Against the golden rule argument against abortion

Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):187–198 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

R.M. Hare and Harry J. Gensler have each argued that abortion can be shown to be immoral by appealing to a version of the golden rule. I argue that both versions of the golden rule argument against abortion should be rejected: each rests on a version of the golden rule which is objectionable on independent grounds, each is unable to support its conclusion when the rule is satisfactorily modified, and each is unable to avoid the implication that contraception is as wrong as abortion and for the same reason. In addition, some further problems particular to each position are identified

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,168

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Natural Response to Boonin.Andrew J. Peach - 2005 - International Philosophical Quarterly 45 (3):357-376.
Hare, abortion, and the golden rule.George Sher - 1977 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 6 (2):185-190.
Abortion and the golden rule.R. M. Hare - 1975 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 4 (3):201-222.
Levels of Meaning in the Golden Rule.Jeffrey Wattles - 1987 - Journal of Religious Ethics 15 (1):106 - 129.
Teaching the golden rule.Samuel V. Bruton - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 49 (2):179-187.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
110 (#161,468)

6 months
11 (#242,683)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Boonin
University of Colorado, Boulder

Citations of this work

Would Human Extinction Be Morally Wrong?Franco Palazzi - 2014 - Philosophia 42 (4):1063-1084.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references