Can raped girls abort?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alix
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Doc_Keele said:
It doesn’t seem like it!🙂
Click to expand...
Well, they do. And it’s not just Catholics. Anyone who has progressed to Kohlberg’s stage of universal morality knows it. And those who have managed to progress to his seventh stage know it even more clearly. :cool:

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.**
 
LittleSoldier said:
Well, they do. And it’s not just Catholics. Anyone who has progressed to Kohlberg’s stage of universal morality knows it. And those who have managed to progress to his seventh stage know it even more clearly. :cool:

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.**
Click to expand...
I’ve never heard of Kohlberg:blush:
If all Catholics do know this, then it seems they don’t know the implications of it then.
 
Doc_Keele said:
I’ve never heard of Kohlberg:blush:
If all Catholics do know this, then it seems they don’t know the implications of it then.
Click to expand...
Yes, we certainly do, which is why those are mostly Catholics you see demonstrating outside of abortion “clinics” and only very rarely, people of any other religion or non-religion.
 
jmcrae said:
Yes, we certainly do, which is why those are mostly Catholics you see demonstrating outside of abortion “clinics” and only very rarely, people of any other religion or non-religion.
Click to expand...
Well you can’t assume the one is because of the other:shrug:
 
Doc_Keele said:
I’ve never heard of Kohlberg:blush:
If all Catholics do know this, then it seems they don’t know the implications of it then.
Click to expand...
Really? Thank you for being honest. My fields are biology and research psychology, but I got severely hurt and wasn’t able to complete my education. Kohlberg is a pychologist who took Piaget’s (you must have heard of Piaget!) stages and expounded on them. Piaget didn’t have a seventh stage. Kohlberg’s seventh stage brings in religion. I’m not too clear on this stage yet.

It’s really very fascinating stuff and I recommend that you google it and find out about it because it explains (at least partly and of course it is a theory) why people behave the way they do when faced with a moral dilemma.

At the risk of screwing up what Piaget and Kohlberg said, my understanding is that many people honestly believe that if a man-made law states that something is illegal, that “something” is morally wrong. People sometimes get stuck at this stage and it’s a shame. I got to the next stage (the universal stage) and am now attempting to get to the final stage (the one that Kohlberg added). 🙂

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.
 
Yes I will look that up, that sounds very interesting:)

Yes, it’s certainly true that people take “moral cues” if you like from the criminal law, and there’s plenty of arguments that the law should have moral content. The law is there to denunciate unacceptable behaviour as one of its justifications for punishment.

I need to do a lot more work on moral philosophy, especially the philosophy of action as it’s relevant to my thesis.

Thanks for the info!đź‘Ť
 
Doc_Keele said:
Well you can’t assume the one is because of the other:shrug:
Click to expand...
Actually you can, can’t you? What is stopping someone? If we need to be so careful with words, I think the word you might use is “shouldn’t.” And I’m not sure I would even agree with “shouldn’t.”

I mean, isn’t what you said kind of like a child asking her teacher “Can I go to the bathroom?” Well, I hope so! If she can’t go to the bathroom she shouldn’t be in school, but in a doctor’s office.

That’s just if we want to be absolutely clear in our meanings and that is why I asked you for operational definitions quite awhile ago (and never received them BTW, but that’s OK). 🙂

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.
 
hope i’m nt repeating…

rape (@ least violent rape) rarely results in prenancy probably because of the trauma the woman experiences… stress, i guess, can interfere w/ ovulation & proably other things…

but i know someone who was date-raped and got pregantn… gave the child up for adoption… VERY difficultl and painful at first but now both are doing well…

so now the woman has no guilt feelings about murdering her child… which last a lifetime…

abortion destroys women as well as children (post aboriotn syndrome)… abortion destroys men who have no rights…& who also care about their chilren and what thye undergo in the procedure… aboriton destroys all of society … sending a msg to all that human life is expendable… disposable
 
Doc_Keele said:
Yes I will look that up, that sounds very interesting:)

Yes, it’s certainly true that people take “moral cues” if you like from the criminal law, and there’s plenty of arguments that the law should have moral content. The law is there to denunciate unacceptable behaviour as one of its justifications for punishment.

I need to do a lot more work on moral philosophy, especially the philosophy of action as it’s relevant to my thesis.

Thanks for the info!đź‘Ť
Click to expand...
You are very welcome. 🙂

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.
 
wanner47 said:
Once again… how does abortion not fit this definition?
Click to expand...
The answer is it depends on the circumstances. That’s the basis for my position that abortion is justified in cases of serious risk to the mother’s life for example.
 
Doc_Keele said:
The answer is it depends on the circumstances. That’s the basis for my position that abortion is justified in cases of serious risk to the mother’s life for example.
Click to expand...
You stated:
My personal definition of murder is the unjustified intentional killing of another human being by a rational actor I guess.
Click to expand...
Based on this definition how do circumstances play any roll is the definition of abortion as murder?
What part of your definition is variable dependent upon circumstances?
 
Doc_Keele said:
The answer is it depends on the circumstances. That’s the basis for my position that abortion is justified in cases of serious risk to the mother’s life for example.
Click to expand...
That scenario very rarely exists, and in the event it does usually the principle of double effect comes into play. Moreover, this circumstance arises in less than 1% of pregnancies.

Do you think it logical at all to legalize the murder of millions due to an event that occurs in less than 1% of pregnancies?
 
wanner47 said:
That scenario very rarely exists, and in the event it does usually the principle of double effect comes into play. Moreover, this circumstance arises in less than 1% of pregnancies.

Do you think it logical at all to legalize the murder of millions due to an event that occurs in less than 1% of pregnancies?
Click to expand...
That’s a straw man argument.
 
davidv said:
You stated:
Based on this definition how do circumstances play any roll is the definition of abortion as murder?
What part of your definition is variable dependent upon circumstances?
Click to expand...
No, the definition isn’t variable (wouldn’t be much of a definition then would it?). I wasn’t defining abortion as murder as such.
 
Doc_Keele said:
No, the definition isn’t variable (wouldn’t be much of a definition then would it?). I wasn’t defining abortion as murder as such.
Click to expand...
From my perspective, abortion meets all of the conditions of your definition. It is, therefore, murder, as you defined it.
 
davidv said:
From my perspective, abortion meets all of the conditions of your definition. It is, therefore, murder, as you defined it.
Click to expand...
Well I could drive a truck through the holes in that argument, davidv;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top