Bodily Integrality

Bodily Integrality

Bodily Integrality is extremely important because it is an issue that comes up in our everyday lives. The way we put yourself out to society can be both acceptable and comfortable for yourself, but someone else may be offended by it. This happens because there is such a wide range of opinion on bodily integrality. This is why I believe it is important to take a closer look at this topic and analyze it, especially since these there are laws in our country regarding these issues. These laws can have serious aftereffects for example, not allowing abortion can lead to illegal abortions where you have fetes and mothers dying. Considering how diverse Body Integrality is from different occupations to different species it is difficult to blanket the entire topic with one clear solution. The oppositional claims would have a lot of emotional claim that would not have any real substance.Everyone has their own moral standard, and once they get emotional they don’t listen to reasoning and push their own beliefs onto the next person. They also will try to give a different definition to a different situation which will put holes in their reasoning. To have a common ground on this topic I believe if you are in whole body and soul and able to make a conscience decision for yourself you should be able to make a decision for yourself if it affects only youself. Once it affects someone else or something else you should not be able to have so much control that you alter him/her/its life so much that you can not be undone the action. Body Integrity can be an emotional topic that need to be looked at objectively that is why I will assert we need to accept sex work, we must accept the porn industry, not support abortion and support animal rights.
After explaining how important Bodily Integrity is we must accept sex work. Sex work tends to be a taboo topic because many people believe it is morally wrong. I believe it is fine to do sex work if you are safe about it and if you are in whole body and soul able to make a conscience decision to do this line of work. This can be a gray area because the person may feel they are forced given their situation but in reality they do have alternatives. If someone in particular is forcing you to do it by threatening your life it is no longer acceptable. As long as it is two consisting adults sex work should be accepted. Both adults understand the terms beforehand, it can be seen as a legal contract. Usually this sex work is done behind closed doors that most people may not even know the details which is exactly why it should be accepted. They are exchanging goods or a service for something in return. It can be seen in the same manner of paying a mechanic to service your car when the check engine light comes on. You have a problem that you can handle yourself but prefer to have a professional handle. When it comes to this topic Lars O. Erricsson shares my same belief of (Erricsson, Lars O) it becoming an irrational discussion once someone see’s it immoral. This is because sex is an exclusive action many will argue can be shared only with someone they love. Once you want to compare it to any other service people then become offended. Once someone has a certain belief for something like a religious background belief it is impossible to change their mind. It would be like trying to say their religious is wrong or change their religion as a whole. Some may say sex work is immoral because it is putting a price on your body when a body does not have price and should be respected. If someone wants to put a price on their body and someone is willing to pay that price then let then let them. An understandable argument is when someone brings up how dangerous and unsafe sex work can be. If we monitor it and have more regulations these issues can be eliminated. In the documentary Whores’ Glory one of the men in that area was interviewed saying if they did not have the brothel district normal women would not be able to go go outside with ut being molested, and if women did not go outside men would rape cows and goats (Whore’s Glory). Sex work and porn can be put into the same category of bodily integrity because they both involve some type of sex work which they exchange actions for monetary value.
Building on the same principle of sex work we must also support the porn industry. This issues relates to Bodily Integrity because porn workers expose their body on film and photography which is then distributed to others. Porn can be seen to be completely different from sex work because it not only involves the actors in the film or photo but also the viewer. This claim of having a negative impact on the viewer is an argument with no reason behind. I say this because especially in the United States there are many requirements to adult content. From something as simple as sex in a film in the theaters, it is rated by it’s content and then there are requirement to see this content. The same thing can be seen if you try to purchase adult content magazines or film. The cashier by law needs to see your government issued identification card to confirm you are of legal age to view such content. The only gray area is the internet. Before entering an adult content website you must check if you are eighteen years or older. You see the effort but with today’s technology there is no way to confirm the the individual is or is not of legal age. I believe the government in the future will find the technology and implement it as soon as possible. Most of the time when people argue about the porn industry they focus on the women involved. Wendy McElroy wrote a great article in Free Inquiry Magazine regarding all the different positions but focus only on women. We must look into the men involved also because man or women they should be seen at the same level (McElroy, Wendy). What I always found industry is how so many people are against the porn industry while others idolise the actos. They refer to some actors and “porn stars”. From everyday people to celebrities themselves like Tiger Woods have this obsession over “porn stars” (Why Do Guys Chase Porn Stars?). As sex work and porn involved two humans the issues of abortion does also but must be analysed in a different manner.
