The pro-choice position assumes the lack of any moral absolutes. THis is due to the fact that morality does not pass the materialistic naturalistic test. That is, you can not see or measure it, and it can not be explained by matter, the physical laws, time, chance, and survival of the fittest. According to modern science, anything that fails this test does not exist (i.e. God, truth, etc.).
"Conscious Memory" and "consciousness" are abstract concepts which materialistic naturalism (MN) does not allow for. If you want to use abstract concepts such as conciousness to justify killing a baby, then you can not discount abstract concepts such as the morality of doing so. If you want to disassociate yourself with MN, and use abstract reasoning to justify the killing of a child, then you are left with the dilema that the primary reason for killing the child is almost certainly selfish and self-centered, and thus immoral (the real needs of the innocent baby are trampled inthe name of the selfish wants of mom). Having allowed abstract reasoning into the picture, you can no longer discount the moral issues.
Of course, I doubt that you wish to be bothered with things such as lack of reason and such. One thing is certain, there is no shortage of hypocrisy in liberal thought. |
