Progressives and Moral Properties
Found a great comment on Yourish.com from David Foster that made so much sense. Progressives (liberals) view morals as properties of objects and not people. So for instance, nuclear weapons are immoral, but not people who seek to use them. Guns are immoral, but not people who shoot others. Bombs are evil, but not those who employ them.
Fascinating theory.
How would this apply to abortion?
The answer is obvious, but it took me a moment, because I don’t even think like that.
The immoral “object” is the baby.
Wow. I’d love to test this out with a survey.
What do you think – does it fit real-world observations?
Related posts:
- Adam Hamilton’s Color Theory
- We love someone for who they are – not what they do
- Adam Hamilton’s Color Theory (part 2)
- Powerful delusions? – Yep, that describes it.
- Choice?
May 7th, 2009 Morality
I think that might be accurate. How often do we hear “It’s not fair to make a woman carry to term” and even comparing pregnancy to slavery? The baby is seen as an unjust aggressor. (and a thing, not a person)
True. Justice Ginsburg is arguing bodily autonomy is the only defense left, because technology is making the humanity of the unborn more apparent. IIRC, she even gave the “pregnancy is slavery” line and insisted it violated the 13 amendment. Hard to see the baby as being the master, or perhaps seeing the government as being slave master, if abortion is abolished, but not so difficult if they consider sex without consequences to be a human right.
That’s a good question – Is sex without consequences a human right?