Human Life. What's It Worth To You?
Thanks to GotDesign for pointing out an outrageous story and evidence that morality, absent an objective, absolute standard, is subject to little more than the prevailing attitude of the day.
Before someone jumps on me about my word-choice, show me evidence of how any other formulation of morality within a society can be anything more than majority rules or pragmatism, both of which are little more than subjective opinion. For my part, the following story of an abortion performed in Great Britain on a 24 week old fetus (unborn child) with a cleft palate supports my case pretty well:
This goes well passed mere medical issues into the realm of placing levels of value upon an autonomous, if you will, innocent human life. By that, I mean an innocent life that is not the property of a human being, including the mother and father of that child. If you happen to be under the illusion that a child is, in some way, property, watch what happens when a father or mother is found to be abusive.
The fact is, with every passing day, we are confronted with more absurd practices than we heard before. Now, it's a cleft palate, tomorrow perhaps abortions will be performed on kids with a finger or a toe missing, with evidence that eyes are not developing properly, or if there is a chance the child will be born deaf...or brown hair instead of red. Sounds absurd doesn't it? I agree. But yesterday I would have thought it absurd to suggest that an abortion would be performed on a child with something as easily reparable as a cleft palate.
Related Espresso Roast posts:
Eyes Too Blind to See
No More Double-talk, Please
A World of Contradictions
Before someone jumps on me about my word-choice, show me evidence of how any other formulation of morality within a society can be anything more than majority rules or pragmatism, both of which are little more than subjective opinion. For my part, the following story of an abortion performed in Great Britain on a 24 week old fetus (unborn child) with a cleft palate supports my case pretty well:
Doctors and health officials will consider whether more guidance on abortions is needed following the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service not to prosecute two doctors who authorised a late abortion on a foetus with a cleft lip and palate.There was no prosecution because the doctors performed the abortion "in good faith" that there were problems associated with the child. However, lay aside for the moment that the worth of a human life is beyond the value-judgments of any individual, no other evidence of serious problems was mentioned (as a matter of fact, the concluding remarks in the article suggested that, in fact, there were no other problems found). That's actually a very strange sounding statement to me as I think about it. Exactly what problem crosses the line into the realm of rising to the level of rendering a child unworthy of life and what standards are followed in order for that judgment to be made? Who is really qualified to make that kind of judgment call? I know that many do make it, but who is really qualified to render an innocent life unworthy of living?
Jim England, the chief crown prosecutor for West Mercia, said the doctors believed, in good faith, that there was a substantial risk the child would be seriously handicapped. "In these circumstances, I decided that there was insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that there should be no charges against either of the doctors," he said.The inquiry began after a legal challenge over a previous decision by police not to charge the doctors involved in the abortion carried out, in 2001, on an unnamed woman from Herefordshire who was more than 24 weeks pregnant.
This goes well passed mere medical issues into the realm of placing levels of value upon an autonomous, if you will, innocent human life. By that, I mean an innocent life that is not the property of a human being, including the mother and father of that child. If you happen to be under the illusion that a child is, in some way, property, watch what happens when a father or mother is found to be abusive.
The fact is, with every passing day, we are confronted with more absurd practices than we heard before. Now, it's a cleft palate, tomorrow perhaps abortions will be performed on kids with a finger or a toe missing, with evidence that eyes are not developing properly, or if there is a chance the child will be born deaf...or brown hair instead of red. Sounds absurd doesn't it? I agree. But yesterday I would have thought it absurd to suggest that an abortion would be performed on a child with something as easily reparable as a cleft palate.
Related Espresso Roast posts:
Eyes Too Blind to See
No More Double-talk, Please
A World of Contradictions
Labels: David C. Price
posted by DAVID C. PRICE at 3/17/2005 12:15:00 PM
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home