"I do n't think those blanket statements necessarily apply . You have to realize that there is something behind the proclamations of that sort of morality ; human life is sacred is n't just a proclamation , it 's a philosophy . The case could just as easily be made that pro-choicers are basing their morality on a proclamation as well , that `` reason is the basis for morality `` . Even if you call either a case of proclamation , it 's the philosophy behind it that serves as the basis for the morality , not statement itself ."
"What are the reasons which you would present behind the statement `` all human life is sacred `` ( or whichever similar statement you think is the core of your pro-life stance ) ? If morality is based only on arbitrary proclamations , then there is little chance of consensus because other groups or religions come up with other arbitrary set of rules and we are back to the situation of , in the worst case , chaos and , in the best case , a majority imposing arbitrary rules on an unwilling suffering minority . I suspect that a lot of people , if not most people , at least partially follow some version of `` treat others as you would have yourself be treated `` . When , as children , we were scolded `` How would you like it if ... `` that is a tactic of teaching this rule . For those who are religious ( which I only marginally , occasionally and hesitatingly am ) , even Jesus stated `` Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. `` in the Sermon on the Mount talk ( as quoted by ShadowPikachu ) . Many world religions and philosophies seem to incorporate that general rule , which is partly why I think it has a reasonable chance at being incorporated as a global base of morality ."
"blanket statements something behind the proclamations"
"all human life is sacred treat others as you would have yourself be treated"