English Class

*NOTE: This post is centered on a sensitive topic. I do not mean to offend any by writing this, however I would like to hear what you think.

Expectation failure. It's something that the "Best College Teachers Do" according to Dr. Ken Bain. It is something that a teacher creates in their classroom to challenge the commonly existing beliefs or views of life and society, otherwise known as paradigms. In class this last Monday, my English professor posed this question/scenario to us:

Say a student is hungry and wants to run to McDonald's between classes. They are a native resident of Rexburg and as such, hop in their pick-up truck (his words, not mine). As he pulls into the drive-through and orders his food he pulls forward to the pick up window. He looks inside the window and sees a man with a gun trying to get all the cash from the till. At first, the student freezes but then comes back to life as he sees a patron try and run for the door. The criminal shoots that person and kills them. Then an employee runs for the back room to try and reach a phone. With another shot they are dead as well. The student realizes he has his shotgun on a rack in the cab of his pickup (again, my professor's words, not mine). He reaches up, grabs it, aims and takes fire. His shot hits the criminal and kills him. Did the student make a mistake? Is he guilty of murder? Or did he make a morally correct decision in stopping a murderer from continuing his work?

He closed class with that hypothetical situation on Monday and told us to come prepared for a civil argument on Wednesday. In my mind I did not feel that the student made an immoral decision. It seems like as a citizen we have a responsibility to help and protect those around us. If we are in a position where we can stop someone from doing harm before they have shot anyone, then a shot in the shoulder or leg would be adequate. However, if the person has already done harm then anything should be done to stop them from hurting more people. 

In class this discussion was had and the conclusion I had come to on my own was generally agreed upon by the students in my class. After about ten minutes of discussion, my teacher then wrote the claim of his argument on the board. I was shocked as I read what he wrote:

"People should not call abortion murder."

Instantly I was confused. "What? I am at Brigham Young University-Idaho, a church endorsed school, and yet my professor is telling me that we should not call abortion murder?" Whether or not my mouth hung open for a few minutes I am not sure of, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did. My personal beliefs have always been that abortion is murder. You have a child growing inside of your body, you are the source of its life, and you choose to rid yourself of that "burden." I understand that in some circumstances, an abortion is necessary. While those circumstances exist and they are very sad, choosing an abortion because you simply don't want to have a baby does not sit well with me.

It is wrong. It is disgusting. And it is morally grotesque.

So why is my teacher telling us that we should not call it murder? Yes, I know that the Church has made no statement as to at what point the soul enters the developing body, but to me I have always felt that abortion = murder. But my professor was arguing that point. It's hard to sway me from my view point, but if you have a good argument, it's very possible.

My professor's argument was this: "If you believe that using deadly force to stop a murderer from continuing his work, and you believe abortion is murder, then logically you would be in support of using deadly force against all abortion doctors." 

There was a man who laid in wait in a very well known abortion doctor's office. This specific doctor was in support of late term aborting, and was known to be the one doctor to go to if you wanted an abortion late in your pregnancy. This man laid in wait for this doctor to finish up for the day, and as he was about to leave his office, he shot the doctor and killed him. In this man's trial, he said, "I was just stopping a murderer from continuing his work, because I believe abortion is murder." 

Obviously what this man did is wrong. But, if you were to follow the logic of:
1. Believing that using deadly force against murderers to stop them from killing more is morally correct.

2. Believing abortion is murder.

3. Thus, it is not morally incorrect to use deadly force against abortion doctors...

...then what he did was not morally wrong. However, all of our moral compasses would point us towards the view point of "killing is wrong." So how do we solve this issue? I honestly don't know.

My professor believes that people only call it murder because they are disgusted with the poor and irresponsible choices of those women that choose to get abortions. (He did acknowledge that there are special and rare circumstances where an abortion is necessary.) He is disgusted with abortion. But, he does not think people should call it murder because by doing so it justifies the use of deadly force against those who practice abortion. 

I am not saying that abortion isn't murder. And I'm not saying that we should go around bombing abortion clinics and putting out a contract for every practicing abortion doctor. I basically just want to know what you think. Do you think his argument is ridiculous? Do you think he even has a valid point? 

I'm not sure. I haven't been swayed by his argument. And I still think that the student in the hypothetical situation made the morally correct decision. But I've been left in a kind of stupor all day by my professor's argument. I would love to hear your thoughts.