Posted by
Arturick on Tuesday, June 02, 2009 4:34:46 AM
Is the future set, no more capable of variance than a straight line extended to infinity? Or is the future an amorphous blob of possibilities, an infinite array of outcomes yet to be determined by a billion potential choices? Liberal adherents of the amorphous blob theory doubtlessly wish to nuke human life out of existence, aborting the future to prevent possible negative outcomes.
I have no desire to argue the case one way or the other, as intellectual heavy-hittters in philosophy and physics have both already weighed in on the issue. Rather, I propose an intellectual exercise with regards to time.
Suppose technology is acquired that allows you to view the future. This technology is then given to doctors who perform abortions. Women coming in for an abortion are then shown their future son/daughter around age 30 or so. The doctor then informs the woman, "Here is the person you are killing." Does this negate the "it's a clump of cells" or "it's part of a woman's body" arguments put forth by the pro-abortion crowd? If it does, then is the argument then negated in the absence of such technology, considering that the future exists whether we can see it or not?
Now, the argument could be made that, if your future child is a person of virtue and a respected member of the community, then surely it is wrong to have the abortion, but what if your future child is a monster? If one could go back in time and kill Hitler as a child, are you to be lauded for killing a tyrant or condemned for killing a child who had yet done no wrong? If the crimes of adult Hitler warrant the death of the child Hitler, then various social justifications for abortion (i.e. a poor parent might raise a child who turns to crime) are equally arguments for the death penalty, which is opposed by many who advocate abortion.
To take away the character issues that come up with the "time window" technology, suppose that an advanced DNA scanner is developed which, upon scanning a fetus, can produce images of what that person will look like as an infant, a child, and an adult. Does the firm knowledge of what the fetus will become defy the pro-abortion arguments as well?
Would abortion remain legal in a world possessing either of these technologies?