3 ms·
In the case of abortion, I'll grudgingly admit that reasonable people can differ, at least in cases of rape or incest; in life-of-the-mother cases (pregnancy in
by clock_tower 11y ago
In the case of abortion, I'll grudgingly admit that reasonable people can differ, at least in cases of rape or incest; in life-of-the-mother cases (pregnancy in the Fallopian tube), the other side might even be right.
But on torture? I'm not willing to make any concession to people who think that hanging a Japanese general for waterboarding US soldiers is fine, while leaving a US president entirely unpunished for waterboarding actual and suspected terrorists is not fine. Either we owe the Axis (and especially that general's heirs) some enormous apologies, or we need a few trials of a certain past political administration.
I tend be a fan of bright lines in general. If you don't know that some things are wrong (and, therefore, that any line of reasoning that leads to them has a problem with it somewhere), how do you know when you've gone astray?
- tamana 11y agoYour post specifically opened with an example of how important issues don't have bright lines. When the population is split on an issue, it's unlikely that one and only one half are evil/idiots. Life is complicated.
- clock_tower 11y agoAbortion gets murky in a narrow range of cases, but torture is never murky. War crimes are war crimes, and they're off limits for everyone, under all circumstances, by definition.