Philosophy Essay 代写：寻找有争议问题的解决方案
在这篇文章中，我们将讨论，并试图找到解决方案的三个最有争议的和燃烧的伦理问题的一天，这是：堕胎，安乐死和死刑。为了做到这一点，我们决定在这些问题上的六人的意见。在这些人中有三个是音乐家和自由的专业哲学家。他们是约翰列侬，Paul McCartney，火车，悉尼卡拉汉，Philippa Foot和David Gelernter。
我们的第一双是约翰列侬和悉尼卡拉汉，这个问题是流产。在这个问题上，我们有两个方面：堕胎的支持者的权利，妇女-所谓的“亲选择”的人和那些谁是完全反对它-“亲生命”。双方的论点似乎同样有说服力。在他的书中“偏袒”Sydney Callahan（一个“亲生命”的倡导者）给出了双方的一些论点。职业选择的女权主义者的第一个参数是一个道德上的权利来控制自己的身体。但对卡拉汉来说，这似乎是一个虚假就业的真实原则。他认为，“自己的身体不再是一个单一的整体的存在而产生另一种生物的生命”（卡拉汉32）。从概念的那一刻起，在“它”（胎儿）和“他”（人）之间没有直线之间的关系。因此，他说，没有人可以承担责任，画出这条线，杀死一个人类的孩子。因此，概念必须是一个有机体成为人类的一个点。虽然只有在受孕后，人类怀孕的三个阶段发生，法律是试图阻止这样的流产后的第一阶段。进一步说，他写道，女性主义的首选地位的一个主要极大值之一，就是胎儿的价值只依赖于一个孕妇的有意识的“建筑”是错误的。这种说法是基于一个假设人的价值和权利可以授予个体意志”。它不会花你很长的时间来的原因，它不是这样。
卵子和精子都是重要的遗传信息的载体。事实上，他们是潜在的人。但是精子没有鸡蛋是无用的，反之则是鸡蛋。因此，我们不同意一些赞成选择的活动家的立场，他们声称一个鸡蛋本身等于一个，这是已经受精。他们几乎是相同的。
拼音 双语对照
Philosophy Essay 代写：寻找有争议问题的解决方案
In this essay we will discuss and try to find the solution to three most controversial and burning ethical issues of the day, which are: abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment. In order to do this, we decided to take opinions of six people on these issues. Among these people three are musicians and free are professional philosophers. They are John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Train, Sydney Callahan, Philippa Foot and David Gelernter.
Our first pair is John Lennon and Sydney Callahan and the issue is abortion. In this issue we have two sides: supporters of abortion right for women - so called "pro-choice" people and those who are totally against it - "pro-life". The arguments of both sides seem to be equally persuasive. In his book "Taking Sides" Sydney Callahan (an advocate of "pro-life") gives a number of arguments of both sides. The very first argument of pro-choice feminists is a moral right to control their own body. But to Callahan it seems to be a case of false employment of true principle. He argues that "One's own body no longer exists as a single unit but is engendering another organism's life" (Callahan 32). From the moment of conception there is no straight line to be drawn between "it" (fetus) and "him" (human). Thus, he states that nobody can take responsibility to draw that line and kill a human child. Therefore, conception must be the point from which an organism becomes a human being. Though it is only after conception that three stages of human gestation take place, and the law is trying to prevent such abortions after the first stage. Further on, he writes that one of the major maxima of feminist pro-choice position that the value of fetus is dependent only on a pregnant woman's conscious "construction" is erroneous. This statement is based on the assumption "…that human value and rights can be granted by individual will". It wouldn't take you a long time to reason that it is not so.
Egg and sperm are both carriers of significant genetic information. In fact, they are potential people. But the sperms without an egg is useless and vice versa is the egg. Therefore, we do not agree with the position of some pro-choice activists who claim an egg by itself to be equal with the one, which is already fertilized. They are hardly the same.
