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/.
No comments:
Post a Comment