The question about abortion is not whether or not it is right to kill children, that is rather naive to think. The question is whether a woman should have the right to choose or if the government should have the right to choose whether the child will be given a chance at life.
I have to say that I least agree with Warren's point of view because it seems like it is taking the entire process of abortion and treating it like there should be no regulations on how or when a pregnancy could be aborted. Maybe it was just the reading, but I just could not find myself agreeing with Warren on her points.
I believe that I should not have a say in how a woman treats her own body. As a christian, I believe that abortion is wrong and that it shouldn't be allowed except in extreme cases where actually having the child would result in death of either the mother or the offspring. I strongly disagree with the premise of using abortion as birth control, and I fell like if it reaches that point, the parties involved should just not be allowed to reproduce, and they should be chemically castrated.
Today I will be commenting on Dallas's blog at http://dallaslrsmith.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5-how-did-second-contemporary.html#comment-form
Monday, April 23, 2012
Monday, April 9, 2012
Human Cloning: Good or Evil
Blog 4- How did the first contemporary issue effect your principles? Did it challenge them? Were your principles helpful in working out your response to the issue? Which philosopher's position was most consistent with your own principles and why?
I have to agree with Tooley on most of his points; I feel that the deal-breaker in dealing with human cloning comes from the fact that whatever we would do with our clones would also be done with our biological siblings. If a clone was to be made, he/she would most likely behave and be treated just like every other human, he/she would not be a second class citizen and the advantages of having them around could outweigh the negatives. If a person needed a certain organ, like a kidney, they would have a guaranteed match. I am not advocating using the clone as an "organ farm", but having a person who would be a perfect match could save lives.
Looking at those who claim that human cloning would bring about a society like in "Brave New World", you seem to forget that there would be some limitations placed on the process. For the situation to grow completely out of control, you would have to ignore the fact that people would stop it if it became a problem; thinking that people would just allow the world to be turned into something like in Aldous Huxley's book is naive.
The issue of human cloning didn't really effect my principles, because I can only hope that even when this science does become available, the people who will use it will make the right choices of what to do with it. Past that, I really have no say in what is going to happen with human cloning, so I see no reason to worry about it.
This week I commented on Evon's blog at http://evonsommerville.blogspot.com/.
I have to agree with Tooley on most of his points; I feel that the deal-breaker in dealing with human cloning comes from the fact that whatever we would do with our clones would also be done with our biological siblings. If a clone was to be made, he/she would most likely behave and be treated just like every other human, he/she would not be a second class citizen and the advantages of having them around could outweigh the negatives. If a person needed a certain organ, like a kidney, they would have a guaranteed match. I am not advocating using the clone as an "organ farm", but having a person who would be a perfect match could save lives.
Looking at those who claim that human cloning would bring about a society like in "Brave New World", you seem to forget that there would be some limitations placed on the process. For the situation to grow completely out of control, you would have to ignore the fact that people would stop it if it became a problem; thinking that people would just allow the world to be turned into something like in Aldous Huxley's book is naive.
The issue of human cloning didn't really effect my principles, because I can only hope that even when this science does become available, the people who will use it will make the right choices of what to do with it. Past that, I really have no say in what is going to happen with human cloning, so I see no reason to worry about it.
This week I commented on Evon's blog at http://evonsommerville.blogspot.com/.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)