{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

C includes 3 and 10 item 4 is probably b item 5 might

Info iconThis preview shows pages 3–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
C includes 3 and ▲10. Item ▲4 is probably B. Item 5 might be A or B. Exercise 12-8 1. Tory is being consistent in that what he is proposing for both sexes is that members of both should have the right to marry members of the other sex. IM – 12 | 3
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
2. To avoid inconsistency, Shelley must be able to identify characteristics of art and music students, athletes, and children of alumni—for whom she believes the special admissions program is acceptable—and show that, aside from women and minority students who happen also to be in one of the listed categories, such students do not have these characteristics. Furthermore, the characteristics she identifies must be relevant to the issue of whether an individual should be admitted into the university. It may well be possible to identify the characteristics called for. (Remember that consistency is a necessary condition for a correct position, but not a sufficient one.) ▲3. Marin could be consistent only if he could show that the process of abortion involves killing and capital punishment does not. Because this is impossible—capital punishment clearly does involve killing—he is inconsistent. However, Marin’s inconsistency is the result of his blanket claim that all killing is wrong. He could make a consistent case if he were to maintain only that the killing of innocent people is wrong, and that abortion involves killing innocent people but capital punishment does not. There is another approach: Marin could argue that only state- mandated killing (which would include capital punishment but not abortion) is permissible. (Each of these last claims would require strong arguments.) 4. Koko seems to distinguish between adults on one hand and seventeen-year-olds on the other. (We presume that’s the basis for treating her daughter differently.) Whether she is consistent depends on whether this distinction is reasonable. We think it is. 5. Jack is not being consistent. He’ll need to come up with something besides simply not being able to have children if he is to have any hope of justifying his different policies for gay couples and heterosexual couples who can’t have children. 6. Alisha will need to back up the claims that marijuana is a drug in a way that tobacco is not. She may be able to do this, but she hasn’t yet done it in the passage. (She might refer to differences in mind-altering characteristics, for example.) 7. We find some substance to this argument. (It remains to be seen, of course, whether members of any other groups are actually able to secure redress for past discrimination. If they are not, then the disadvantage to the groups affected by Proposition 209 is just a formality— not that one can’t stand on principle and oppose it anyway, of course.) 8. To avoid inconsistency, Harold would have to identify a relevant difference between the discrimination law and the marijuana law. In fact, there is one fairly obvious one to which he can appeal: The former has been declared contrary to the state constitution; the latter has not been alleged to be contrary to any constitution. So, Harold may object to the failure to
Background image of page 4
Image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}