe in
the morally permissible killings of animals in cases of self-defense and self-protection, similarly,
their ethical consistency also harmonizes with the fact of “morally permissible killings” of the
fetuses, rather, morally permissible abortions in certain cases where the woman’s life is at stake
due to unnatural complications of pregnancy. However, abortion still is a question which draws
moral and ethical attention and it has been subjected to a number of controversies and
theological condemnations. However, the act of morally permissible killings of both fetuses and
animals are subtly accepted by the greater society (Abbate).
Question 2
According to the article of Hua and Ahuja, the sanctuaries or the shelters of the animals,
catering to the animals who had become outdated from the biomedical test centers or

2WOMEN STUDIES
laboratories, had been an outcome of the neo-liberalization of animal rights in the twentieth
century. However, even though the sanctuaries and shelters exhibit an explicit form of anti-
captivity measures, yet their philosophy and insight is not conservationist according to their
practice. The sanctuaries that has promised to provide the animals with a “better” life and
conditions and have therefore, institutionalized themselves as shelters, are often way backward
when it comes about the reality of providing “good” conditions for the animals. Sanctuaries are
often observed to be working poorly when it comes about the individuality of the sentient
animals. However, the zoos and acquariums that violates the fundamental rights of animals,
however, is not more unethical than the sanctuaries and shelters. The shelters and sanctuaries
face space related problems which restricts the natural mobility and tendency of the animals
(Hua and Ahuja). Animals are born free and possess the right to roam around their own habitat
by expressing their normal behavioral tendency. Unfortunately, the sanctuaries sometimes fail to
provide such situations to the non-laboring animals. Even though anti-captivity discourses and
animal rights movements have given shape to a better form of sanctuaries and shelters, yet there
are plethora of work left for the benefit of the animals in the animal shelters (Bekoff and Carron).

3WOMEN STUDIES
References:
Abbate, Cheryl E. "Adventures in Moral Consistency: How to Develop an Abortion Ethic
through an Animal Rights Framework." Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18.1 (2015):
145-164.
Bekoff, Marc, and Carron A. Meaney. Encyclopedia of animal rights and animal welfare.
Routledge, 2013.
Hua, Julietta, and Neel Ahuja. "Chimpanzee Sanctuary:" Surplus" Life and the Politics of
Transspecies Care." American Quarterly 65.3 (2013): 619-637.
Kaczor, Christopher. The ethics of abortion: Women’s rights, human life, and the question of
justice. Routledge, 2014.