Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Professors: Babies Don’t Know They’re Killed in Abortions
Life News ^ | 5/7/12 | Warner T. Huston

Posted on 05/07/2012 4:51:54 PM PDT by wagglebee

In February of 2012, a pair of left-wing “philosophers” wrote a paper that claimed that babies aren’t human until they can become cognizant of themselves, aware that if they were to be “aborted” or killed they’d be losing something valuable, their lives.

This, they claimed, justified abortion as well as post birth infanticide. Naturally they had elaborate justifications for their stance and what they wrote is chilling indeed, for it essentially states that only people that think like them are really worth the status of “human,” worth having their lives considered sacrosanct.

The pair, Alberto Giubilini of Milan, Italy, and Francesca Minerva of Australia, held as a central thesis that since abortion is so commonly accepted there had to be a more expansive use for it. That use, the pair decided, should be to cover killing babies born with developmental problems. After all, they said, neither fetuses or newborns “have the same moral status as actual persons,” so this certainly must mean that newborns with catastrophic birth defects could be killed without any moral reservations.

Here is how they justified the non-human status of both a fetus and a born baby.

The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.

Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’. We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her. This means that many non-human animals and mentally retarded human individuals are persons, but that all the individuals who are not in the condition of attributing any value to their own existence are not persons. Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life: spare embryos where research on embryo stem cells is permitted, fetuses where abortion is permitted, criminals where capital punishment is legal.

This is chilling for its cold approach to life, but worse for its vagueness.

Let’s examine the main point of what makes someone a worthy human in these liberal’s minds. They feel that unless someone can understand the “basic value” of their own life, then they don’t count for personhood.

This is so entirely ague that anyone can qualify for elimination in a large number of situations.

The pair mentions that mentally retarded people can qualify for elimination, that they aren’t cognizant of the value of their own lives. But are you aware of yourself when you are in a coma from an accident? Are you any longer aware of yourself if you have Alzheimer’s? How about if you have devolved to infantile status at the end of your life? Should your children have the right to just kill you instead of keeping you alive in that case?

How far does this “thought” criteria go? Can these “philosophers” decide that if you are happy drinking beer, working as a car mechanic, and watching reality TV that this isn’t enough cognition to qualify to be self-aware? Could they decide that unless you think exactly like them, why, you aren’t properly a human? Of course they could because they would be in charge of deciding what “thought” qualifies as enough to make you a real person.

Imagine what this means? It means that the left is leaving behind its reliance on “science” and alighting on “thought” to serve as a basis to assess who is worth what. No longer is mere biology something worth considering. That long-held justification for abortion using the unviable cells argument is now out. Instead we will henceforth set out to determine if people are thinking properly to ascertain if they are worth keeping alive.

Chilling, no?

Worse, imagine how much more dangerous these ideas will become when governments decide to use them as a basis for policy! We will have governments determining who is “worth” being called a human based on how the person being judged thinks.

Extremely chilling, indeed.

LifeNews.com Note: Warner Todd Huston is an editorial columnist whose work is featured on numerous web sites. He has also written for several history magazines, and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture.”


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; moralabsolutes; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last
The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.

The problem is the "moral status" of bastards who believe this.

1 posted on 05/07/2012 4:52:03 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; Salvation; 8mmMauser
Pro-Life Ping
2 posted on 05/07/2012 4:53:32 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; AKA Elena; APatientMan; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


3 posted on 05/07/2012 4:54:58 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Even if that is true.... So?

So does this mean that if a person doesn’t know they are being killed it’s somehow okay to kill them?


4 posted on 05/07/2012 4:55:36 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This means someone can shoot the professors between the eyes in their sleep, and they won’t mind since they won’t be aware they are being killed.


5 posted on 05/07/2012 4:57:20 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

So how do the professors know this?


6 posted on 05/07/2012 4:58:01 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Babies Don’t Know They’re Being Killed During Abortions

Wouldn’t that be true for people ambushed with a bullet to the back of the skull? Or someone who has an OD of sleeping pills slipped into their drink? How does ignorance of your murder make it right?


7 posted on 05/07/2012 4:58:11 PM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Using the same logic, wouldn’t a person suffering from dementia be eligible for a good snuffing out?

What about a person in a coma, who couldn’t prove’ their self awareness?

Or if a person is temporarily knocked out?

The list is endless.


8 posted on 05/07/2012 4:58:44 PM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Maybe it's the case that when you become a tenured professor you lose a sense of self ~ so it's OK to be slaughtered.

Perhaps one of these fine gentlemen would like to demonstrate for us the utility in that belief.

9 posted on 05/07/2012 4:59:01 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

We are witnessing mankind rationalize itself into The Darker Ages.


10 posted on 05/07/2012 5:01:12 PM PDT by cld51860 (Oderint dum metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Professors: Babies Don’t Know They’re Killed in Abortions

In the abortion debate many pro-abortion and not-quite-anti-abortion proponents have said the humanity of the fetus is “the central question”, “the central issue”, but never define humanity or human being except as something that is sentient, the killing of which would be murder. And? By their own words sentience does not define humanity for cows are sentient and humans may feel no pain if certain nerves are severed.

