ABSTRACT In the first part of this article I discuss some objections which assert that surrogacy is primarily—but not exclusively—harmful in a moral sense. After examination of mainly but not exclusively morality‐dependent harms (objections from similarity with prostitution, exploitation, etc.) and after the discussion of possible non‐morality‐dependent harms (baby, couple, surrogate mother, agency, etc.), I argue, in the second part, that no one reason supports the possible prohibition of surrogacy. In the last part I try to show why moral reasons (...) alone could not be sufficient to criminalize any kind of activity—including surrogacy—in a liberal order. (shrink)

Abortion is one of the great moral debates of the epoch. Is there a rational method by which the debate can be resolved? Can bioethics' promise of such a method be fulfilled? Surely, a strictly rational approach can establish solid grounds for our beliefs once and for all. We would then be justified in deeming as unreasonable anyone who does not accept the perfectly rational conclusions. I present two scenarios to show that there can be no such philosophically grounded method (...) and therefore no such facts to which everyone must agree. This does not mean that it is in fact impossible for people to reach agreement. It simply means that there is no incontrovertibly rational means by which they must do so. (shrink)

A moral compromise is a compromise on moral matters; it is agreement in the face of moral disagreement but where there is agreement on the importance of consensus -namely that it secures a morally desirable outcome. It is distinguishable from other forms of agreement, and an important distinction between moral compromise with public agreement and moral compromise with public disagreement is also made. Circumstances in which the former might be permissible are outlined, and the sense in which it is allowed (...) all things considered to agree is made clear. The relevant discussions of Dan Brock and Mary Warnock on the role of the philosopher to public policy are critically reviewed. Finally, a brief list is offered of the considerations relevant to an estimation of whether and, if so, when such compromise is allowed. (shrink)