Quote:
Quote by: Castle  The intended implication of my question was asking for a distinction that would make the fetus unworthy of the same rights that we afford to infants. I apologize if that wasn't clear.
By "murder", I refer to "morally wrong killing", rather than "unlawful killing". Again, I apologize for the confusion. |
Oh no, it was clear. But I respond to words, not intentions.
As for the fetus being unworthy of the same rights afforded to infants, it was included in my reply: it is dependent on its mother for its continued existence. For its rights to be protected, the mother's rights must be infringed, and one person's rights end where another's begin. Of course, at one minute before birth, the infant's potential rights should be taken into consideration, as long as the protection of the rights would not put the mother at undue risk, so an abortion at birth-minus-60-seconds should not be acceptable. And it isn't.
But if you want to make this shades-of-gray issue into a black and white one, there it is: infant that depends on its mother has no rights; infant that could be cared for by anyone has rights.
As for morally acceptable killing, abortion is morally acceptable to me. Killing a viable infant when there is no risk to the mother is not, generally speaking (there are complications involved in it, of course, as with any moral question). So the "murder" answer remains the same, as well.
Edited to add: 1337 posts! I am LEET!