The Jury Talks Back

3/10/2009

Non-Religious Argument Against Abortion

Filed under: Uncategorized — Fritz @ 8:53 pm

From, Marquis, Don (April 1989). “Why Abortion is Immoral”. The Journal of Philosophy 86 (4): 183-202.

The misfortune of premature death involves a loss of the goods that make life worth living. On Marquis’s view, “the misfortune of premature death consists of the loss to us of the future goods of consciousness. What are these goods? … The goods of life are whatever we get out of life. The goods of life are those items toward which we take a pro attitude. They are completed projects of which we are proud, the pursuit of our goals, aesthetic enjoyments, friendships, intellectual pursuits, and physical pleasures of various sorts. The goods of life are what make life worth living” (190).

Accordingly, Marquis subscribes to the Future Like Ours Thesis (or FLO for short):

FLO: Killing a human is wrong because it deprives her of “a future like ours.”

Arguments in Support of the FLO theory:

The Considered Judgment Argument:

1. According to our considered judgments, what people fear the most about death is the loss of future experience.
2. If 1, then, according to our considered judgments, it is the loss of future experience that fully constitutes death as a grave misfortune to people.
3. Therefore, according to our considered judgments, it is the loss of future experience that fully constitutes death as a grave misfortune to people.
4. The fetus is equally capable of sustaining a loss of future experience.
5. Therefore, death is an equally grave misfortune for the fetus.
6. It is wrong to deliberately inflict a misfortune on a fetus that is as grave as death to people.
7. Therefore, it is wrong to deliberately inflict death on the fetus.

Another argument:

1. What makes murder the worst of crimes is that it deprives a person of her future experience.
2. If 1, then it is the worst of wrongs to deprive a being capable of future experience of all her future experience.
3. Therefore, it is the worst of wrongs to deprive a being capable of future experience of all her future experience.
4. A fetus is capable of future experience.
5. Therefore, it is the worst of wrongs to deprive a fetus of all her future experience.

h/t: Keith Burgess-Jackson

Scatter-shot from around the web

Filed under: Uncategorized — Scott Jacobs @ 2:18 pm

The following items have caught my attention, and my lapsing/remitting ADHD prevents a full post for each (though I can work one up if one of these gets significant attention).  And so without further delay…

I know that most of us thought that the $787 Billion Stimulus bill would be but the first of many, but to be considering another so soon? (Redstate’s got something good on this too, great long quote from Speaker Pelosi

Having already gotten $13.4 Billion (seperate from the Stimulus Bill’s cost, mind you), General Motors wants $16.6 Billion more.

It seems that Sen Dodd (D – CT) might have a bit of a problem in the next election, since he is polling unfavorably already against someone who has merely said he’s considering a run.

Charles Freeman (President Obama’s pick to chair his National Intelligence Council) has asked that his selection not proceed, amid rising criticism due to some statements that suggest anti-Israel and/or pro-China leanings.

Coming soon to an Economy near you: The Botchmen.

Instapundit links to a possible conflict of interest for President Obama’s Urban Czar Adolfo Carrion

Instapundit informs us that the GOP is finally considering ethics turnabout to be fair play.  About damn time.

It seems that all is not Sunshine and Unicorn Farts on the Hill, as boths sides take issue with Obama’s Budget…  If you look close, you’ll see a truly laughable quote from Pelosi regarding unemployment rates.

Think Bush Stopped Stem Cell Research? WRONG!

Filed under: Uncategorized — Kevin M @ 9:25 am

From the Now They Tell Us Department at the NY Times, comes this bit about the history of restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cells.  Congress, not the President, has been blocking the funding, and there is only a slight difference between the Bush and Clinton/Obama policy.

Restrictions on embryonic stem cell research originated with Congress, which, each year since in 1996, has forbidden the use of federal financing for any experiment in which a human embryo is destroyed. This includes the derivation of human stem cell lines from surplus fertility clinic embryos, first achieved by Dr. James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin in 1998.

President Clinton contemplated but never implemented a policy that would have allowed N.I.H.-financed researchers to study human embryonic stem cells derived by others. Research was able to begin only in August 2001, when President Bush, seeking a different way around the Congressional restriction, said researchers could use any lines established before that date.

Critics said the distinction between the Clinton and Bush policies lacked moral significance, given that each was intended to get around the Congressional ban, based on a religious and moral argument. The proposed Clinton policy amounted to: “Stealing is wrong, but it’s O.K. to use stolen property if someone else stole it.” The Bush policy was: “Stealing is wrong, but it’s O.K. to use stolen property if it was stolen before Aug. 9, 2001.”

Mr. Obama has put the proposed Clinton policy into effect, but Congressional restrictions remain. Researchers are still forbidden to use federal financing to derive new human embryonic stem cell lines. They will, however, be allowed to do research on new stem cell lines grown in a privately financed lab.


Powered by WordPress.