Skip to comments.Australian Ethicists Argue the Right to Kill Babies After They’re Born
Posted on 03/02/2012 6:45:18 PM PST by sreastman
Australian Ethicists Argue the Right to Kill Babies After Theyre Born
An article entitled After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live? was recently published in the London-based "Journal of Medical Ethics," advocating that if abortion is allowed, then society also has the right to kill a newborn child. This outrageous deduction by Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva takes abortion to its logical conclusion.
The abstract states: By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call after-birth abortion (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.
The authors are willing to admit that handicapped children are able to live happy lives but then advocate that, because of their burden on the rest of the family, the children should be able to be killed. If the test for ones life continuing was based on not burdening someone else, everyones life would fail at one point or another. The question then becomes how burdensome must you be to merit your murder?
It is revolting to consider, and even more so to advocate for, the right to kill a perfectly formed, helpless newborn baby. This shocking position should stir a second look at legalized abortion. If our society is unwilling to accept the right to kill newborns, and even older children, why do we allow the murder of the unborn? The destruction of another human being - regardless of his age, his size, or his ability - should never be allowed.
Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, commented: Abortion opens the door to infanticide. If you can kill a child in the womb, even up to the moment before birth, then there is no logical reason to protect life after birth. A human being begins at the moment of conception and should be afforded legal protection at all stages of life. This is the only logically defensible position. It is shocking to see people advocating killing children after they are born. It is just as shocking to see people advocating killing them before they are born.
© 2012 Liberty Counsel
You may contact Alberto Giubilini and Francesa Minerva by email to discuss their "findings":
“Australian Ethicists Argue the Right to Kill Babies After Theyre Born”
In related news, Americans Argue the Right to Kill Australian Ethicists After They’re Born. Film at 11:00.
These are not ethicists, They are murdering sons of bitch’s.
By advocating the murder of newborns, they give up the right to be regarded as “persons” and we can perform 180th trimester abortions on these promoters of baby butchery.
I can only horrifically imagine what type of monsters would have to be in this business.
Especially the women babykillers.
I agree. I have always been an opponent of capital punishment except in really egregious circumstances. There are a few crimes which cry out for the blood of the perpetrator.
Saying it is OK to murder babies is so far beyond the pale that they should not be allowed to live on this earth.
First you cheapen the value of life a little bit, then a little bit more, then a little bit more, then you cheapen life from the other end of the spectrum, then a little more, then a little more, and then you are in the Fourth Reich.
These aren’t ethicists, they are Nazis. Human beings are evil.
I just really equate it to more of an “OK, you first” kind of view on that sort of proposal.
For example, we should hound Peter Singer as to why he hasn’t killed himself to make room for others? He’s surely lived long enough. He has a huge carbon footprint to answer for.
In a way they are helping expose the horror of abortion for what it really is, which doesn't help the pro-
choice murder argument, IMHO.
The far left totally agrees, believe me. They’ll get around to it sooner or later.
No sh*t, Sherlock.
One day, he'll probably be getting the needle when his faculties start to fail and he's no longer an effective useful idiot. I'm sure he'll want to reflect on euthanasia again - fortunately, he'll have all of eternity to do just that.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
So THAT’S where all those Nazis went...
I can’t help but think these folks are roasting abortion supporters for lunch.
Showing the absurdity of killing living beings couldn’t be done in a much more effective way.
Chilling. Murderers calling themselves ethicist.
We must need an ethicist pogrom to improve our ethics.
This is where we are being led as a society. Those who oppose this idea are being called “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”. Is it only a coincidence that this subject is brought up now?
Might want to take a look at this which I posted in another thread. Seems on topic:
Ah the morality of those who pray at the idol of ‘reason alone’ and who think that man is inherently good as he is because he is. And reject that Judeo-Christian faith and teachings has had any affect on how men treat each other.
I guess morality that secular humanists and athiests believe in came out of the swamp with man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.