Replies

“What do you suggest be done?”

There’s one train of thought I’ve been exploring. It involves asking some very fundamental questions about morality, and crime and punishment, and to do so without recourse to theological dogma. In other words relying only on rational thought.

By the way, I don’t have any problem with somebody saying I’m against abortion because the bible says so and I believe in what the bible says. That’s fine, but that’s not a rational argument, it’s dogma, it’s not up for discussion.

Anyway, my train of thought goes like this:

1. The motive force of all humans is the pursuit of their own happiness (as they define it).

2. Humans are pretty good at determining what makes them happy in the short run, but not as good as determining how a particular or a set of short term actions will impact their happiness in the long run.

3. To deal with the long term happiness problem, younger people have relied on their elders to teach them the lessons that they learned through experience as to the do’s and don’ts of life. Sort of like a first time explorer telling a subsequent traveler what to watch out for on his journey. These “rules” is what I call “morals”. (BTW this is one of the key roles that religion plays in our lives - it tells us the dos and don’ts that will lead us to a happier life ( or even afterlife)).

4. One of the “rules” or moral that is quite universal among humans is “thou shall not kill”

5. If, as I stated above, morals are rules that lead one to a happier future, how does “thou shall not kill” accomplish that? Or similarly “thou shall not steal”?

6. Let’s say there was no law against killing, what would happen if say I killed your brother. What would be the consequences on my future happiness of such an act? Well, I got a feeling I could easily end up being killed by you or his other relatives or sons. So for my own future happiness I’d be wise to not kill someone else.

7. But what if that someone else was a loner with no living relatives, no close friends. If I killed him, how would that effect my long term happiness? What would be the consequences? They may not be as severe as the case described in 6. But would there still be some consequences. Would strangers feel that I would pose a threat to their life? Probably. Would there be a sense of empathy that would cause a backlash against my action. Maybe. Would I be ostracized? The consequences would most likely not be as severe as when the life I’ve take has great value to others, but they may still be significant.

8. So the amount of natural consequences (pre law) seem to depend on the magnitude of the loss to other people a particular action causes.

9. If we apply this type of reasoning to abortion, we’d have to ask, how does a woman aborting her fetus affect her future happiness? What about that of others around her? Do they feel a loss? Given the negative reaction to abortion of many people, it would seem that it does effect them. In what way? Is it empathy? Is it a fear of the “slippery slope”?

10. Now, in the case of the murder of a loner with no friends or relatives, society has decided that the punishment should be the same as for a person that is loved by 1000 people. So can a parallel be drawn between a fetus and the loner with no friends and relatives?

11. Most people would agree with that, IF ( and it’s a big if) the fetus were considered a human being. I believe this is where all the disagreement between Pro-lifers and pro-abortionists resides - in deciding at which point a fetus is a human being.