The Issue is not Biological Status, but Moral Status

Good morning, Michael.

In response to the first of the two questions you asked in your final post last night:  As I understand it, the issue is not biology, but morality; that is, the issue is not the biological status of human life at the earliest stage of its development, but its moral status.  In my judgment, it would be not only mistaken but unreasonable to deny the biological facts to which you refer.

In response to your second question, let me say just this:  There are many arguments to the effect that human life at the earliest stage of its development does not have the same moral status as human life at a later stage of its development--for example, a stage after which what Boonin has called "organized cortical brain activity" has emerged.  Do I find any of those arguments persuasive?  As I explain in my new book, I do not.  Do I find Boonin's argument unreasonable?  I do not.  What would I say to Boonin if he said that he finds my rejection of his argument unreasonable?  I would say that he is underestimating the complexity of the issue and indeed is being unreasonable in doing so.

Now, off to do what I do best:  chauffeur my children around to their various activities.

All the best,

Michael