Notre Dame Prof – Should the Pope Rethink Abortion?
Gary Gutting is a philosophy professor who apparently skipped Sunday school.
Hat tip to Ed Morrissey of Hot Air.
Should Pope Francis Rethink Abortion?
Pope Francis has raised expectations of a turn away from the dogmatic intransigence that has long cast a pall over the religious life of many Roman Catholics. His question “Who am I to judge?” suggested a new attitude toward homosexuality, and he is apparently willing to consider allowing the use of contraceptives to prevent sexually transmitted diseases. But his position on what has come to be the hierarchy’s signature issue — abortion — seems unyielding. “Reason alone is sufficient to recognize the inviolable value of each single human life,” he declared in his recent apostolic exhortation, “Evangelii Gaudium,” adding: “Precisely because this involves the internal consistency of our message about the value of the human person, the church cannot be expected to change her position on this question.”
I want to explore the possibility, however, that the pope might be open to significant revision of the absolute ban on abortion by asking what happens if we take seriously his claim that “reason alone is sufficient” to adjudicate this issue. What actually follows regarding abortion once we accept the “inviolable value of each single human life”? This appeal to rational reflection has been a central feature of the tradition of Catholic moral teaching. I put forward the following reflections in the spirit of this tradition.
There is considerable rational basis for moral concern about abortions. In many (probably most) cases, it would be immoral to abort a pregnancy. (Note, however, that this by no means implies that most abortions actually performed are immoral.) Late-term fetuses, for example, are no different biologically or psychologically from babies born prematurely at the same stage of development. It’s hard to see how killing a premature baby is immoral but killing an identical late-term fetus isn’t. At a minimum, aborting a healthy late-term fetus would, except when the mother’s life is at risk, be immoral — which is no doubt why it is seldom, if ever, done.
Further, from conception on, an embryo or fetus is at least potentially human in the sense that, allowed to develop along its natural path, there is a human life ahead for it.
Comments
Francis, bishop of Rome has opened himself up to comments like this, who knows if willfully. Too many of his remarks are said to be misunderstood, mistranslated, or mis-something or other. One has to wonder if the bishop is floating these trial balloons coming from where he does on the political ideology scale, and stepping back when heat comes his way. But, I’ll give Francis, bishop of Rome, the benefit of the doubt.
I couldn’t believe the guy wrote this: “aborting a healthy late-term fetus would, except when the mother’s life is at risk, be immoral — which is no doubt why it is seldom, if ever, done.” Seldom done? Has this guy never heard of Kermit Gosnell, Barack Obama, Wendy Davis? These people all believe and fought for the right to kill a healthy late term baby. Gosnell actively slaughtered hundreds, perhaps thousands of them. Obama sought to make sure the ones who survived Gosnell would be left to die without medical assistance, and Wendy Davis, ah, Wendy, filibustered for 11 hours to make sure that no woman would be punished with a baby even if she wanted to kill it at the 11th hour.