I’m working on an abortion/stem cell essay that’s applicable to a wider range of matters where state meets personal morals. In short, one consequence of my (current) political meta-ethic needs to confront the fact that abortion certainly and possibly other issues, e.g., public opinion on ESCR is in my view well tested by the democratic process, means that the society at large from a political perspective finds these to be right. That is the majority yield the authority for these things to be done. I think that with few exceptions abortion remains personally unethical and I’ve yet to hear an argument for a generic situation in which it might be considered ethical. However that is a separate question to the political meta-ethical one.
Anyhow, I’ll elaborate more when I have it worked out more in detail.
One thing you might want to consider in your essay is ‘ethical arbitrage’ in your ideal vision of a world dominated by ‘local communities’. By that I mean communities will ban embryo research out of ethical concerns but yet reap the benefits of those few communities that do legalize it.
I think that with few exceptions abortion remains personally unethical and I’ve yet to hear an argument for a generic situation in which it might be considered ethical.
In the case of late term abortions two types of cases I recall reading about involved unborn babies who have no brain (well they have a brain stem so very basic functions like heart rate are maintained). They die immediately after birth. The other type involves cases where the brain grows outside the skull. While the brain may be functioning closer to a normal human baby than in the first case, the condition means instant and assured death upon birth. Considering that the head is not normally sized, birth can be risky and as a result the hyper-hyped ‘partial birth abortion’ is used. I’m not sure if these are generic situations that happen to be rare or just situations too rare to be considered generic but you may want to consider them.
I’ve yet to hear an argument for a generic situation in which it might be considered ethical.
If a fetus is not a person, and the woman doesn’t want to continue to bring it to term, why isn’t it ethical?
If you’re going to start out assuming your conclusion (the fetus is a person) why bother?
JA,
I don’t have to “assume it’s a person.” It’s alive. Under what generic situations is it ethical to kill a puppy?
There are quite a few situations where it is ethical to kill a puppy that we would never accept as applicable to a person. Shelters that can’t find a home for an unwanted puppy do this all the time.
I don’t have to “assume it’s a person.” It’s alive. Under what generic situations is it ethical to kill a puppy?
It’s not even close to being a puppy. Under what generic situations is it okay to kill a bacterium? You never know, 4 billion years from now, that bacterium might be the ancestor of the most intelligent being the world has ever known.
Boonton,
Was Mr Vick’s actions regarding dogs ethical or not? Are you just being obtuse for arguments sake?
There are in fact situations in which it is considered ethical to kill a puppy. Oddly enough however, those conditions (and what reasons are valid) are regulated and controlled, unlike the situation with late term abortion.
So it appears that your (and JA’s?) position the life of a puppy is more valuable than that of a viable fetus. Is that right?
JA,
We’re discussing late term abortion. How is a viable fetus = a bacterium?
Mark,
Sorry, I got my threads confused and thought we were talking embryos. A viable fetus is more than a puppy.
JA,
Well, actually that’s understandable. This thread kinda got brought over from the other side by Boonton.
I think I’ll wait for your essay before we open up abortion and embryos again. Best to keep the comments in one place