RE: Traditional Xtianity teaches

From: Adrian Teo (ateo@whitworth.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 21 2002 - 19:48:45 EDT

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: Traditional Xtianity teaches"

    Hello Burgy,

    I respond to this in light of having read George Murphy's response,
    which I agree with substantially.

            YOU WROTE:
            Based on the rather obvious (and agreed to) fact that we
    really do not know,
            and will never know, the "exact point" (if one exists) when
    the developing
            entity becomes a human being with a soul (indeed, we do not
    even know if a
            "soul" exists), I argue the moral ethic that abortion therefore must be
            considered to very likely be a "wrong," and therefore, in the
    absence of any
            other reasons, ought to be avoided.

            I also argue that there ARE other factors to consider, such as rape and
            incest situations, and situations involving the pregnant
    female's health,
            and situations involving severe fetal deformities.

            AT: What puzzles me here is how does one not fall into
    situation ethics if what is very likely to be a wrong can be
    mitigated by other factors?In your view, are there absolute wrongs?
    For example, the taking of an obviously innocent life (at whatever
    point where it would be reasonable to conclude that the enitty is a
    human life)?

            Adrian.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Oct 24 2002 - 00:58:25 EDT