In the above context, they say the case for first trimester abortions depends upon the experience of pain. Are they saying that denying life is not to be permitted if the experience is painful? For whom? Surely after the fetus is dead it will no longer feel or remember feeling pain. This reminds me of the question of whether one would rather be given a drug before an operation that would prevent pain or be given one later that would erase from the memory the pain experienced during the operation. Such questioning is secondary to the fact of the operation. What will be its result? In the case of abortion the result will be the death of the fetus whether it feels any pain or not. The experience of pain, then, is not bad in itself if its cause brings about a better state of being or prevents a worse one. To grant or deny a fetus (the term here used generically) a future life outside the womb as a sentient human being by its present ability to experience pain seems more than bizarre--"It’s okay, you know, it didn’t feel a thing because it wasn’t sentient." Yeah, which is better, to exist having felt no pain of abortion or to not exist having felt no pain of abortion? To be or not to be, that is the question, isn’t it?
11 posted on 05/07/2012 5:05:28 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I wonder what the Hollywood leftard's stance is on this. Half of them belong to the cult of scientology. Don't they make a big deal over "prenatal memory"?

I expect closet cases Tom Cruise and John Travolta to speak out passionately in defense of the unborn.

Any second now...

...I'm, I'm sure they'll be here any moment...

12 posted on 05/07/2012 5:06:21 PM PDT by Sirius Lee (When we cease to be good we'll cease to be great. Be for Goode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

And we actually think we can have a dialog with these people! It is impossible to find a common ground with these people.

We might as well try having a discussion with a vat of maggots.


13 posted on 05/07/2012 5:07:49 PM PDT by Wurlitzer (Nothing says "ignorance" like Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Yea, well that works for demonocrats I guess...


14 posted on 05/07/2012 5:08:50 PM PDT by babygene (Figures don't lie, but liars can figure...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Yea, well that works for demonocrats I guess...


15 posted on 05/07/2012 5:09:03 PM PDT by babygene (Figures don't lie, but liars can figure...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Would it be OK to kill anybody if it can be done in his or her sleep?

I see a big fat FAIL here.


16 posted on 05/07/2012 5:09:03 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
This means someone can shoot the professors between the eyes in their sleep

I was just about to post a similar statement.........

17 posted on 05/07/2012 5:09:22 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (My 6 pack abs are now a full keg......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I would like a government grant to conduct a study where I take these liberal profs, bash them into a persistent vegetative state, then cut them up and see whether they know they are being killed.


18 posted on 05/07/2012 5:10:46 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I’ve heard some perverse individuals defend abortion on the grounds that it is a “legal activity.”


19 posted on 05/07/2012 5:12:06 PM PDT by Rides_A_Red_Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

God takes these baby’s to where these murderers will never enter, they will be judged.


20 posted on 05/07/2012 5:12:34 PM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wurlitzer

“We might as well try having a discussion with a vat of maggots.”

At least maggots serve a useful function, devouring dead tissue. The maggots need to get to work on these bastards’ brains.


21 posted on 05/07/2012 5:13:14 PM PDT by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Pro-Life Ping


Please add me!


22 posted on 05/07/2012 5:14:07 PM PDT by Rides_A_Red_Horse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
Good word. These nit wits give justification to any murderer who kills a human being inside or outside of the womb. Since when does not being able to talk about your own murder become a justification for your murder? This is the thinking of the criminal mind.
23 posted on 05/07/2012 5:14:40 PM PDT by jonrick46 (Countdown to 11-06-2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Neither do animals in the slaughter house. But they still resent the process.


24 posted on 05/07/2012 5:16:24 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Barack Obama has cut and run from what he called "the right war".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Whatever it takes to justify something that makes life more convenient...in this case, killing infants with genetic anomalies that weren’t caught in time for an abortion to be carried out. We’ve come right back to ancient Greece in such an undeniable way, and yet people still turn a blind eye to it because it’s convenient to be able to kill children who are too burdensome.


25 posted on 05/07/2012 5:16:27 PM PDT by lymelady (Pro-life: Because I passed biology and history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I actually had a conversation with an individual espoused of this argument. It didn't last very long. I said, "yeah, so if we found a genetic predictor of homosexuality..." He was actually shocked, or professed to be. I am not, of course, in favor of murdering any children, but I thought it might be interesting to see his reaction.

Here's the deal - these folks are fine with killing anyone they think might not turn out to meet their standards. They only get disturbed when they think the killing might turn out to be by somebody else's standards. And in the Third Reich, it did. To Hitler's butchers, what they were doing made sense. What these guys are advocating makes sense to them, too. To them I humbly suggest that if some of us are horrified by it, it might be due to something other than close-mindedness.

26 posted on 05/07/2012 5:17:55 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

lol

total rubbish

try covering a new borns face and watch how fast they try and pull whatever is covering it away!

all living things KNOW they are alive and will struggle to stay alive.


