The fallacy in the anti-abortion argument lies in the shift from the scientifically accurate claim that the foetus is a living individual of the species Homo sapiens to the ethical claim that the foetus therefore has the same right to life as any other human being. Membership of the species Homo sapiens is not enough to confer a right to life. We can plausibly argue that we ought not to kill, against their will, self-aware beings who want to continue to live. We can see this as a violation of their autonomy, or a thwarting of their preferences. But why should a being’s potential to become rationally self-aware make it wrong to end its life before it has the capacity for rationality or self-awareness?
The logical end of this type of thinking is that parents should be able to kill one month old babies (who have essentially no “rationality” or “self-awareness”). You may think that I’m exaggerating the case, and Singer doesn’t really intend that outcome.
But you would be wrong. He is on record as saying exactly that. So: when someone is this morally, ethically deaf, should ANYTHING they say be given any credence whatsoever?
Obviously not…. except that Singer is a hero of the Progressive Left, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and by extension, whether you like it or not, the Democratic party, which supports these organizations.
Abortion is a MORAL issue before it is a POLITICAL one…. but sadly, there are two many Christians who want to be more “politically open,” extending to supporting the Democratic party in furthering the murder of the unborn.
It is truly the American Holocaust. One of the saddest aspects: the people in the USA who, of all people, should be most interested in protecting the helpless, because their forefathers were slaves, are in fact most likely to support candidates who favor making it easy for them to kill their unborn children.
