Blog 5

Blog 5 - How did the second contemporary issue effect your principles? Are you better able to see areas where your principles need adjusting? What adjustments need to be made? Which philosopher's position was least consistent with your own principles and why?




My principles have always centered around the idea of people not hurting others. The controversial issue of abortion definitely challenges my initial principles. How can I speak about not hurting others, but yet be completely pro-choice? And not in the sense that I am against it, but think women should have a choice. No. I actually believe that if necessary, an abortion is the RIGHT thing to do. I don't think that adjusting my principles would be an honest decision, because I would be changing my principles just so that they could coincide with my beliefs on this contemporary issue. According to my current "principles", Warren's position on abortion is least consistent with them. Warren believes that abortion is morally justified. My principles entail that people deserve to make decisions based on the fact that no one is getting hurt. However abortion, the killing of a potential life, for lack of better words, goes completely against it. So, Warren's position goes against what my principles are, even though they coinside with my position on abortion.

I commented on Christian's blog  http://ethicalwellbeingchris.blogspot.com/.

Blog #4

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?

The first contemporary issue does not effect my principles at all. Although the Christian religion in which I was raised in does not accept human cloning, my own personal beliefs do not conflict with the contemporary issue. Christian believers are opposed to human cloning because of the question of morality and what is ethically right. My principles, however, are not exclusive to what is morally right. I think that we are all entitled to our own rights, as long as we are not hurting anyone. Also, human cloning does have beneficial factors. Such factors include: reversing mental illnesses, abolishing infertility, and stem cell research. I think that Tooley's position on human cloning is most consistent with my own principles. He focuses on the benefits of human cloning and believes that it should be morally allowed. We are all different, and one's belief should be able to different from someone else's. 

I commented on  http://danwilson22-dansblog.blogspot.com blog.