Reply  In my previous discussion thread titled "Compare and Contrast Metaethical Theories, I chose Utilitarianism as my metaethical theory of choice in comparison to Christian Ethics. "Utilitarianism argues for the principle of maximal utility: we should always do whatever will provide the most benefit to the greatest number of people." (Saxon, Michael S. Jones, Mark J. Farnham, p. 18). However, from a Christian Ethics standpoint, an abortion wouldn't be considered acceptable. "At its heart, Christian Ethics is a blend of both virtues and principles." (Saxon, Michael S. Jones, Mark J. Farnham, p. 68). I explained and detailed my views on various topics within the metaethical theories.

Much like the previous discussion, I also lead with the topic of abortion that I chose to for this discussion as well. I highlighted the pro-choice views that aligned very closely with the Utilitarianism theory and I also highlighted the pro-life views that aligned very closely with the Christian Ethics theory.  However, I ultimately ended up choosing Utilitarianism to be the stronger theory of the two. My reasoning was based solely on the fact that I am living in the reality of Utilitarianism. Has my opinion changed on which theory I think is stronger, no. However, after reading the assigned chapters for this module, I did develop a better understanding of how and why some may believe or argue that Christian Ethics is the stronger theory.

More specifically, as is pertained to the "born" versus "conceived" comparisons. "That is, there is more to this text than the simple parallel between conception and birth. It also describes God knowing the unborn in the same way he knows a child or an adult. Thereby contributing something characteristic of adults to the unborn" (Scott Rae, p. 135). There is clearly a difference between what many humans consider a "born" child which directly conflicts with what god sees as a child. The child was his creation all along. This was a gift from him since before the idea of conception came to realization. I believe this is also the part that many pro-choice advocates struggle with while applying the Utilitarianism theory. If terminating the life of the fetus will eliminate the likelihood of stress, financial hardships and physical harm to self or others, why is abortion seen as such a negative thing? The only reasonable argument is that from a biblical standpoint, God would consider conception to be life. "The general tenor of Scripture appears to support the idea that the unborn is considered a person by God, being described with many of the same characteristics that apply to children and adults" (Scott Rae, p. 137). 

If closing, this is an extremely difficult topic as it pertains to ethics. Especially if you're on the side of pro-choice. However, this will also lead you down the rabbit hole of opening a can of worms to a plethora of other issues as it pertains to life and choices. Such as war, the death penalty, the "eye for an eye" beliefs and even the idea that only some will be "saved" while others will not. All interesting topics that I'll save for a future discussion