I Struggled with the Decision

By -
Andrew Sullivan has come out in favor of legalizing late-term abortions. The reason? "For all the women involved, this was unimaginably painful."

I've seen this before, and often on this very issue: they struggled with the decision, so therefore it is... well, what exactly? Not immoral? Immoral, but more OK than if they hadn't struggled with it?

But... what in the world does struggling have to do with the morality of the decision one reaches? So...

JUDGE: Did you rape those ten women?

DEFENDANT: Yes, your honor. But the decision to do so was incredibly painful.

JUDGE: Oh! Well then, off you go!

What complete, mush-brained nonsense Sullivan is spouting!

Comments

  1. Anonymous10:05 PM

    How can he still call himself a Christian? Being against infanticide is a defining feature of Christianity.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more