生命优先 Pro-Life

值得关注的时间节点

堕胎从哪个环节开始道德上不可接受？

• 受精（Conception）：严格禁止堕胎
• 可存性（Viability）：婴儿不再在生理上依赖（physiologically dependent）母亲
• 出生（Birth）
• 人格的获得（The Attainment of Personhood）：根据 Tooley 的定义，人格的获得意味着发展出一种关于「自我」的，在时间中持续存在的意识

Don Marquis 与剥夺观

• 剥夺观解释一切杀戮的道德错误性：被杀者失去了一切可能的未来价值
• 不诉诸生命神圣观，物种主义
• 不排斥安乐死（当未来只剩极端痛苦，毫无价值时，安乐死被允许）

避孕手段是否等同于杀人？
=> 否，在避孕中，并不存在一个确定的被剥夺未来的个体。

例外情况

反堕胎者有时容许例外情况（exceptions）下堕胎的可能性。

• 乱伦（incest）或强奸所产生的胎儿
• 母亲遭受严重的生理或心理伤害

剥夺观是否能正当化这种例外情况？
=> 胎儿的未来是否没有价值？即使它将拥有一个更为艰难的人生，这意味着其未来毫无价值吗？它真的「死了更好」吗？

似乎不是。剥夺观无法有效地正当化例外情况下堕胎的可能性。

反对受精赋权：Toby Ord 与天灾

Toby Ord 的思想实验：天灾（The Scourge）

The Scourge struck swiftly and brutally. This terrifying new disease, more deadly than any before it, left no part of the world untouched. From the poorest countries in Africa to the richest countries of the West, it killed with equal, horrifying, efficiency. It struck quickly, killing most of its victims within a few weeks of onset, and silently, for there were no detectable symptoms prior to death.
Before the Scourge, the global death rate was 55 million per annum. That is, all causes of death — old age, war, murder, disease, and so on — conspired to take 55 million lives each year. The Scourge changed this dramatically. It alone killed more than 200 million people every year. Where life expectancy in the West had risen steadily over the past century to 78 years, it had now dropped to just 29.
Perhaps worst of all, the effects of the Scourge were not felt equally across all members of society. It killed only the very young and innocent — those who were completely powerless to prevent it.

持严格禁止堕胎的立场意味着生命权从受精开始。但这会导向一些极其反直觉且难以接受的道德结论：自然流产（miscarriages）实际上是道德上极其严重的灾难，甚至比历史上任何屠杀都更可怕。

世界的道德中心应当转向阻止流产，战争、贫困、疾病等社会问题都应退居其次 — 这是一个荒谬的结论。

阅读

Marquis, D. (1989). Why abortion is immoral. The Journal of Philosophy, 86(4), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026961

Ord, T. (2008). The scourge. The American Journal of Bioethics, 8(7), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160802317934