“I think that the answer a “true” atheist would make to these questions would be yes, it would be better. Of course C.S. Lewis says that whenever a judgment of better or worse or compassionate verses cruel is made there is an acknowledgement that there is a higher good.”
The higher good for a wise atheist would be self preservation. In other words he would understand that by protecting all human life he would in the final analysis be protecting his own.
It’s the slippery slope argument.
When you boil it down to its essence the fight between pro-lifers and abortionists is about when life begins. Everything thing else is just noise.
Actually I think that pro-choicers if confronted with scientific facts would admit that a fertilized egg is alive. The debate is whether that life is important or worthy of preserving. They say “no.” They want to use a balance approach. i.e. is the mother’s life worth more. That’s the slippery slope and so we let ourselves get caught up in a debate about the pregnancy being because of rape. How could we insist that a woman give birth to a baby when the biological father raped her? Well, yes, we can insist because its not about the mother, its about the baby, the life within. Once we concede that issue, we’re cooked. So then they will want to say, well, mercat, what if your 14 year old granddaughter were raped and got pregnant... to which I would say that if she can deliver the baby without it killing her (she could) then she should deliver the baby. Her family would take care of her. Killing her baby would be more destructive to her than carrying and delivering it. And on and on.