The respect for one’s conscience is rooted in a broader respect for the human person. The conscience represents a person’s ability to identify the values and goods that inform her moral identity. Ignoring or overriding a person’s conscience can lead to significant moral and emotional distress. Refusals to respect a person’s conscientious objection to cases of killing are a source of incisive distress, since judgments that it is impermissible to kill so-and-so are typically held very strongly and serve as central moral commitments in one’s moral identity. I think it is wrong for a college basketball coach to pay his players, but I think it is really wrong to kill people. This article argues that any and all arguments for not respecting a conscientious objection to abortion commit a deontic fallacy. Briefly, arguments for the permissibility of abortion are structurally such that abortion is at best permissible, not obligatory. Now, arguments to justify overriding or ignoring a person’s objection to performing action (α) must understand action (α) as being obligatory. Thus, arguments for ignoring conscientious objections to performing abortion are incongruent with the actual philosophical justifications for abortion. Such arguments, then, commit a deontic fallacy.

中文翻译：

---

道义谬误和反对良心反对的论据

对良心的尊重植根于对人的更广泛的尊重。良心代表一个人识别价值和商品的能力，这些价值和商品告知她的道德身份。忽视或压倒一个人的良心会导致严重的道德和情感困扰。拒绝尊重一个人出于良心对杀戮案件的反对是极度痛苦的根源，因为不允许杀死某某的判断通常非常强烈，并且是一个人道德身份的核心道德承诺。我认为大学篮球教练给他的球员发工资是错误的，但我认为杀人真的是错误的。本文认为，任何和所有不尊重出于良心反对堕胎的论点都犯了道义谬误。简要地，允许堕胎的论据在结构上是这样的，即堕胎充其量是允许的，而不是强制性的。现在，为推翻或忽略一个人反对执行行动 (α) 辩护的论点必须将行动 (α) 理解为是强制性的。因此，忽略良心反对堕胎的论点与堕胎的实际哲学理由不一致。那么，这样的论点就犯了道义谬误。