Response to Rhatican's sentiments
By admin | April 12, 2012Rhatican's argument is grounded on the assumption that all humans have a right to life. Furthermore, Rhatican states that abortion in the cases of rape are immoral, and that "her (the fetus) murder compounds the injustice of the rape." If all humans have a right to life (including fetuses), and these rights supersede any other circumstances (including crimes, such as rape), then it logically follows that killing or murder of any sort to justify or make due with (in the case of rape) the outcome of any such crimes would be equally immoral. If all humans have a right to life, and this right cannot be superseded by any crime committed, then it follows that any killing to justify a crime is immoral. And so, for example, it necessarily follows that the death sentence would be equally immoral as abortion. If all humans have the right to life, and this right cannot be superseded by any circumstances, then how is killing on the battle field the morally right thing to do?