Ethical Issue - abortion

[goout]

Number 3
Any procedure with the intent to kill another human being is immoral.
The object of the procedure is evil, not good.

If the woman has a cancerous uterus, and to save her life the treatment of the uterus has the effect of killing the child, that is morally permissible.
And even in that case, a mother may practice heroic virtue to save the human being growing inside her.

 

[goout]

One thing that I don’t fully understand is the ‘primacy of the informed conscience’? Could anyone possibly explain this for me and how it could possibly be related to abortion?

The human conscience is oriented to seek the objective good, which Christians hold to be the voice of God speaking in the individual.

The conscience is not the objective good itself. And so satisfying one’s individualized conscience is not the end of a moral evaluation. Because the conscience is the interface between the human being and the objective good, and not the good itself, the conscience may not be well formed and may cause the person to choose evil.

Exalting the individualized conscience for it’s own sake is not a fancy thing. It is simply an appeal to personal power. It is often seen as an agonized and heroic thing to nuance one’s conscience to the point of choosing evil.
It’s simply abdication of one’s responsibility to make good moral choices.

 

[midori]

One thing that I don’t fully understand is the ‘primacy of the informed conscience’?

Basically, it means that you don’t embark on a significant moral decision without educating yourself about it first.

Just like you don’t randomly marry someone you win by lottery— you date them, find out if you’re compatible, find out if you’re wanting to tie yourself to them, legally and financially and spiritually.

Just like you don’t withhold lifesaving care from someone who has a significant medical issue, and just let them die rather than finding out what you need to do to help them live. Like, for example, there are lots of thyroid problems that can be easily managed with medicine— but in the absence of that medicine, it can be a cruel/harsh/short life.

Just like you don’t run off and get a job with a company that engages in immoral/illegal/unethical business practices… you figure out what you’re doing, and make sure it’s okay, rather than just getting a random paycheck to pay your bills, and the source of those funds doesn’t matter.

You educate yourself, so that you make good, solid, ethical, moral decisions.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Mother’s “health” could mean a lot of things. if the mother’s life is in danger by the pregnancy

I have seen the “mother’s health” argument taken to extremes, one common one being that ANY pregnancy presents health risks to the mother, so the mother should ALWAYS have the option of avoiding these risks by killing the baby in the womb.

There needs to be some sort of distinction between a health risk that is truly serious/ grave, such as life-threatening ectopic pregnancy, and the ordinary, normal health risks of a pregnancy.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

Mother’s “health” could mean a lot of things. if the mother’s life is in danger by the pregnancy

I have seen the “mother’s health” argument taken to extremes, one common one being that ANY pregnancy presents health risks to the mother, so the mother should ALWAYS have the option of avoiding these risks by killing the baby in the womb.

There needs to be some sort of distinction between a health risk that is truly serious/ grave, such as life-threatening ectopic pregnancy, and the ordinary, normal health risks of a pregnancy.

Agreed. I’ve also seen health in this argument described as mental health. Which obviously is unacceptable in every way when it comes to reasons for abortion.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I’d be happy to respond. Shoot me a PM.

 

[TheLittleLady]

I would suggest three resources for you:

Mr Horn does an excellent job.

https://www.ncbcenter.org/consultation/

https://www.feministsforlife.org/

 

[Dugtrio1]

The challenge for your assignment seems to be to come up with an objective measure of “how strictly” a person adheres to his religious teaching. A number scale, for example. The Catholic Church is a good choice because it has a clearly established ethical code (catechism) as opposed to other religions with more denominations and a less clear set of ethical guides.

One way you can accomplish your assignment is by taking the Catechism of the Catholic Church (the set of rules), getting all the statements on abortion (search the index) and arrange them into a list of questions. Then you can ask your interviewee, “Do you agree with this? This? This? etc.” Assign your interviewee a score based on the number of “yes” responses and then it gives you an objective measure.

 

[Ender]

The Catholic Magisterium teaches that an embryo is a person from the moment of conception, and therefore the embryo is deserving of the same dignity and respect of that of a person. However, select Catholic Moral Theologians diverge; for example, Richard McCormick and Lisa Carhill believe that while the very early embryo is deserving of a great deal of dignity and respect, it is not yet a person.

It is true that the Magisterium teaches an embryo is a person from the moment of conception. It is also true that science teaches life begins at conception. The entire debate is about the meaning of “person”, and understand this: either a person is any human organism at whatever stage of development, or the definition is completely arbitrary. We have historical examples of how bad it can be to employ arbitrary definitions for that term.

"Do you believe that it is a person form the moment of conception that is deserving of dignity and respect equal to people?

If you say an embryo is not a person and is not entitled to the dignity and respect of “people” what is the argument against denying those things later on in life? Birth is not some magical moment where a non-person becomes a person in any meaningful way. Personhood becomes not an inherent right but merely a privilege granted by the state.

Do you believe that the rights of the mother and her family have precedence over the rights of the embryo?

How is this question different if asked of a fetus than if asked of a child? Anyone who thinks children don’t impose hardships on a family has never been a parent. Would anyone for a moment argue that the rights of the mother allow her to eliminate a problem child?

What about if there is a concern for the mothers health and welfare?

There is nothing that requires a mother to sacrifice her life for her child, although there have been heroic mothers who have done just that. That said, “health” is a slippery term (see: “person”) and the number of conditions that require an abortion to correct are effectively zero.

What ethical approach underpins your position on abortion?

If right and wrong do not exist objectively, independent of our personal opinions, they do not exist at all.

One thing that I don’t fully understand is the ‘primacy of the informed conscience’? Could anyone possibly explain this for me and how it could possibly be related to abortion?

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience.

Some people assume this means we are justified in doing whatever we believe is right, that following the “certain judgment” of our conscience eliminates accountability for whatever sin we may commit. That interpretation is in error. Believing abortion is necessary or appropriate does not excuse a person for having one.