|
1.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Eddy Souffrant
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
2.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Robert Paul Churchill
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
3.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Lori Keleher
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
4.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Eddy Souffrant
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
5.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Rob Lovering
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
In this paper, I present a case study on a recent attempt at implementing what I refer to as the “Pro-lifer’s Asymmetrical Punishment View” (PAPV), the view that people should be legally punished for performing abortions whereas women should not be so punished for procuring abortions. While doing so, I argue that the endeavor, which took place in the state of Alabama, is incoherent relative to the conjunction of its purported underlying moral rationale and the Alabama criminal code. I then present what I take to be possible explanations for, practical implications of, and solutions to the attempt and its incoherence. Given that other endeavors to implement PAPV are currently in the works and are so with similar underlying moral rationales and within similar criminal codes, what I present and argue here is not limited to Alabama’s attempt at doing so.
|
|
|
|
6.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Benjamin A Rider
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
7.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Shelly Johnson
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
8.
|
Philosophy in the Contemporary World:
Volume >
27 >
Issue: 2
Charles Harvey,
Janet Donohoe,
David K. Chan,
Joseph Orosco,
Andrew Fiala
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|