Theoretical Reviewing Of Overlapping Consensus In The Context Of Abortion Debate

Abstract

Since the beginning of the late modern era, modern constitutions have been trying to keep both grouprights as minority rights and individual rights. But, in some cases, it is still ambiguous if an action or aphenomenon must refer to individual rights or group rights. Abortion discussions, with regard to politicalrights, are one example of these ambiguous cases. In this context, whereas Liberal view tends to regardabortion as individual rights of a woman, Communitarian view can be against it by pointing out the rightto life and this case may lead to a kind of liberal constitutional crises. This article gains importance as suchconstitutional crises still emerge even nowadays. John Rawls’s theory of overlapping consensus in PoliticalLiberalism tries to solve these political conflicts that emerged in liberal constitutions by prioritizing publicreason. This article conceptionally aims to examine Rawls’s theory in terms of prioritization and valuerelativity in abortion discussions. The method of article is hermeneutics. In order to extend the universe ofthe discussion, some important thinkers such as Immanuel Kant, Isaiah Berlin and John Gray, who haverelated studies on the topic, were included. In conclusion, it is asserted that Rawl’s theory is weak bothpractically and theoretically as to the principle of utilitarianism violates the rights of communitarians.

Keywords

• political science
• overlapping consensus
• pluralist liberal constitution
• group rigths
• individual rights.
• siyaset bilimi
• örtüşen görüş birliği
• çoğulcu liberal anayasa
• grup hakları
• bireyselhaklar.