In this episode, J.P. and Stan discuss a path for moral clarity through the complex conversations surrounding the abortion conversation.

In this podcast we discuss: 

• What does it mean to discuss something in the morally relevant sense?
  
• What is “it” at the center of the controversy? How to gain clarity by asking the most fundamental question.
  
• How to approach complex issues when values conflict.
  
• The two ways to define a person: functional and ontological.
  
• How to parse out exceptional cases in order to get at the morality of an issue.
  
• What does Augustine and Locke’s view of ‘ownership’ have to say about the abortion conversation?
  
• Stan’s story he has lived to tell
  
• Do ideas have a gender? 
  

Resources mentioned during our conversation:

•  Medical Definition of Abortion – (RxList and Health.Harvard.edu)
  
• Andrew Moscrop, “‘Miscarriage or abortion?’ Understanding the medical language of pregnancy loss in Britain; a historical perspective”
  
• Greg Koukl, Stand to Reason Blog: Street Tactics Part 3
  
• Kathryn Kost, Isaac Maddow-Zimet, and Ashley C. Little, Pregnancies and Pregnancy Desires at the State Level: Estimates for 2017 and Trends Since 2012
  
• Stan Wallace, “Four Steps To Determining the Morality of Abortion”
  
• J.P. Moreland, “In the Morally Relevant Sense, It is Not a Woman’s Body”
  
• Connect with us!