Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



2/19/2016 7:23 pm  #1


The Abortion issue.

Hi guys, I'm new to this board but am looking for some help on the abortion issue.

My whole life I have been passionately pro life (my folks were protesters in the 80's). However, recently I have been having a bit of a pro life crisis so to speak. I am beginning to find the pro-life view inconsistent, illogical, and sometimes extreme in a way that's starting to disturb me. There are so many ways to begin a chat on this topic and so many things to say I'm not sure where to start. So I guess I'll just start by asking what your response would be to shirt tough questions.

So here's the first one...you've heard it a million times.

If your 10 year old child was raped by your brother what would you do?

 

2/19/2016 7:38 pm  #2


Re: The Abortion issue.

Hi Matt,

Please feel free to post whatever questions you have here. Some of us have different takes on the issues depending on whether they are NL theorists or not.

Mattman wrote:

If your 10 year old child was raped by your brother what would you do?

I presume you mean to imply 'and impregnated'? If so then care for the 10 year old whilst waiting to see how things took there course. Note that by the Principle of Double Effect some Natural Law accounts would still hold it permissible to carry out an operation which has the unintended effect of leading to the death of the unborn child if undertaken for suitable medical reasons (the American Catholic Quarterly recently featured an entire issue dedicated to this question) - think instances when both parties would die anyway. Those aside the child would be born and cared for like any other and the mother would receive all forms of support to help her cope.

That aside I would not consider it moral to kill the brother for his actions, so why should I consider it moral to do so to an innocent party. Likewise I wouldn't consider it morally permissible to kill an adult born of incest so why a child?

So short answer: if the fetus is indeed an individuated person by that point the 'extremeness' of the situation cannot provide Consequentialist justification for killing them. I would differ from most Catholics in that I'm willing to enter into debate on at what point this individuation does happen - either way though it would be far, far earlier that the normal cut-off date for such operations.

Last edited by DanielCC (2/19/2016 7:40 pm)

 

2/19/2016 7:45 pm  #3


Re: The Abortion issue.

Mattman,

I don't think your issues with the pro-life position are really strictly logical. Based on your example it is rather more emotional - and please don't take that to mean something like an insult or even necessarily a defect. Emotion is part of our being and is properly human. Exactly so, people could easily see the way a philosopher would tackle a strictly logical issue with the pro-life position as being in some sense mean, insensitive or cold-hearted. In part I think this is where the art of rhetoric would properly come in.

But what would I do? I would certainly want to do all I could to help, comfort and console the poor child and do everything I could to make sure the child had the resources she (presumably) needs; e.g., expert and sensitive psychological help, all medical assistance* but also certainly any spiritual resources (assuming she is a believer). Further I might myself seek these things to prevent me from adding crime to crime; I mean, to prevent myself from seeking vigilante justice against my brother.

To that extent I have answered your question, I think. But notice that someone visiting here might be a bit surprised to see such a response posted on a philosophy forum though, to be sure, we can definitely more explicitly tie this into practical philosophy, which is the art of living wisely, which includes living ethically (in classical philosophy at least).

That all being said God bless you and your family, and perhaps especially for the grace and courage to be pro-life. The fact that you are now tackling the issue in the very down-to-earth, practical sphere is rather, I think, at least possibly indicative of real progress and commitment to the pro-life cause.

*Edit: Added: "all medical assistance." The more I think about your question Matt the more I realize the response could be lengthened and qualified almost ad infinitum.

Last edited by Timocrates (2/19/2016 8:06 pm)


"The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State."
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16 (3).

Defend your Family. Join the U.N. Family Rights Caucus.
 

2/19/2016 7:47 pm  #4


Re: The Abortion issue.

I mean, given the way you're expressing yourself, I don't think that you necessarily want a very detailed philosophical account. But, I can put the standard moral position in popular terms the following way:

A child of rape and incest is still a life and you are not entitled to kill it because it is associated with a traumatic event. Everyone understands how awful things are for the mother, and this is why the rapist incestuous father should be severely punished, but on what grounds would abortion follow? It is not usual to consider emotional trauma alone sufficient justification for gross moral error. It only ever serves as a mitigating factor with respect to retribution.

Now, if the mother's life is in danger (she is 10) the procedure might be properly medical and the loss of the fetus might be an unfortunate side effect of preserving her life. But that depends on circumstances and is not the kind of "exception" (it in fact isn't an exception) that demolishes the moral position.


Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 

2/19/2016 8:11 pm  #5


Re: The Abortion issue.

As for my own position, I'm with Daniel in saying that I'm more willing to permit abortion after conception, since I'm not fully convinced by the usual teleological arguments that try to begin the moral restriction immediately upon conception. However, my position on the moral status of killing is not particularly standard and is generally a lot more greco-roman than Christian, so I am willing to permit a lot of things that even moderns would be willing to consider gross moral error, mainly because I'm not particularly convinced that bare human life has a protected moral status in the same way that Christians and people falling in the post Christian tradition are. Consequentialists tacitly agree with me, but for vastly different reasons.


Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 

2/20/2016 6:16 am  #6


Re: The Abortion issue.

Thank you guys for your responses so far. I would just like to say I'm aware that my first post seems rather emotional rather than philosophical.Just wanted to throw it out there though, because although it is emotional it is very raw and real. I mean I understand people have to use their logic and stand with reason but it just seems to me that sometimes circumstances that are fully evil might have different rules?

