Dyskurs wokół aborcji – analiza teoretyczno-prawna

P. Szecówka
{"title":"Dyskurs wokół aborcji – analiza teoretyczno-prawna","authors":"P. Szecówka","doi":"10.16926/gea.2022.01.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dispute over the acceptability of abortion has been known to the world for thousands of years. There are still no objective premises by which the dispute could be resolved. However, this is not the main problem. The real problem is, that there is no field for conversation on this matter in which both pro-life and pro-choice adherents can feel comfortable with. The author of this article believes, that the lack of a common language is the source of this problem. Clear absence of a common understanding of individual concepts (key to the dispute) in both social discussions and in legal doctrine, causes constant misunderstandings and constantly progressing polarization of views. This polarization is definitely not conducive to the development of a good and safe legal order, which representatives of both sides (pro-life and pro-choice) could be content with.","PeriodicalId":166701,"journal":{"name":"Gubernaculum et Administratio","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gubernaculum et Administratio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16926/gea.2022.01.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dispute over the acceptability of abortion has been known to the world for thousands of years. There are still no objective premises by which the dispute could be resolved. However, this is not the main problem. The real problem is, that there is no field for conversation on this matter in which both pro-life and pro-choice adherents can feel comfortable with. The author of this article believes, that the lack of a common language is the source of this problem. Clear absence of a common understanding of individual concepts (key to the dispute) in both social discussions and in legal doctrine, causes constant misunderstandings and constantly progressing polarization of views. This polarization is definitely not conducive to the development of a good and safe legal order, which representatives of both sides (pro-life and pro-choice) could be content with.
关于堕胎的可接受性的争论已经为世界所知了几千年。目前仍没有解决争端的客观前提。然而,这还不是主要问题。真正的问题是,在这个问题上,没有一个领域可以让赞成堕胎和赞成堕胎的人都感到舒服。本文的作者认为,缺乏一种共同的语言是这个问题的根源。在社会讨论和法律理论中,明显缺乏对个别概念(争议的关键)的共同理解,导致不断的误解和不断发展的观点两极分化。这种两极分化绝对不利于建立一个良好而安全的法律秩序,而这是双方(支持堕胎和支持堕胎)的代表都可能满意的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信