Archive

Gallup just issued its annual poll on “moral acceptability.” I was struck by the dramatically different results in the two questions about suicide.

The first question asked about “doctor assisted suicide.” Close to a majority, 49 percent, of respondents answered that committing suicide with a doctor’s help is morally acceptable, while 45 percent responded that it is not.

The other question asked simply about the moral acceptability of “suicide.” Strikingly, only 21 percent said that it is morally acceptable to take one’s own life, while a whopping 70 percent said it is not. Indeed, suicide was one of the lowest “morally acceptable” behaviors in the entire poll. Only cloning humans, polygamy, and extramarital affairs had a lower moral acceptability rating.

That’s quite a paradox. So, what’s going on? Why the wide disparity in answering two questions that are about the same issue?

Seven miscarriages. Two living children. Countless questions. What does it actually feel like to lose a child through miscarriage? What happens when the pregnancy test line starts fading and you realize you’re about to lose another baby? Why do so many women feel completely unprepared for the physical, emotional, and spiritual reality of miscarriage, despite the fact that roughly 1 in 4 pregnancies ends in miscarriage? In this deeply personal and moving conversation, Gabriela Anastasopoúlou shares her journey through a miscarriage, becoming a mom to her son, followed by seven miscarriages and secondary infertility, and the eventual birth of her daughter after years of unanswered questions and heartbreak. Gabriela opens up about: As a civil rights attorney and advocate for Read More ›

The utilitarian bioethicist Peter Singer opposes human exceptionalism. Indeed, he contends that being human is irrelevant to determining moral value. What counts are capacities and the ability to suffer. Singer advocates using the term “person” to identify individuals with the highest moral value. Since he believes that personhood is based on capacities, some humans are not persons — the unborn, infants, the profoundly cognitively disabled — while some animals are. This means that those animals matter more morally than the vulnerable humans he so casually depersonalizes. It is thus unsurprising that Singer takes issue with Pope Leo’s encyclical on AI because of the document’s stalwart defense of universal human rights and its intense focus on the impact AI will have Read More ›

There is an old joke: What do you call the medical student who finished last in his class? Answer: “Doctor.”

The increasing legalization of assisted suicide has accorded that joke a disturbing pertinence. A doctor who prescribes poison need not be an excellent medical practitioner. He or she need not specialize in treating patients who present with particular life-threatening conditions, and indeed, can prescribe even if never treating the patient’s underlying condition at all.

For example, Jack Kevorkian was a pathologist who never treated a living patient after medical school. But if assisted suicide had been legal in his time, he would have been qualified to lethally prescribe. Along similar lines, before assisted suicide was legalized, the California death doctor Lonny Shavelson was a part-time ER doc who mostly pursued a career as a photojournalist and author.

The “nature rights” movement continues to advance. Now, a bill has been presented for consideration in the U.K. House of Lords by a member of the Green Party to redefine “nature” as a “subject” with enforceable “rights.”

The “Nature’s Rights Bill 2026” is as radical as it is long. It recognizes “Nature” (capital N) as “a legal subject and rights bearing entity” that essentially includes everything that exists on the planet:

“Nature” means the interconnected community of living organisms, ecosystems, habitats, species, landscapes, seascapes, geological processes, waters, soils, atmosphere, climate systems and natural cycles, including the evolutionary and regenerative dynamics of life on Earth.

The putative rights of Nature are all-encompassing:

(1) Nature has the following inherent rights—
(a) the right to exist, persist and evolve;
(b) the right to maintain and regenerate ecological integrity;
(c) the right to restoration and regeneration where harm has occurred;
(d) the right to be free from pollution, contamination and degradation that threatens ecological integrity, resilience or health;
(e) the right to maintain natural cycles, functions and processes, including hydrological, climatic, geological, soil, nutrient, reproductive, evolutionary and ecological processes;
(f) the right to maintain ecological connectivity, diversity, abundance and resilience; and
(g) the right to exist, regenerate and flourish within safe ecological limits, including Planetary Boundaries and Earth System Boundaries so far as applicable.

Did the women’s movement get hijacked? Former Cosmopolitan writer and Subverted author Sue Ellen Browder says yes, and she says she helped do it. In this eye-opening conversation, Sue shares what she witnessed inside Cosmopolitan during the height of the sexual revolution, how media narratives helped reshape American views on sex, marriage, motherhood, and abortion, and why she believes the women’s movement became fused with abortion politics. We discuss the influence of figures such as Betty Friedan, Larry Lader, Simone de Beauvoir, and Kate Millett, the origins of modern feminism, the role of propaganda in shaping public opinion, and what Sue uncovered in her research into Roe v. Wade. Was the sexual revolution an organic cultural shift or a carefully Read More ›

AI gets most of the attention, but biotechnology may be even more impactful on the human future. Indeed, I think it is the most powerful technology since the splitting of the atom — perhaps even in history, as it has the potential to literally alter the human race or any cell/organism — which could cure diseases or unleash an unstoppable pandemic. Attention must be paid. Some biotechnologists are intent on pursuing radical biotechnologies — whether to eliminate disease, or as I expect to become the bigger, more remunerative draw, to create designer babies enhanced to be smarter, more beautiful, or otherwise made to order — regardless of the ethical questions. A long piece in The Guardian illustrates the stakes we Read More ›

Egg freezing is sold as empowerment. A way to “pause” fertility, focus on career and relationships, and have children later on your own timeline. But what if that promise isn’t as secure as women are being told? In this explosive episode of Bioethics Babe, Jennifer Lahl, founder of the Center for Bioethics and Culture Network and director of the documentary Eggsploitation, exposes the risks, realities, and ethical questions surrounding the rapidly growing egg freezing industry. We discuss: Is egg freezing truly empowering women, or is it selling the illusion that biology can be postponed without consequence? This conversation dives into the science, ethics, medicine, and cultural assumptions behind one of the fastest-growing reproductive technologies in the world. For Episode Resources, Read More ›

In a newly released paper in the prestigious journal Bioethics, three prominent bioethicists argue that when someone decides to commit suicide via self-starvation and dehydration — known in euthanasia movement parlance as “voluntary stop eating and drinking” (VSED) — doctors should be allowed to “terminally sedate” the person trying to die when necessary to prevent intractable suffering. Patients who commit VSED are often not terminally ill. In fact, euthanasia organizations promote self-starvation to the elderly who are not dying and as a means of becoming eligible for assisted suicide where it is legal by making oneself “terminal” via lack of sustenance. VSED must be distinguished from the common circumstance when actively dying people stop eating. That’s a natural process and Read More ›

Environmentalism is growing increasingly radical and irrational, epitomized by the “nature rights” movement that seeks to declare geological features, flora, and fauna to be rights-bearing beings. Nature rights activists proselytize neoearth religion. Advocates often invoke mystical beliefs of indigenous peoples as justifications for their advocacy, including the invocation of “Pachamama,” the Incan earth goddess. Some activists even claim that the earth is alive. Now, an article in the environmental journal PLOS Climate claims that “glaciers are more than human beings” — what I guess we could call glacier exceptionalism: In the context of accelerating climate change and widespread ecological degradation, there is growing academic and legal interest in reframing natural entities—such as glaciers—as more-than-human beings. This conceptual turn challenges anthropocentric Read More ›