When it comes to Bodily Integrity we should not support abortion. Abortion has always been a hot topic for everyone. We have been voting on it for years and still are unable to come to a clear conclusion on what we want to be done by it. The reason we should support sex work and porn but not abortion is because the two or more parties involved no longer meet the requirement we presented. Sex work and porn includes two consenting adults while abortion does not. The mother may or may not be of whole soul body and mind because they are faced with a decision on a time sensitive issues. The mother may also may not be of legal age which will bring up the issue of being able to make a decision for herself. This leads to the fetus which has absolutely no input in the manner. If the mother does decide to go through with an abortion the cancels all potential of the fetus and the action has to reversible action. Once it is done it is done. Judith J. Thomas give a good argument of if you wake up hooked up to a violinist because they need your help to live. You then must think if you could save his life by remaining hooked up for 5 minutes he can live would you do it or what if it took 5 years would you still do it? I believe this has some relation to abortion but does not. If you are pregnant that means you did something which lead to that. There is no action that can make you prone to being hooked up to a dying person. Also you must put into consideration you don’t have to remain hooked up to this dying person when you are pregnant although limited you are still able to live your life as regular. Finally when pregnant you know you will be pregnant for about 9 months there is no wondering how long you must sacrifice to help this other person. There are alternatives to abortion. If the mother can not financially support a child or is unprepared they can carry out the pregnancy and put it up for adoption later on (There Are Alternatives to Abortion!). As seen in abortion animal rights involve a consenting adult and a nonconsenting living thing.
Animal rights is a tricky issue because it involves two different species. Although it does not involve two humans we need to still support animal rights. The gray area of animal rights is the fact that most of the population does indeed eat animals. I believe we should not neglect or beat animals or kill for any reason. The exception to this is when we do eat animal for nutrition. We have made a business of killing animals for food. This said we have predetermined animals we accept to eat. For example, we can not go kill an endangered species for food. There are animals that are raised for the sole purpose of killing for food. This is accepted because that is their role. This may sound cruel but we have always have a give take relationship. Especially here in the United States we do things to make our lives easier. We invented things like a remote control so we don’t have to get up and walk to the television screen to change the channel, or a vehicle to get us from point A to point B. It is possible to have a healthy diet without eating meat. Meat is a great meat source which is easier than eating a bunch of plant based or egg foods (Lack of Nutrition From Meat for Vegetarians.). Considering the reason it is acceptable to kill animals for food, Alastair Norcross argument no longer makes sense. The argument is trying to justify someone who really likes the taste of chocolate but are unable to taste it without killing a puppy. Other than the fact that this example is unrealistic he has no real reason to kill the puppy other than selfish reasons. There is no nutrition in chocolate and just something he likes. When eating an animal for nutrition it benefits millions (Norcross, Alastair). This can be better seen in a situation where a family is self sufficient and live off of their land. They raise their own animals and eat them to give them nutrition and energy to go through their day to day life.
Body Integrity is an obligation we all have to each other that is why we MUST accept sex work, we MUST accept the porn industry, NOT SUPPORT abortion and SUPPORT animal rights. Bodily Integrity is an important topic we all must evaluate. A good rule of thumb is to consider it is acceptable if it includes a consenting adult of soul body and mind to make the decision that only involves him or herself. Once that action is imposed on someone or something else and is irreversible it is no longer acceptable. We all have our own opinions and it is important to remember to respect other’s opinions. I believe in the future if we all evaluate this topic it would be easier to regard laws. For example how there are age requirements for adult content. As time goes on we can evaluate how things are being handle and if there is a better way to handle it. This said although we should not support abortion there are certain situations it should be accepted for example without the consent of both parents. For example in the situation of a women being raped. Because these situations are hard to prove given our limited technology I believe abortion should be passed as a law until we can better evaluate it.