I think in the case of the 10 year old raped it makes us get very serious about holding true to whether a VERY EARLY embryo is a person. (I'm talking 5 weeks here).

I mean what happened if the girl is 5 weeks pregnant with an embryo that for we know for a fact will be acephalic. It seems to me that there are other things to measure in this situation that would give us help us determine whether or not it's OK to abort? I guess I'm having issues with the absolutism.

(I know my ideas are mushy so I appreciate everyone's help)

     Thread Starter
 

2/20/2016 6:21 am  #7


Re: The Abortion issue.

(How do I reply to individuals on here??)

     Thread Starter
 

2/20/2016 6:27 am  #8


Re: The Abortion issue.

Mattman wrote:

(How do I reply to individuals on here??)

I'd suggest just quoting from their posts (or PMing them if you want to keep it private).

 

2/20/2016 7:29 am  #9


Re: The Abortion issue.

Thanks you Daniel, I was wondering seeing a couple things about your post:

A serious problem I have with the abortion issue is the whole direct/indirect forseen/unforeseen dilemma. It ends up seeming like a word game to most people I beleive. Especially, when tough smack you in the face realities appear (like mom who's about to die or pregnant child). As in " Yes, we can cut a piece of the woman tube which her embryo is stuck in, but we absolutely can not sprag it out of tube- we would be attacking it's body"!

I was wondering what your take on this is? I honestly beleive that if there is a medical reason for a pregnancy termination before the baby can survive outside of the womb, that any method of termination that's is safest would be allowable. So a woman who is 7 weeks pregnant with an infected cervix can have a d&c.

Also, when do you think you can ascribe human status to an embryo.( I have always said conception but am having some issues with that as well.)

     Thread Starter
 

2/20/2016 7:32 am  #10


Re: The Abortion issue.

Now that I'm think about it more I've concluded that you've actually picked a bad case for modern sensibilities: a 10 year old can't meaningfully consent to the abortion or fathom her choices, so in reality it's not even a particularly "private" affair in the very individualistic terms of the modern way of thinking about it. You're basically talking about a case where family is going to decide on the 10 year old's behalf that the pregnancy isn't something she should have to face.

That kind of strips the example of much of the usual rhetorical pathos: it's not as if a 10 year old, stressed by her looming grave decision, should be left out of society's judgmental and meddling eye to make this choice for herself. The judgemental and meddling family will simply handle it for her and wider social constraints on the dicision are arbitrarily excluded from the prcess. Hell, it's not even clear to me that a 10 year old would fully grasp all the distress over her future that usually factors into abortion decisions even if she could made the decision for herself, so what kind of distress are you trying to prevent in this case? The family's distress?

Mattman wrote:

I think in the case of the 10 year old raped it makes us get very serious about holding true to whether a VERY EARLY embryo is a person. (I'm talking 5 weeks here).

I agree with you that it's worth considering, and that's certainly a case that would get a lot of attention, but the child-incest/rape aspect is basically a red herring. It's ultimately irrelevant to the question. If the pregnancy is a person, and if it is prohibited to kill all innocent persons, then the pregnancy cannot be killed. If the pregnancy isn't a person, then, provided no other gross moral error is in play (and it's possible to consider abortion an aspect of some other kinds of vices besides murder), then it is (within whatever relevant limits) permitted to kill it. Bringing up childhood-incest/rape in the example makes it seem like that aspect is morally relevant, and it's very hard for me to see how it would be. At best it seems rhetorically relevant only.

Now, indeed, there might be some additional extraneous ethical aspects connected to such a case. Things that occur to me, and others might comment:

1. If abortion is permissible, it might be an especially relevant times for certain outside parties to exercise certain virtues like charity to aid in the procedure.
2. If abortion isn't permissible, people willing to lend their aid helping the victim and her child and bringing the criminal to justice are certainly exercising any number of virtues.
3. In any case, failure to exercise sympathy for the victim is probably characteristic of any number of vices.

Mattman wrote:

I mean what happened if the girl is 5 weeks pregnant with an embryo that for we know for a fact will be acephalic. It seems to me that there are other things to measure in this situation that would give us help us determine whether or not it's OK to abort? I guess I'm having issues with the absolutism.

I personally am disinclined to think that killing is prohibited merely on the basis of life alone, but the standard view would usually hold that the case of an acephalic is not particularly different from a severely disabled person, which we aren't inclined to kill. Given the common assumption, I tend to agree. You generally can't slip poison to brain damaged relatives, so I don't see why you can kill an acephalic except for the convenient circumstances of the hidden status of fetuses and modern people's general lack of concern for things that are "private".

Now, that probably won't apply cleanly to all acephalics. I don't know if there are cases where the fetus simply is outright not viable outside the womb due to a lack of a brain stem or something like that. In those cases, I'm not sure what the usual Church stance is. Do you have to wait for the fetus to die on its own either in the womb or shortly after birth?

For reasons related to my Platonism I'm actually very interested in how classical arguments interact with cases of extreme deformity. Some fetuses can be so deformed as to be medically considered tumors. In these cases you've got such a gross distortion of the telos of a human body that I'm not sure what to say about it. Is it still even rightly called human? Why? DNA? The instantiation is so distorted that it seems to me like trying to draw meaningful teleological parallels between trees and mulch.


Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum