Wednesday, March 21 , 2018, 5:10 am | Overcast 56º


Randy Alcorn: Right and Wrong of Ethics Can Be Slippery to Grasp, as Abortion Issue Proves

Commonly accepted ethical principles are absolutely necessary for civilized societies. Ethics promote desirable behaviors and condemn behaviors considered wrong. But ethical principles are not always interpreted the same way, nor unconditionally applicable in every circumstance. That reality is the source of so much of our social and political discord.

Take the divisively white hot issue of abortion. Is it ever ethical to terminate a pregnancy? If not, once impregnated, does a woman’s body become indentured to the state until she delivers? Is it murder to terminate a pregnancy? If so, always or, depending on circumstances, sometimes? Isn’t murder an absolute violation of one of western civilization’s primary ethics — you know, “thou shall not kill”?

Most sane societies accept that murder is wrong, yet the assassinations of people designated as terrorists are conducted with impunity and, apparently, with little ethical angst. The justification for these sanctioned homicides is the greater good — innocent lives will be saved. The fact that these attacks, especially by drones, sometimes kill innocent people, including children, is accepted as unfortunate collateral damage, regrettable but unavoidable. A little bad to gain much good — the relative ethics of scale.

Some people argue that there can be no morality without religion. Yet, in the name of religion many atrocities are committed by believers. Meanwhile, there are atheists whose ethical behavior is equal to that of the most devout church-goers.

Ethics, what is right and what is wrong, can sometimes be as slippery as eels.

Let’s go back to the abortion issue. Where there are not the conditions to raise children with fundamental ethical standards, and who consequently develop into vicious, conscienceless monsters, what greater good is served by their having been born? Would aborting these births surgically or with the morning-after pill be unethical? Any more unethical than taking out terrorists, even if it means killing some innocent people in the process?

Parts of Brazil are being plagued by gangs of feral children robbing and murdering people, including burning alive a woman whose purse had insufficient money for one pack of these vicious kids. Recently, in Brunswick, Ga., an infant in a stroller was shot in the face at point-blank range by two teenage boys, 17 and 14, enraged that the infant’s mother had nothing worth stealing. Similar atrocities committed by organized urban gangs of homicidal young men, whose ethics are either nonexistent or sociopathicly alien, have become common in both Mexico and the United States.

Ethics are not congenital; they are learned in early childhood, taught by responsible parents or caretakers who understand the importance of socialization that includes instilling broadly accepted, basic ethics. Children born only as the unwanted result of sex, especially into conditions of severe poverty and nonexistent, lawful opportunity, undermine civilization. If the impoverished populations of the United States, Brazil, Mexico or anywhere had ready access to birth control — including abortion, society would be better for it.

Not everyone needs to or should have children. There is no obligatory natural directive compelling humans to mindlessly procreate. And, certainly the planet is not suffering from a shortage of people. Quite the contrary, it is choking on the effluvia generated by excessive human population whose massive, mushrooming, cities spread across the planet like huge festering lesions oozing toxins into water, air and land.

Allowing even 15-year-old girls ready access to over-the-counter birth control, including the morning-after pill may assault the ethics of some folks, but the fact is that children born to unmarried mothers, especially adolescent mothers, and raised without a father have a significantly higher incidence of criminal behavior.

Until people are capable of and committed to properly raising and caring for children, they should not have them. Doing otherwise endangers and burdens all of society. People who have children without the means to support them and then require public financial assistance to raise those children are reprehensibly irresponsible. The ethics of such negligent breeders are questionable.

Nevertheless, once born, it is in society’s best interest that every child be properly socialized and afforded a chance to become an ethical, educated and self-sufficient adult. Yes, that can be a daunting and expensive proposition — another good reason to limit unwanted births as much as possible — but brutal gangs of amoral predators is a greater expense that no society can long endure.

The ethics of those who insist on severely limiting or eliminating abortion and birth control, yet are unwilling to fund programs to properly raise and educate the resulting children are curiously flawed and as slippery as eels.

— Randy Alcorn is a Santa Barbara political observer. Contact him at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click here to get started >

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >