Article info
PDFOriginal research
The inconsistency argument: why apparent pro-life inconsistency undermines opposition to induced abortion
- Correspondence to Dr William Simkulet, Philosophy, Park University, Parkville, MO 67002, USA; Simkuletwm{at}yahoo.com
Citation
The inconsistency argument: why apparent pro-life inconsistency undermines opposition to induced abortion
Publication history
- Received January 2, 2021
- Revised April 1, 2021
- Accepted April 20, 2021
- First published May 20, 2021.
Online issue publication
June 23, 2022
Article Versions
- Previous version (20 May 2021).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise
- Embryo as epiphenomenon: some cultural, social and economic forces driving the stem cell debate
- Inconsistency arguments still do not matter
- Creating and sacrificing embryos for stem cells
- Prolife hypocrisy: why inconsistency arguments do not matter
- Embryo deaths in reproduction and embryo research: a reply to Murphy's double effect argument
- Two Tragedies Argument: Two Mistakes
- What’s in a name? Embryos, entities, and ANTities in the stem cell debate
- Embryonic stem cells: the disagreement debate and embryonic stem cell research in Israel
- Critical notice—Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice by Francis J Beckwith