LETTERTO THE EDITOR

To the Editor:

BBC News reported in July of 2001 that it had become possible for a woman to have a child with just two eggs--no sperm was necessary. So, I guess there is a societal power on (the natural) earth that can give two women the ability to produce children. More generally, I would ask if you believe that if a married man became infertile, he should divorce his wife? If the answer is “no” than you have introduced a spectrum of morality beyond your black-and-white paradigm.

This would make, I believe, something like same-sex marriage “morally permissible.” I believe one could argue that you can tolerate something that is morally permissible. In general, I believe Benjamin’s notion of good and evil is a bit askew. I would put forth a better dichotomy, where “good” is defined as that which is manifestly advantageous (and giving people the right to marry, adopt and contribute to the economy seems advantageous), and “bad” is defined as that which is manifestly disadvantageous.

This would involve a more practical spectrum that wouldn’t depend on transcendental knowledge of purpose and end. Instead, we could say that a cold is bad, but not evil--which is weird to say. I encourage people persuaded by Benjamin’s argument to consider this difference between the practicality good and bad vs. good and evil.

Jim Steele,
NDSU Student