Erricsson, Lars O. “Charges Against Prostitution: An Attempt at Philosophical
Assessment.” 2nd ed. Vol. VIII. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 367-70. Print. A.
“Lack of Nutrition From Meat for Vegetarians.” LIVESTRONG.COM. N.p., n.d. Web. 28
May 2013.
McElroy, Wendy. “A Feminist Defense of Pornography.” Free Inquiry Magazine n.d.: n.
pag. Web. 16 Apr. 2013. .
Norcross, Alastair. “Puppies, Pigs, and People.” N.p.: n.p., n.d. 442-48. Print.
“There Are Alternatives to Abortion!” Priests for Life. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 May 2013.
Thomson, Judith J. “A Defense of Abortion.” N.p.: n.p., n.d. 413-23. Print.
Whore’s Glory. Dir. Michael Glawogger. The Match Factory, 2011. DVD.
“Why Do Guys Chase Porn Stars?” By Lenore Skenazy on N.p., n.d.
Web. 29 May 2013.

Rights: Humans and Animals


During this past semester, we have discussed numerous topics that I consider to be very important to society as a whole.  Abortion, euthanasia and animal rights were three of the most controversial topics.  The three aforementioned topics are quite important since they deal specifically with human life and the life of animals across the board.  As for abortion and euthanasia, how can we allow this to be an option?  Society should not allow this to occur, especially with your tax dollars being spent to support someone’s irresponsibility or choice to have unprotected sex.  Euthanasia hits close to home because we too must ensure we take care of our elderly, those who loved us, raised us, and contributed to whom we are today.  An animal right is a value I hold close to my heart.  From childhood, we have always had pets, specifically a dog-named Duke.  This dog was my best friend, always brightened my day and was ready to play catch.  Today, I have expanded my views on animal rights to include cows and any other animal us humans will consume in order to survive.  In the following analysis, I will argue that we must protect human life to the fullest extent possible as well as for animals-rights since they cannot speak for themselves.

Having demonstrated the importance of life, abortion is wrong, seriously immoral, except in rare cases, and it is in the same moral category as killing an innocent adult human being.[1]  Roe v. Wade in 1973 became and remains the most controversial ruling in US Court history.[2]  The ruling provided regulations for elective and medically required abortions.  During my younger years, the thought of abortions didn’t bother me, but now after discussing the topic in class I have had a change of heart and now live with a conservative view.  According to Don Marquis, a philosophy professor at the University of Kansas, “The loss of one’s life deprives one of all experiences, activities, projects and enjoyments that would otherwise have constituted one’s future.  Therefore, killing someone is wrong, primarily because the killing inflicts (one of) the greatest possible losses on the victim.”  I agree whole-heartedly with his argument and we all must ensure we protect the lives of those who cannot speak for themselves.  A reading from this past semester about the violinist being connected to a human for nine months brought up several important points.  First, nine months is not a long period if you compare that to our life expectancy, which is now just shy of 80 years old.  I believe that disconnecting a healthy person from the violinist who would only need your help for a short time period is selfish and dead wrong.  For the other side of life, we should allow abortions for victims of rape or for woman who could possibly die from birthing a child.  I do not hold those two categories as being immoral.  The rape victim did not choose to suffer this violent act; thus becoming pregnant.  As for the mother-to-be, possibly chose to procreate and have good intentions to raise her child.  For unseen medical reasons, birthing a child could cause her own demise and that is not within the scope of my argument.  Women have an option to birth a child and then surrender the baby for adoption.  Killing an innocent baby is morally wrong and inhumane.  Just as I have argued for the protection of life, let’s discuss the same issue but at the opposite end of the spectrum, euthanasia.

