Abortion law a chance?
ANDREAS PELTZER, A CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN, WRITES: The heated debate on abortion subsided a bit.
It may be valuable to look at one of the underlying issues. The Namibian Constitution says: “The dignity of all persons shall be inviolable.” (Article 8) The terms “dignity” and “person” are most challenging. Germany’s highest court ruled an unborn (nasciturus) is a person (BVerfGE 39,1). Six judges were in favour, two provided opposing votes. There are diverging views on this eminent question. The matter is aggravated by the fact that the term “dignity” is undefinable in principle.
We regard the legal system as logically firm, but in reality, it is quite fragmentary. The judicial syllogisms is actually a mix of deductions, inductions, and abductions. (Charles Sanders Peirce/Lege) Judges have to transcend the existing law, as justice is a moral obligation a priori.
That’s why we speak of jurisprudentia instead of dogmatic jurisscientia. Judges need experience in their reflections. Justice is not a gamble of words. It entails dealing with a story, a narrative, that the affected parties bring before a judge. The circumstances matter.
It makes a difference whether a boxer hits an opponent during a competition or whether it happens in a private altercation. The discussion on abortion could be used to refine the legal system.
It could integrate (not separate) law, morality, and ethics into a dialectic unity (Hegel). The court would be counseling and consulting instead of criminalizing. Fundamental ethics and the philosophy of law would permit.
* Rubrieke, meningstukke, briewe en SMS’e deur lesers en meningvormers weerspieël nie noodwendig die siening van Republikein of Namibia Media Holdings (NMH) nie. As mediahuis onderskryf NMH die etiese kode vir Namibiese media, soos toegepas deur die Media-ombudsman.
It may be valuable to look at one of the underlying issues. The Namibian Constitution says: “The dignity of all persons shall be inviolable.” (Article 8) The terms “dignity” and “person” are most challenging. Germany’s highest court ruled an unborn (nasciturus) is a person (BVerfGE 39,1). Six judges were in favour, two provided opposing votes. There are diverging views on this eminent question. The matter is aggravated by the fact that the term “dignity” is undefinable in principle.
We regard the legal system as logically firm, but in reality, it is quite fragmentary. The judicial syllogisms is actually a mix of deductions, inductions, and abductions. (Charles Sanders Peirce/Lege) Judges have to transcend the existing law, as justice is a moral obligation a priori.
That’s why we speak of jurisprudentia instead of dogmatic jurisscientia. Judges need experience in their reflections. Justice is not a gamble of words. It entails dealing with a story, a narrative, that the affected parties bring before a judge. The circumstances matter.
It makes a difference whether a boxer hits an opponent during a competition or whether it happens in a private altercation. The discussion on abortion could be used to refine the legal system.
It could integrate (not separate) law, morality, and ethics into a dialectic unity (Hegel). The court would be counseling and consulting instead of criminalizing. Fundamental ethics and the philosophy of law would permit.
* Rubrieke, meningstukke, briewe en SMS’e deur lesers en meningvormers weerspieël nie noodwendig die siening van Republikein of Namibia Media Holdings (NMH) nie. As mediahuis onderskryf NMH die etiese kode vir Namibiese media, soos toegepas deur die Media-ombudsman.
Kommentaar
Republikein
Geen kommentaar is op hierdie artikel gelaat nie