What is wrong with the "consistent life ethic"

Consistent life ethic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

'via Blog this'

1. No ethic is more than an effort to analyze issues of a particular decision or act after the fact.

2. Ontological values capable of being willed are the basis of  all moral actions.

2. There is no such thing as a consistent life ethic or any other sort of ethic. Such designations are abstract.

3. The values of Abba's way are tolerance, democracy and helpfulness. These reside in a framework in which the dominant underlying value is non-idolatry - the first commandment.

4. Non-idolatry precludes capital punishment because it is an obvious conscious decision to take a life. In Abba's way the conscious taking of life under all circumstances is forbidden.

5. Euthanasia or suicide, when it represents a person's own decision and choice, may in fact be admirable. It is certainly something that should not be made subject to punitive law.

6. Abortion is the most difficult of these acts to decide but one thing is absolutely clear. It should not be subject to punitive laws of any kind.  In a fair and just society. it should be an option available to all.

7. The way we love with our bodies is a free choice. The only basis for legal intervention is when the choice is not free or a person has not reached a legal age of consent. Sexual abuse ranks with war as something opposed to the values of Abba's way.

Aside from its meaninglessness, a consistent life ethic seems clearly based on a sort of quid pro quo. We will stand against this if you will oppose that. Consistency may be a virtue, but life would go better if the values noted above were unearthed in more human beings, where they have resided universally since the beginning of our common history.

Charles Sanders Peirce - Thinking in Threes