What is your answer?
The authors hold that Supreme Court decisions
{ 1 } - have recognized the great ethical difference between contraception and abortion.
{ 2 } - have not decided that the unborn child is not a human being with human rights.
{ 3 } - have recognized the woman's right to assistance for an abortion from state or federal funds.
{ 4 } - have recognized the father's right to be involved in the decision whether or not to have an abortion.
{ 5 } - have evaded the question of the rights of children on the pretext that it is a speculative question on which there is no general agreement.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
The authors hold that Supreme Court decisions
{ 1 } - have recognized the great ethical difference between contraception and abortion.
{ 2 } - have not decided that the unborn child is not a human being with human rights.
{ 3 } - have recognized the woman's right to assistance for an abortion from state or federal funds.
{ 4 } - have recognized the father's right to be involved in the decision whether or not to have an abortion.
{ 5 } - have evaded the question of the rights of children on the pretext that it is a speculative question on which there is no general agreement.
See p. 266. Their lack of recognition supports the claim that the contraceptive mentality leads to abortion.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
The authors hold that Supreme Court decisions
{ 1 } - have recognized the great ethical difference between contraception and abortion.
{ 2 } - have not decided that the unborn child is not a human being with human rights.
{ 3 } - have recognized the woman's right to assistance for an abortion from state or federal funds.
{ 4 } - have recognized the father's right to be involved in the decision whether or not to have an abortion.
{ 5 } - have evaded the question of the rights of children on the pretext that it is a speculative question on which there is no general agreement.
They have decided this, but not honestly, for they pretend that this is a speculative question that they cannot or should not decide. See pp. 266-7
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
The authors hold that Supreme Court decisions
{ 1 } - have recognized the great ethical difference between contraception and abortion.
{ 2 } - have not decided that the unborn child is not a human being with human rights.
{ 3 } - have recognized the woman's right to assistance for an abortion from state or federal funds.
{ 4 } - have recognized the father's right to be involved in the decision whether or not to have an abortion.
{ 5 } - have evaded the question of the rights of children on the pretext that it is a speculative question on which there is no general agreement.
See p. 266.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is wrong. Please try again.
The authors hold that Supreme Court decisions
{ 1 } - have recognized the great ethical difference between contraception and abortion.
{ 2 } - have not decided that the unborn child is not a human being with human rights.
{ 3 } - have recognized the woman's right to assistance for an abortion from state or federal funds.
{ 4 } - have recognized the father's right to be involved in the decision whether or not to have an abortion.
{ 5 } - have evaded the question of the rights of children on the pretext that it is a speculative question on which there is no general agreement.
See p. 266.
<= back | menu | forward =>
5 is correct!
The authors hold that Supreme Court decisions
{ 1 } - have recognized the great ethical difference between contraception and abortion.
{ 2 } - have not decided that the unborn child is not a human being with human rights.
{ 3 } - have recognized the woman's right to assistance for an abortion from state or federal funds.
{ 4 } - have recognized the father's right to be involved in the decision whether or not to have an abortion.
{ 5 } - have evaded the question of the rights of children on the pretext that it is a speculative question on which there is no general agreement.
See p. 266, and http://www.ohiolife.org/court/roe.htm for the text of Roe v. Wade. For information on Norma McCorvey, the Roe of Roe v. Wade, see http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0474_Roe__v._Wade.html and http://www.priestsforlife.org/Norma.html
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end