Angel
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 3, 2017
- Messages
- 18,001
- Reaction score
- 2,909
- Location
- New York City
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Abortion 201: the Legal question
Prerequisite: Abortion 101
https://www.debatepolitics.com/abortion/350312-abortion-101-a.html#post1069806631The Argument
The taking of a human life for any reason other than self-defense is immoral.
Except where the pregnant woman's life is at risk, abortion is immoral.
But human beings have a right to be immoral.
Therefore women have a right to be immoral.
Therefore women have a right to abort pregnancies.
That's the issue settled morally.
Morally, one may be both pro-life and pro-choice.
The legal settlement of the issue is another matter.
The legal settlement of the issue is political.
The political question is how, as a society, to rationalize the taking of human life in abortion as a legal right.
In Abortion 101 we explored the moral argument for being at once both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice in the matter of abortion.
Over 200 posts later and the DP Pro-Choice Contingent still didn't get it.
I explain this failure in two ways:
1. The Pro-Choice Contingent cannot think outside their talking points.
2. The Pro-Choice Contingent cannot separate the moral from the legal aspects of abortion.
In Abortion 201 we take up the legal question of abortion.
Question:
How does the moral question of abortion relate to the legal question of abortion?
In order to avoid the drone of talking points which the misunderstanding of this question will draw from the Pro-Choice Contingent,
let us stipulate here at the outset that abortion is legal in the United States, and that its legality is not the question being mooted here.
The question raised here goes to the relation between the moral argument presented in Abortion 101 and the legality of abortion.
Inasmuch as the DP Pro-Choice Contingent still does not get the moral argument, this summary may be in order:
1. Being both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice is the morally sound view on abortion.
2. Abortion is immoral (with exceptions).
3. But every moral agent has a right to be immoral (a right in the sense of a claim, not a right in the sense of privilege).
Questions:
In allowing an immoral act is abortion law an immoral law?
In embodying the morally sound view on abortion is abortion law itself morally sound?
Over 200 posts later and the DP Pro-Choice Contingent still didn't get it.
I explain this failure in two ways:
1. The Pro-Choice Contingent cannot think outside their talking points.
2. The Pro-Choice Contingent cannot separate the moral from the legal aspects of abortion.
In Abortion 201 we take up the legal question of abortion.
Question:
How does the moral question of abortion relate to the legal question of abortion?
In order to avoid the drone of talking points which the misunderstanding of this question will draw from the Pro-Choice Contingent,
let us stipulate here at the outset that abortion is legal in the United States, and that its legality is not the question being mooted here.
The question raised here goes to the relation between the moral argument presented in Abortion 101 and the legality of abortion.
Inasmuch as the DP Pro-Choice Contingent still does not get the moral argument, this summary may be in order:
1. Being both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice is the morally sound view on abortion.
2. Abortion is immoral (with exceptions).
3. But every moral agent has a right to be immoral (a right in the sense of a claim, not a right in the sense of privilege).
Questions:
In allowing an immoral act is abortion law an immoral law?
In embodying the morally sound view on abortion is abortion law itself morally sound?