Morality

[jillian]

There's command theory (like most religious views), there's utilitarian (like poly's) and there's natural law.

I'll take natural law. Because it is based on our nature, not something supernatural or ideological.

natural law?

you mean like natural selection? darwinism?

nature is amoral

[Chris]

natural law?

you mean like natural selection? darwinism?

nature is amoral

No. Natural law as what is natural to who we are.

[jillian]

No. Natural law as what is natural to who we are.

Unless you're gay or pro choice?

[Chris]

Unless you're gay or pro choice?

How do you justify being pro-choice? Morally, I mean.

[Chloe]

How do you justify being pro-choice? Morally, I mean.

I'm not trying to respond for Jillian but I don't think that being "pro-choice" is really a morality thing. I think that the extreme pro-life position is more immoral in some cases.

Pro-choice is not anti-life or anti-baby, it's just the allowance of the parent to decide the future development of the embryo growing inside of her up until a certain point in my opinion. To deny a parent the ability to have a say in their health and what could happen to their family's future is actually more immoral in my opinion than allowing them to do what they feel is best for their lives since it not only takes away some of their freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but it forces them to possibly take steps that could be harmful to themselves or their family's stability...which would be immoral for the opposing person to put onto someone else because of their point of view. Anyway that's just my opinion. I could be wrong but I think it just depends on how you look at it.

[junie]

How do you justify being pro-choice? Morally, I mean.

it would be immoral to leave such a thing up to government regulation...

Defenders of the decision argue that Roe v. Wade was a disinterested, pragmatic, and ultimately principled decision defending the most basic rights of personal liberty and privacy.


http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt...dmark_roe.html


The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws and cited past cases ruling that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this "zone of privacy." The Court then argued that the "zone of privacy" was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." This decision involved myriad physical, psychological, and economic stresses a pregnant woman must face.

[Chris]

I'm not trying to respond for Jillian but I don't think that being "pro-choice" is really a morality thing. I think that the extreme pro-life position is more immoral in some cases.

Pro-choice is not anti-life or anti-baby, it's just the allowance of the parent to decide the future development of the embryo growing inside of her up until a certain point in my opinion. To deny a parent the ability to have a say in their health and what could happen to their family's future is actually more immoral in my opinion than allowing them to do what they feel is best for their lives since it not only takes away some of their freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but it forces them to possibly take steps that could be harmful to themselves or their family's stability...which would be immoral for the opposing person to put onto someone else because of their point of view. Anyway that's just my opinion. I could be wrong but I think it just depends on how you look at it.

Yes, but what of the unborn's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? How do you morally justify denying it what you allow the mother?

(I didn't bring this up. :-))

[junie]

Yes, but what of the unborn's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? How do you morally justify denying it what you allow the mother?

(I didn't bring this up. :-))

what anyone would personally choose is beside the point as far as being legally pro-choice...

[Chris]

it would be immoral to leave such a thing up to government regulation...

I agree.

But how do you justify depriving the unborn its rights? And what is this thing called privacy, where does that come from, is it a natural right too? Why deprive the unborn that natural right?

[Chris]

what anyone would personally choose is beside the point as far as being legally pro-choice...

Ah, but the question here is not what is legality but what is morality.