Sources & Extracts

Review this excerpt and then go back to the main thread.

David Wong believes that if liberals and conservatives on abortion policy accepted the justification principle they could find ways to modify their policy recommendations to reflect that principle. He summarizes his argument and gives suggestions for how the principle might be implemented:

I hope I've made plausible the conclusion that the conservative and liberal positions are both defensible on the basis of well-established moral systems. Now if conservatives and liberals hold the justification principle, as very many do, then they face a difficult choice. The conservatives must weigh the justification principle against the fetus' right to life. It seems reasonable for them to consider a compromise between their conflicting prima facie obligations. They could refrain from the most serious violations of the justification principle - advocating legal sanctions against abortion, for instance - while utilizing other methods of opposition. Some antiabortion organizations strive to reduce the need for abortions by advocating public policy making it easier for women to carry a pregnancy to term. This would involve pregnancy disability benefits and better contraceptive research. Liberals could refrain from pressing for public funding of abortions, since this would involve requiring conservatives to actively contribute to the violation of a deep moral belief. Liberals are free to, and should, find other ways to increase the ability of women to have abortions. They could press for health care programs that would decrease the financial impact of having an abortion, even if these programs did not fund it specifically. They might even return to a general attack on poverty. (David Wong, Moral Relativity, p. 197.)