Suppose that we want to test whether the point of birth (or viability, or whatever) is morally relevant to when killing is justified. On the GR consistency approach, we'd ask
Suppose that we want to test whether the point of birth (or viability, or whatever) is morally relevant to when killing is justified. On the GR consistency approach, we'd ask
If you follow this approach, you're appealing to whatever moral intuitions your society has programmed you to have.
Suppose that we want to test whether the point of birth (or viability, or whatever) is morally relevant to when killing is justified. On the GR consistency approach, we'd ask
We're equally opposed to our having been killed at any point. Whether we'd be killed before or after reaching birth (or viability, or whatever) makes no difference. So GR consistency leads us to think that killing is seriously wrong starting from the moment of conception.
Here's a parallel case. To test whether skin color justifies abuse, we'd ask how we react to ourselves being abused on the basis of various possible skin colors that we imagine ourselves having. From this GR perspective, we see that skin color is morally irrelevant; we oppose our being abused regardless of what skin color we imagine ourselves having.