Ross Douthat tackles the question: : What do we accept today that our great-grandchildren may condemn? And he offers some suggestions, in part by referring to a piece by Kwame Anthony Appiah in the Washington Post: abortion, brutal prisons, industrial meat production.

Tyler Cowen turns the question around: What do we condemn that our descendants may accept?

Torture and loss of privacy -- in some of its forms at least -- already seem to be on the rise, at least in terms of their acceptability in the United States.

With rising health care costs and tight budgets in many countries, can we not expect euthanasia to rise in moral popularity? Will the principles for cutting off care force us to transparently embrace some ugly moral principle, or will the ugliness be our lack of transparency and arbitrariness on these matters?

Preemptive warfare feels unpopular, because Iraq and Afghanistan have gone poorly, and because there have no more major successful terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. I predict the idea will make a comeback. Robot and drone warfare may become even more commonplace, as will targeting at a distance and selective cyberwarfare.

I fervently hope that torture, preemptive war and euthanasia don't make a comeback. However here is one condemned practice that nobody mentioned that ought to be accepted: assisted suicide for the terminally ill. I predict that Dr. Jack Kevorkian, now widely viewed as a bizarre crank, will be seen as a hero by the future.