That is really the question raised by this USA Today column, "We've Forgotten What Belongs on Page One."
The author writes about the events that form the basis of an ongoing trial in Philadelphia about infanticide performed routinely by a physician. The question surrounds the seemingly artificial, in the author's eyes, distinction between what is moral and what is legal:
...whether [the doctor] was killing the infants one second after they left the womb instead of partially inside or completely inside the womb — as in a routine late-term abortion — is merely a matter of geography. That one is murder and the other is a legal procedure is morally irreconcilable.So an inch makes the difference between what is illegal and what is legal, between permissible termination of a life and the impermissible termination of it.
The details that emerged during the trial and that are described in the column are just horrifying. The trial seems to highlight the real dispute at issue: not when does life begin but when does life become socially valuable?
Our enlightened society and its legal system have an answer. An inch makes all the difference.
Ralph Waldo Emerson is famous for writing in his essay "Self-Reliance" that "[a] foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers..." Apparently, little statesmen are also wont to adore foolish inconsistencies. And it reflects the smallness of their minds.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Brief comments to this post are welcome; however, please respect the civil tone of conversation that I wish to cultivate in this forum.