Abortion Debate: Is it moral? Should it be illegal?
Tuesday, March 8 · 7:00pm – 10:00pm
Scotiabank Auditorium, Marion McCain Arts & Social Sciences Bldg6135 University AvenueHalifax, NS*On the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day*
Free event, open to the public. There will be opportunities for the audience to pose questions to each opponent.Stephanie Gray of the controversial Canadian Centre for Bio-ethical Reform will debate Dr. Mark Mercer of Saint Mary’s University on whether abortion is moral, and the legal implications of its morality. Stephanie Gray will argue that abortion is immoral, while Dr.Mercer will argue it is not immoral.
by 
Hope they define what they mean by ‘moral’ and what they mean by ‘abortion’ before they begin.
If ‘abortion’ is one option that a women has a right to when pregnant then would it not be ‘morally’ ok? If ‘abortion’ is just a medical procedure then what does it have to do with ‘morality’. If ‘abortion’ is a private decision then how could it be immoral? If ‘moral’ means the community standards then how can something be immoral when there is no community standard?
On the other hand if there is no ‘right’ to abortion, if abortion is not just a medical procedure, and if it is immoral to take another’s life and abortion involves another’s life then the situation seems to suggest immorality.
Having said all this the debate seems to be a no win situation for a Pro Life perspective as ‘winning’ the debate would open the door to the oft heard criticism of Pro Life wanting to ‘impose’ morality on others. However, the same criticism would be fair towards Prof. Mercer as he too would be ‘imposing’ morality on others.
I would agree with you DC, that morality is a relative term, like ‘justice’ and so forth. However, at this point, I’ll take almost any form of questioning on the subject of abortion. I’m interested to see what the presenters have to say but even more interested in the conversations that will be going on in the crowd and community afterward. Win or lose, people will be talking, and, for Canada, that’s a start!
Being accused of “wanting to impose morality on others” is a self-refuting claim. Those who accuse others of imposing morality, believe it is wrong to impose morality. Why? Because that is their morality which they have no problem imposing on others.
The law already imposes morality on others. No one has qualms imposing morality on others when we are talking about female circumcision, honour-killings or even eating dogs and cats – all of which are cultural traditions in other countries that are not tolerated here. The law imposes Canadian morality on those who seek to do something else. Would any Canadian say that it was wrong in those cases to do that?
Even on abortion, that’s what we face. That’s why all Canadians pay for abortions or health professionals must tell patients where to get abortions.
Pro-lifers shouldn’t be scared of being accused of imposing our morality on others. Rather, we need to simply ask those who make the accusation, why, if it is wrong to impose beliefs, they are so quick to impose those beliefs on us.
did you catch it, Jennifer? Canada has its own Peter Singer, in the person of Mark Mercer. Cows, as long as they are happy in their life, have more right to live than a fetus in the womb.
@ Julie ~ I caught that too, in an article on the debate:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-aborts-turn-on-their-speaker-at-halifax-debate