English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A CRITICAL REVIEW, if carefully argued, can bring into relief the true issues of a debate. George TANABE'S review in the JFRS of my Liquid Life: Abortion and Buddhism in Japan (1994) does not, unfortunately, let that happen. Because the J1RS has done more than any other journal to focus attention on the question of religion and abortion in Japan, and because the issue is deserving of further examination, I have requested from the editors this space to respond to Tanabe and clarify the state-of-the-question. My hope is not simply to defend my study but to suggest some reasons why he and I presently see the matter so differently. The piece is organized into three sections, in which I comment on misrepresentations of what I have tried to do; on "silences" in the history of morality (or, alternately, on what constitutes evidence in studies of that history); and on gender-specificity as it relates to these questions. On the matter of misrepresentations, I need to reject two things imputed to me by Tanabe. The first is that I blithely fudge the difference between abortion and infanticide. In his second paragraph, after suggesting that Liquid Life mistakenly represents Buddhism as having a "sensible, socially enlightened view," Tanabe continues: Indeed, (LaFleur's) argument goes beyond abortion to include infanticide as well-readers who discern a significant difference between the two might take pause when they see Buddhism used to justify the smothering of a newborn child. (p. 437)

Silences and censures: Abortion, history, and Buddhism in Japan. A rejoinder to George Tanabe