It's morally inconsistent, it's not logical so, however. Logic is pretty much what we make of it, so people can rationalize it however they want.
For example: there are those who would say the government has no right to kill people, and it is logicaly consistent to say that same person may oppose government telling a woman what she can do with her body. In both cases, it is a matter of... what do conservatives call it... right, "small government."
Another way people look at it is that abortion has nothing to do with selection. A woman getting an abortion is killing the "right" person 100% of the time, whereas some people oppose capital punishment because you can never be sure a person is guilty, and killing them sort of eliminates the possibility of appeal. What's more, there aren't all-white groups of women condemning black babies to die because they find them threatening. Black men face this reality in jury trials all the time.
On the other side, there's plenty of people who think a baby is innocent and should not be killed, while a criminal has been found guilty and deserves to die. It's not an issue of "consistency," it's an issue of how one perceives each situation.
For the record, the Catholic church opposes both. I forget which pope said it, but he equated the issue to the seamless robe of Jesus, about how there should be no exceptions.
If you look up seamless robe of Jesus, I bet you could find it. I'm running out real quick so I don't have time, sadly.
It's morally inconsistent, it's not logical so, however. Logic is pretty much what we make of it, so people can rationalize it however they want.
ReplyDeleteFor example: there are those who would say the government has no right to kill people, and it is logicaly consistent to say that same person may oppose government telling a woman what she can do with her body. In both cases, it is a matter of... what do conservatives call it... right, "small government."
Another way people look at it is that abortion has nothing to do with selection. A woman getting an abortion is killing the "right" person 100% of the time, whereas some people oppose capital punishment because you can never be sure a person is guilty, and killing them sort of eliminates the possibility of appeal. What's more, there aren't all-white groups of women condemning black babies to die because they find them threatening. Black men face this reality in jury trials all the time.
On the other side, there's plenty of people who think a baby is innocent and should not be killed, while a criminal has been found guilty and deserves to die. It's not an issue of "consistency," it's an issue of how one perceives each situation.
On another note, I find it futile to seek or expect consistency in huumanity.
ReplyDeleteHence I asked.
ReplyDeleteHence I tried to answer.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, the Catholic church opposes both. I forget which pope said it, but he equated the issue to the seamless robe of Jesus, about how there should be no exceptions.
If you look up seamless robe of Jesus, I bet you could find it. I'm running out real quick so I don't have time, sadly.