[Peace-discuss] Re: abortion and ethics, was Re: Immigration Reform

[C. G. Estabrook]

"Ethics is a condition of the world, like logic," wrote Wittgenstein.  In that 
sense, discussions of ethics, like discussions of logic, need not depend on 
theological agreement.

Of course, someone may hold views on ethical matters for reasons based in 
theology, saying, e.g., I don't commit murder because God forbids it (or, 
unethically, I do commit murder because God commands it).  But they would surely 
be subject to ethical (and logical) critique.

As a matter of intellectual history, the Judeo-Christian (and Islamic) tradition 
has contributed to ethical and logical -- that is to say, political and 
scientific -- discussion, primarily by removing the gods from the universe.


Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> Actually, you should say "some people's" ethics doesn't depend on 
> theology, shouldn't you?  Some people's ethics clearly does. 
>  
> There is a textbook philosophical/theological debate, for example, over 
> whether "God wills the Good because it is good, or the Good is good 
> because God wills it," (or words to that effect).
>  
> Or, perhaps you mean that the latter position is counter-ethical?
> 
> Ricky
> 
> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
> 
> --- On *Tue, 12/8/09, C. G. Estabrook /<galliher at illinois.edu>/* wrote:
> 
> 
>     From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>     Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Re: Immigration Reform Rally!
>     To: "Brussel Morton K." <mkbrussel at comcast.net>
>     Cc: "E. Wayne Johnson" <ewj at pigs.ag>, "AWARE peace discussion"
>     <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>     Date: Tuesday, December 8, 2009, 10:08 AM
> 
>     Mort, as usual, seems particularly interested in theology.  We're
>     talking about
>     ethics, which doesn't depend on theology.  That's why we all agree
>     that our
>     ending human lives in Afghanistan is wrong.
> 
> 
>     Brussel Morton K. wrote:
>      > Jennifer, you are dealing with theologically frozen minds on this
>     issue. The
>      > issue should have no place on the peace-discuss website, but
>     fanatics will
>      > not be restrained. --mkb
>      >
>      >
>      > On Dec 7, 2009, at 8:55 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>      >
>      >> It's a medical procedure that results in the death of a majority
>     of those
>      >> who undergo it.  That after all is the point of the procedure. 
>     --CGE
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>      >>> There is only ONE pro-choice argument, so far as I'm concerned:
>     ALL women
>      >>> should be able to choose whether to continue or terminate a
>     pregnancy,
>      >>> and because it's a medical procedure, ALL women should have health
>      >>> insurance that covers termination, should they choose that...
>     _______________________________________________
>     Peace-discuss mailing list
>     Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>     <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net>
>     http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> 
>