Building on that same principle of life we must also oppose euthanasia, which is a controversial topic within our country.  On October 27, 1997 Oregon enacted the Death with Dignity Act, which allows terminally ill Oregonians to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of lethal medications, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose.[3]  YouTube published a video of an individual named Roger Sanger, who wished to die with dignity in 2009.  Roger was given the option to change his mind and remain with the living.  Roger declined and chose to drink a deadly dose of Nembutal, which put him to sleep then death.  Although Roger appeared to die a painless death, this video brought tears my eyes and left me wondering why someone would choose death.  Roger was accompanied by family and friends which none took the time to try and convince him to change his mind.  J. Gay-Williams stated euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are irreversible and it works against our own interest if we practice it or allow it to be practiced on us.[4]  It should be known that those who die due to an allergic reaction from a medicine or their body did not respond to treatment is excluded from this argument.  Life is the most precious thing we have so we must protect it to the fullest.  We all have motives in life and by allowing someone to commit suicide thus making our bankroll fat, is a damn shame.  A person dying relieves us of the responsibly to care for them.  We now have more time to do what we want instead of take care of someone who took care of us such as your Mother and Father.  As for these two issues, we should protect life and encourage those that wish to die, to think about what they are doing.  It maybe possible they are not thinking clearly about their actions so we must ensure they know exactly what is going on, so they don’t leave earth prematurely.

Building further on the two previous topics, we should also support animal-rights.  We have already mentioned that abortion and euthanasia are both morally wrong and although animals cannot communicate with humans, we know they feel pain.  We must ensure they are protected from inhumane treatment and not purposely abused or injured.[5]  In order for humans to survive, we do not have to consume meat.  By eating meat, which is a good source of iron, we tend to live a more balanced and healthy lifestyle.  I don’t mean overeating but to a certain extent eating meat is fine.  According to Kant, we have no “direct duties” to animals because they lack personal attributes such as rationality, self-consciousness, and free will.[6]  I do agree with Kant, but that does not give us the right to abuse them in anyway.  This part of my argument sounds hypocritical, so let me further explain myself.  I am not opposing eating meat, but I am opposing the abuse and torture these animals suffer as they die.  If we must eat meat, let’s treat these animals humanly and provide them a painless death.  In April, the Stanford Slaughterhouse located in Central California, was shutdown due to inhumane cattle treatment.  A video surfaced showing workers abusing cattle.  I do consume meat, not very much, but the little amount I do brings to light the importance of this topic and how much we should protect animals from abuse and torture.  I would like to think all animals are slaughtered in a humane manner but I know that isn’t the case.  Unfortunately, animal rights is a rarely, if ever spoken, discussed and only comes to light when a celebrity makes it known they support animal-rights.

Life is the most important thing to us and we should protect it to the end.  Abortion, euthanasia and torturing animals are morally wrong.  We have an obligation to help those who cannot do so for themselves such as those babies [fetus] under 15 weeks old.  As for our elderly, they too deserve our help.  After all, they are someone’s brother, sister, son, daughter, father, or mother, who took care of us as newborns, infants or young kids.  As for animal-rights, we owe them the same since they are too living animals.  We have an ethic and moral obligation to reduce, if not completely eliminate, all torture and abuse us humans inflict on animals.  Starting today, join me and stand against abortion, euthanasia and animal abuse.

[1] Marquis, J. (1989). Why abortion is immoral. Journal of philosophy, 86, 183-202.

[2] Roe v wade: Key us abortion ruling. (2004, December 10). BBC News. Retrieved from

[3] Oregon Department of Public Health, (1997). Death with dignity act. Retrieved from State of Oregon website:

[4] Gay-Williams, J. (1979). The wrongfulness of euthanasia. Intervention and reflection: Basic issues in medical ethics, 709-711.

[5] Romero, E. (Performer) (2013). Animal rights [Radio series episode]. In Valley public radio. Bakersfield, CA: Valley public radio. Retrieved from

[6] Kant, I. (1963). Lecture on ethics. (pp. 239-241). Routledge Publishing.