Tag: abortion

Tuesday’s Artful Response: Ethic of Life

Tuesday’s Artful Response: Ethic of Life

Uncategorized
I am not sure today's response is "artful" in that I have not done an art project, but it is in response to what my friend James wrote on Thursday. So first, I'll start with a haiku: the first seed dropsconstitutes, forms, lives, and diesbeginning again It was very tempting to put "beguine-ing again". However, I want to respond to this: "Conclusion:  a religiously grounded anti-abortion ideology is a dead letter." James Cowles I totally agree. You can't get to anti-abortion ideology without disregarding God's own abortion plan. In Numbers 5:11-22, "The Test for an Unfaithful Wife," verses 16-18 are about the "water of bitterness" that brings on "the curse." And, the priests, no less, were the people who prescribed the abortion. Socially, I bet it was a lot easier to cause
Digital Responses To An Analog Issue — The Most Basic Fallacy In The Abortion Debate

Digital Responses To An Analog Issue — The Most Basic Fallacy In The Abortion Debate

Uncategorized
I have recently written elsewhere about the ontological and epistemological problems surrounding the current debate about abortion. These problems – almost always unacknowledged and even unconscious – plague both sides of the abortion debate, pro-choice no less than pro-life. But, in the process of reflecting on that “Skeptic’s” column and responding to reactions thereto, I have concluded that that earlier column did not really address the most fundamental problem with the current abortion debate:  the difference – again, for the pro-choice position no less than its pro-life counterpart – goes even deeper than the disagreements I mentioned in that earlier column. In fact, so I would argue now, that most fundamental difference is not, at base, even religious or metaphysical or ph
Womb With a View Redux — Part 1

Womb With a View Redux — Part 1

ACA / Obamacare, autonomy, Christianity, conflict, Consitution, contraception, critical judgment, culture, employer mandate, Ethics, Freedom, Healthcare, Hobby Lobby, Ideology, Philosophy, Politics, Religion, republic, secularism, separation of Church and State, Sexuality, Spirituality, Theology, Tolerance, Women
In the month or so since the Supreme Court rendered its opinion in the case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, I have decided that the Hobby Lobby decision is easy to hate in the short-term but easy to … if not love, exactly … at least easy to tolerate in the long term. It really is not as bad as you perhaps have heard. I say this for several different, but related reasons that make snap judgments easy but, as is often the case, wrong in some important respects. These reasons include the history of the Federal statute, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA, usually pronounced riff-ra), according to which Hobby Lobby was decided; the pre-RFRA case law pertaining to the granting of religious exemptions to Federal (and State, though not all States have RFRAs) laws; the specific language of RFRA