Even the Greeks, long before Christianity, saw conscience as rational act. In the classic argument for obedience to a higher law, Antigone, in Sophocles' play of the same name, defies the king's commands when she says: “I did not think your edicts strong enough / To overrule the unwritten unalterable laws”. She dies rather than disobey her conscience. I can't imagine Cannold and the Victorian MPs who voted for this bill dying for their conscience. It makes no sense to be martyred for choosing your favourite ice cream.
So, in Cannold's scheme of things, if values are relative and conscience is irrational, then there is no point in debating about the truth. What matters is seizing the levers of power to impose your own values as fast as possible; in other words, to establish a dictatorship of relativism, which is exactly what pro-choice activists are hoping to do in Victoria.
I suspect that this brutal battering of freedom of conscience is part and parcel of the pro-choice ideology. Abortion is hard to justify with facts. It clearly is the taking of an innocent human life. To deny that, your will has to hogtie your capacity for reasoning things out
Advertisement
No wonder abortion was removed from freedom of expression in the Charter of Rights - because it is rationally indefensible. Its only shield against inquiry and criticism is power. So, that's the secret of why Victorian MPs don't give a toss about their constituents' freedom of conscience. If you accept abortion, you probably don't believe in truth. And, if you don't believe in truth, you won't think conscientious objection is worth the hassle.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
60 posts so far.