The morality of abortion is a longstanding controversy. One may wonder whether it’s even possible to make significant progress on an issue over which so much ink has already been split and there is such polarizing disagreement (Boyle 1994). The papers in this issue show that this progress is possible—there is more to be said about abortion and other crucial beginning-of-life issues. They do so largely by applying contemporary philosophical tools to moral questions involving life’s beginning. The first two papers (...) defend the pro-life view from recent objections involving miscarriage and abortion doctors. The third shows how the social model of disability and the concept of transformative experience applies to classic debates like abortion and euthanasia. The final two papers address how rights and harms apply to children and to beings that do not yet exist. All five papers make a noteworthy contribution to the moral issues that arise at the beginning of life. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The notion of ‘playing God’ frequently comes to fore in discussions of bioethics, especially in religious contexts. The phrase has always been analyzed and discussed from Christian and secular standpoints. Two interpretations exist in the literature. The first one takes ‘God’ seriously and playing ‘playfully’. It argues that this concept does state a principle but invokes a perspective on the world. The second takes both terms playfully. In the Islamic Intellectual tradition, the Sufi concept of ‘adopting divine character traits’ (...) provides a legitimate paradigm for ‘playing God’. This paradigm is interesting because here we take both terms ‘God’ and ‘playing’ seriously. It is significant for the development of biomedical ethics in contemporary Islamic societies as it can open new vistas for viewing biotechnological developments. (shrink)

Distinctions between therapy and enhancement are difficult to draw with precision, especially in marginal cases. Nevertheless, most recent Christian discussions of enhancement technologies accept the general plausibility of distinctions drawn between therapeutic interventions and enhancement technologies by appealing to general understandings of nature and human nature as available benchmarks. On that basis, a range of religious assessments of enhancement technologies can be identified. Those judgments incorporate different interpretations of nature as a source of moral insight, different understandings of human responsibility (...) in light of God's purposes, and different assessments of the effects of sin and finitude on human freedom. (shrink)