What is your answer?

Which is NOT a reason of the authors that a woman may not ethically destroy a zygote that exists in her as a result of her being raped?

    { 1 } - There is no proportion between the fetus' right to life and her right to be free of the injury done to her, overwhelming as this is.
    { 2 } - The zygote may be female and thus entitled to choose her own life or death.
    { 3 } - A woman does not restore her personal dignity and integrity by destroying the life of another person who is biologically her own child.
    { 4 } - Although she has the right to protect herself from the effects of aggression, she does not have the right to do so at the expense of the life of a fetus who is in no way an aggressor.
    { 5 } - The zygote is probably a human being and therefore a human person.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























1 is wrong. Please try again.

Which is NOT a reason of the authors that a woman may not ethically destroy a zygote that exists in her as a result of her being raped?

See p. 304.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























2 is correct!

Which is NOT a reason of the authors that a woman may not ethically destroy a zygote that exists in her as a result of her being raped?

    { 1 } - There is no proportion between the fetus' right to life and her right to be free of the injury done to her, overwhelming as this is.
    { 2 } - The zygote may be female and thus entitled to choose her own life or death.
    { 3 } - A woman does not restore her personal dignity and integrity by destroying the life of another person who is biologically her own child.
    { 4 } - Although she has the right to protect herself from the effects of aggression, she does not have the right to do so at the expense of the life of a fetus who is in no way an aggressor.
    { 5 } - The zygote is probably a human being and therefore a human person.

The authors would hold that both sexes are entitled to choose their own lives and neither is entitled to choose his or her own death.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























3 is wrong. Please try again.

Which is NOT a reason of the authors that a woman may not ethically destroy a zygote that exists in her as a result of her being raped?

    { 1 } - There is no proportion between the fetus' right to life and her right to be free of the injury done to her, overwhelming as this is.
    { 2 } - The zygote may be female and thus entitled to choose her own life or death.
    { 3 } - A woman does not restore her personal dignity and integrity by destroying the life of another person who is biologically her own child.
    { 4 } - Although she has the right to protect herself from the effects of aggression, she does not have the right to do so at the expense of the life of a fetus who is in no way an aggressor.
    { 5 } - The zygote is probably a human being and therefore a human person.

See p. 304.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























4 is wrong. Please try again.

Which is NOT a reason of the authors that a woman may not ethically destroy a zygote that exists in her as a result of her being raped?

    { 1 } - There is no proportion between the fetus' right to life and her right to be free of the injury done to her, overwhelming as this is.
    { 2 } - The zygote may be female and thus entitled to choose her own life or death.
    { 3 } - A woman does not restore her personal dignity and integrity by destroying the life of another person who is biologically her own child.
    { 4 } - Although she has the right to protect herself from the effects of aggression, she does not have the right to do so at the expense of the life of a fetus who is in no way an aggressor.
    { 5 } - The zygote is probably a human being and therefore a human person.

See p. 304.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























5 is wrong. Please try again.

Which is NOT a reason of the authors that a woman may not ethically destroy a zygote that exists in her as a result of her being raped?

    { 1 } - There is no proportion between the fetus' right to life and her right to be free of the injury done to her, overwhelming as this is.
    { 2 } - The zygote may be female and thus entitled to choose her own life or death.
    { 3 } - A woman does not restore her personal dignity and integrity by destroying the life of another person who is biologically her own child.
    { 4 } - Although she has the right to protect herself from the effects of aggression, she does not have the right to do so at the expense of the life of a fetus who is in no way an aggressor.
    { 5 } - The zygote is probably a human being and therefore a human person.

See 9.2.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























the end