In light of the Tiller slaying yesterday, William Saletan makes the same argument here that I made here. The exact same argument is developed here and here.
If the pro-life camp is going to condemn Tiller's killer, they're going to have to rethink their stand on the moral equivalance premise.
Joe H.
Posts
The Years Of Writing Dangerously
9 years ago
3 comments:
You're kididng, right? You can't allow for the majority of people who are pro-life that they also are opposed equally to this act of murder and that they grieve for this man's family? That's sad.
Anonymous,
I think the killing of Tiller was murder (unjustified killing). Most pro-lifers also think so.
The problem is that most pro-lifers also believe in what I've called the "moral equivalency" premise. That premise, stated simply, is that an eight minute old fetus has the same moral status as an eight month old fetus and an eight year old child. Killing any one of these entities is morally equivalent to killing any other.
If you believe in the moral equivalency premise, then the killing of Tiller was an act of defending the innocent - which makes it justified and, thus, not an act of murder (which is unjustified killing).
I don't accept the moral equivalency premise with regards to early term fetal entities (I don't think there is a "someone" at that stage). So don't face the justification problem (although Tiller was performing very late term abortions, they were apparently done in very bad situations such that, when he was tried under Kansas law, the State was unable to convict him).
What I'm getting at is that the moral equivalence premise is not compatible with the belief that shooting abortion providers is murder. The moral equivalence premise implies that the shooters are self sacrificing heros.
To resist this conclusion, as Saletan suggested, people in the pro-life camp will need to rethink their position on the wrongfulness of abortion.
Joe H.
You present a sound and clinical argument for your position. But I doubt that most pro-lifers are in the "moral equivalency" camp; however, the majority of Americans are indeed opposed to the type of late-term abortions that Tiller routinely performed. His reason: to protect the mental health (not physical!) of his patients, who were referred to him by other physicians. Read this article [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/01/abortion-tiller-and-murder-compounded/], which also contains congressional testimony, and I think you will see the other side of a well-reasoned, clinical argument about this issue - which rarely ever gets a hearing in this country or by those who are pro-choice.
Post a Comment