Next steps in the abortion debate: It is time to consider some overlooked and new data

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION Dialog-A Journal of Theology Pub Date : 2023-07-12 DOI:10.1111/dial.12808
Mark Ellingsen
{"title":"Next steps in the abortion debate: It is time to consider some overlooked and new data","authors":"Mark Ellingsen","doi":"10.1111/dial.12808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>As the abortion debate moves into its next stage since The Supreme Court struck down the Roe v. Wade decision, little has changed, except for the dire circumstances in which many pregnant women find themselves. Both sides in the debate continue talking past each other in nasty ways, using the same tired, old arguments. We need more and fresh data really to advance the discussion. This article provides fresh historical, neurobiological, and theological data for the debate. From history we learn that the debate on abortion has not always been about feminism versus conservatives (though the Pro-Life side has been associated with white nationalism) and that Protestants have not always been divided on the issue. Theologically the author directs us to his previous research indicating that disagreements today among the denominations on the issue have not been theologically related. This has important implications for rendering the debate more civil, since it is not about faith and Biblical fidelity. From Neurobiology, we receive fresh insights about when in the course of a pregnancy the fetus/embryo actually begins to function with a human-like brain, when it is truly a <i>homo</i> <i>sapiens</i>. In addition to offering reflections on the implications of these insights for the abortion debate, we are reminded that the inputs of history and science are most appropriate inputs for Lutherans committed to using the Two-Kingdom Ethic in social ethics and politics.</p>","PeriodicalId":42769,"journal":{"name":"Dialog-A Journal of Theology","volume":"62 2","pages":"199-207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialog-A Journal of Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dial.12808","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As the abortion debate moves into its next stage since The Supreme Court struck down the Roe v. Wade decision, little has changed, except for the dire circumstances in which many pregnant women find themselves. Both sides in the debate continue talking past each other in nasty ways, using the same tired, old arguments. We need more and fresh data really to advance the discussion. This article provides fresh historical, neurobiological, and theological data for the debate. From history we learn that the debate on abortion has not always been about feminism versus conservatives (though the Pro-Life side has been associated with white nationalism) and that Protestants have not always been divided on the issue. Theologically the author directs us to his previous research indicating that disagreements today among the denominations on the issue have not been theologically related. This has important implications for rendering the debate more civil, since it is not about faith and Biblical fidelity. From Neurobiology, we receive fresh insights about when in the course of a pregnancy the fetus/embryo actually begins to function with a human-like brain, when it is truly a homo sapiens. In addition to offering reflections on the implications of these insights for the abortion debate, we are reminded that the inputs of history and science are most appropriate inputs for Lutherans committed to using the Two-Kingdom Ethic in social ethics and politics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
堕胎辩论的下一步:是时候考虑一些被忽视的新数据了
自最高法院推翻罗诉韦德案裁决以来,堕胎辩论进入下一阶段,除了许多孕妇所处的可怕环境外,几乎没有什么变化。辩论中的双方继续以令人讨厌的方式谈论对方,使用同样陈旧的论点。我们确实需要更多新的数据来推进讨论。这篇文章为这场辩论提供了新的历史、神经生物学和神学数据。从历史中我们了解到,关于堕胎的辩论并不总是关于女权主义与保守主义(尽管支持堕胎的一方与白人民族主义有关),新教徒在这个问题上也并不总是存在分歧。在神学上,作者将我们引向他之前的研究,表明今天各教派在这个问题上的分歧在神学上没有关联。这对使辩论更加文明具有重要意义,因为它与信仰和圣经的忠诚无关。从神经生物学中,我们获得了关于在怀孕过程中,胎儿/胚胎何时真正开始与类似人类的大脑一起发挥作用的新见解,何时它才是真正的智人。除了对这些见解对堕胎辩论的影响进行反思外,我们还被提醒,历史和科学的投入对于致力于在社会伦理和政治中使用两王国伦理的路德会教徒来说是最合适的投入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Luther and the “Repair of Chalcedon”1 Why communicatio idiomatum now? Communicatio idiomatum in deep incarnation “Homo est deus”: Reflections on Luther's Christology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1