Nothing stirs up controversy like abortion. To some, it carries the steep moral cost of destroying human life, while to others, it represents an inviolable bastion of women’s rights over their own bodies. Despite the polarizing nature of the debate, it covers broad philosophical ground, and touches on religious, political, social and moral considerations. Ken and John seek a dispassionate and rational discussion of abortion with UC Berkeley Journalism professor Cynthia Gorney, author ofArticles of Faith: A Frontline History of the Abortion Wars.
As our show begins, John and Ken survey the landscape of the abortion debate. John posits that there are two acts whose morality is debated: the act of aborting the fetus, and the act of restraining women who want to get an abortion. He also notes that the relation between the morally objectionable nature of an act and the government’s right to interfere with it is not always clear. Ken, meanwhile, identifies two main strategies that have been used to defend abortion. The first is to argue that while fetuses are human beings, they are not persons. Persons have consciousness, the ability to feel pain, emotions, etc., and it is these properties that qualify persons for rights that human beings do not have, including the right to life. The second strategy is to maintain that even if a fetus is a person, killing it might be something that a woman has a right to do, since it is inside her or a part of her body.
John and Ken are then joined by guest Cynthia Gorney, who sets them straight on some of the facts around gestation and when we might consider a fetus a person, although she notes that scientists are far from consensus on many of the questions. She also emphasizes that while the legal debate dichotomizes between a non-being and a person with rights, most people think that there are many steps between these two states of being.
With some of the facts straight, the discussion turns to moral questions. Ken wants to know what kind of rights something on its way to being a person has. Gorney notes that in moral philosophy, philosophers often rely on analogies, and she cautions our philosophers against analogizing with respect to birth control, because it is unlike any other moral dilemma. So, of course, John offers a strange analogy, meant to show that because human development up to birth is gradual, the morality of abortion is also gradated. An audience member wants to know how laws could reflect a question of gradual morality. Ken considers the second pro-life strategy he had identified and finds it rather unpromising.
Finally, John and Cynthia agree that it is not consistent with the pro-life position to make exceptions for rape and incest. This is because, at its heart, the pro-life position is not about whether or not a woman is responsible for being pregnant, but rather about the right of a fetus to life. A fetus conceived via rape or incest should logically have the same right to life as one conceived consensually. Gorney wryly notes that while philosophers are free to make this point, most pro-life politicians will not, for fear of appearing heartless.
Comments(1)
Harold G. Neuman
Tuesday, February 15, 2022 -- 2:42 PM
Insofar as the High Court is鉴于高等法院正在走向保守的乌托邦，越来越远离法治——最明显的是，完善的判例法，我在此重申我对情境现实的看法，这是在2011年佩里的文章评论中概述的，涉及现实水平。我在此不再赘述。工作太多，项目尚未完成……
Some of my thoughts, sent to a local newspaper, I herein revisit. There is wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth over the Biden Promise. He will nominate a black female for the chair to be vacated. This, to counter challenges to women's rights (& Roe v Wade) mounted by conservatism.
He is counting on a trifecta bet: 1. A liberal, black female jurist. 2. Her confirmation. 3. Her appointment. Betting is only a gamble: winning, a short-lived victory.
在提到的那封信中，我指出了早些时候的提名、确认和任命的结果，声称这是在任总统应该做的正确的事情，即使这不是可能做出的最佳选择:我们不仅得到了一名助理法官，整个过程对他来说是盲目的，而且在很大程度上也是沉默的。这位法学家话不多，显然对自己的智慧很满意。
I also remarked concerning people who are silent and what that might indicate about their judgment. I received a predictable response from the newspaper. So far. Silence.
如果你还活着，你就知道我说的是谁/什么时候。你甚至可能知道为什么它很重要。