No Harm, No Foul: Abortion and the Implications of Fetal Innocence

Faith and Philosophy, vol. 19, no.2 (April 2002), 172-194

43 Pages Posted: 1 Nov 2013

See all articles by Kenneth Einar Himma

Kenneth Einar Himma

University of Washington - School of Law

Date Written: October 30, 2013

Abstract

Christianity is generally thought to entail a pro-life position on abortion rights. Since the fetus is a person, on this view, from the moment of conception, abortion is murder and hence should be legally prohibited. In this essay, I will concede for the sake of argument the claims that the fetus is a person and that abortion is murder, but I will argue that a Christian can coherently hold that abortion should be legally permitted anyway. The argument will principally be based on claims regarding the ultimate fate of moral innocents and certain commonly accepted liberal normative philosophical views on what behaviors may be legitimately criminalized. In particular, I will assume, as an illustration of how one can hold morally pro-life views and legally pro-choice view, on Mill's harm principle, and argue that, on the assumption that children get a free pass to heaven if they die before reaching the age of reason. I ground the conclusion in something resembling an original position argument with respect to a fetus, and the fact that on most mainstream versions of Christianity, comparatively few people achieve heavenly bliss.

Keywords: abortion, Mill, fetal innocence, harm principle

Suggested Citation

Himma, Kenneth Einar, No Harm, No Foul: Abortion and the Implications of Fetal Innocence (October 30, 2013). Faith and Philosophy, vol. 19, no.2 (April 2002), 172-194, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2347804

Kenneth Einar Himma (Contact Author)

University of Washington - School of Law ( email )

William Gates Hall
Seattle, WA 98195-3020
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
152
Abstract Views
1,196
Rank
349,069
PlumX Metrics