Moral Convenience

"One can regard the fetus in its early stages as close enough to an innocent human being for us to abhor its destruction, but not close enough for us to deny the would-be mother the freedom to terminate it."

It's pretty binary, either the fetus is an innocent human being or it is not.  What does "close enough" even mean?  Isn't this argument the underpinning of every genocide?

The author's right, one can make that argument.  But that's just because people hold muddled and self-contradictory positions all the time.

Giuliani drives me nuts.  He no doubt thinks all sorts of government regulations concerning our bodies are good, but somehow gets in touch with his "principled libertarian" side when it comes to abortion?  The government says a woman can't smoke pot but she can kill a human being if it resides in her.

Giuliani's pro-torture and pro-abortion positions make it impossible for me to vote for him.  If he's the Republican nominee I'm voting for Testudo.

Comments

[PeterTerp]

"The government says a woman can't smoke pot but she can kill a human being if it resides in her."

Hey, be careful with that argument. They might think that you are advocating the legalization of marijuana.
Actually, there are probably all kinds of things that we should be allowed to do on the basis of equivalency...