27 posted on 05/07/2012 5:19:41 PM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
In February of 2012, a pair of left-wing “philosophers” wrote a paper that claimed that babies aren’t human until they can become cognizant of themselves, aware that if they were to be “aborted” or killed they’d be losing something valuable, their lives.

They rationalize murder with whatever argument is handy at the moment.

If the baby DID understand, they would then proclaim that a birth defect or mother in poverty would mean a life that was not "quality", therefore, as Jim Jones himself would argue, death is the preferable option than to live one more day.

28 posted on 05/07/2012 5:22:34 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Barack Obama has cut and run from what he called "the right war".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

Or put a cap in the professor's sleeping ass.

29 posted on 05/07/2012 5:23:58 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hussein: Islamo-Commie from Kenya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Yeah, you don't know your being killed after your dead.

F&$%#*g Dolt!

30 posted on 05/07/2012 5:24:22 PM PDT by KC_Lion (I am finished with listening to empty promises of the great GOP saving me in 4 more years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lacrew
Using the same logic, wouldn’t a person suffering from dementia be eligible for a good snuffing out?

The NAZIs sure thought so.

31 posted on 05/07/2012 5:24:29 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Barack Obama has cut and run from what he called "the right war".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

He'd probably say, "Hey, I'm not offending them because they haven't yet reached the level of sentience to become offended."
32 posted on 05/07/2012 5:27:06 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

You nailed it. These idiots don’t think past their last breath.


33 posted on 05/07/2012 5:28:35 PM PDT by 23 Everest (When seconds count. The police are just 23 minutes away. 831 Bonnie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

34 posted on 05/07/2012 5:28:35 PM PDT by null and void (Day 1204 of our ObamaVacation from reality [and what dark chill/is gathering still/before the storm])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I am tempted to write the University of Austrailia and the University of Monash to advise them that Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva should be terminated from their professorships for their criminal justification for the murder of human beings. I would also fire off a letter to The Journal of Medical Ethics (JME) expressing my condemnation for giving print to Giubilini and Minerva's trash.
35 posted on 05/07/2012 5:28:56 PM PDT by jonrick46 (Countdown to 11-06-2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I’ll bet if one were to sneak up behind these basturds and put a shot in the back of their heads, they would not know they were being killed either.

What a load of illogical and unhuman crap they spew.


36 posted on 05/07/2012 5:29:57 PM PDT by Adder (Da bro has GOT to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise; lacrew
Using the same logic, wouldn’t a person suffering from dementia be eligible for a good snuffing out?

Or someone who's asleep.
37 posted on 05/07/2012 5:31:03 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Be aware, all, that barbarians like this are giving The Won his daily directions via his Blackberry.

That’s who we’re up against.


38 posted on 05/07/2012 5:32:39 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

Stalinists don’t believe all of the bullstalin they spew. They just say whatever it takes to get you to accept their way.

The “science” of genetic homosexuality are just for those who will be swayed by such arguments. They really believe in an end to ALL moral judgment over ALL sexual pairings, regardless of sex, age, relation, martial status, number, or species of partner(s). If they explain that someone people “can’t help themselves”, well maybe some will surrender to the group think. Transvestitism is not natural. We are born naked, there is no gene to “wear the other’s sex’s clothing”. Clothing is determined by culture and fashion.

The goal of “global warming science” is to reduce the size and production of the West. China and India are permitted to continuing using so-called “fossil fuels” and burning tires and coal. But some well-intentioned Americans are willing to use crappy toilets, low wattage light bulbs, and short range electric cars “to do their part to save the planet”.

Abortion serves the “zero population growth” mindset of the Left (who said 42 years ago that we would be facing a population explosion). It also serves the “do as thou will” philosophy of the sex positive hedonists. Why worry about the next generations when the goal is to live for today as thou wants?

Don’t look for consistency from Stalinist minds.


39 posted on 05/07/2012 5:34:00 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Barack Obama has cut and run from what he called "the right war".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
"So does this mean that if a person doesn’t know they are being killed it’s somehow okay to kill them?"

Only if you do it in secret, so that the right to privacy stands to trump any complaints.

40 posted on 05/07/2012 5:34:30 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Substitute the word fetus for black, or woman or jewish or gypsy or slav or non-believer and you redefine the value of human life. You make it three fifth or three quarters or any ratio you like. It worked in the time of slavery, the twenties with eugenics and nazism and now with islamism. It is the excuse they are looking for. Codify into law and presto a human life is worthless. Scary indeed.


41 posted on 05/07/2012 5:34:36 PM PDT by bubman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Next semester the subject will be:

Infanticide...Euthinasia’s misunderstood sibling


42 posted on 05/07/2012 5:35:39 PM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bubman
Excellent post!
43 posted on 05/07/2012 5:36:39 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Could someone please verify that Professors don’t know they are being killed if their skulls are caved in from behind with a Louisville Slugger!
Get back to me will ya?


44 posted on 05/07/2012 5:40:31 PM PDT by TsonicTsunami08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

By that logic, if we snuck up behind the perfessers and blew their heads off with 12-guage shotguns before they knew what was happening, it would be OK.


45 posted on 05/07/2012 5:43:18 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Do I really need a sarcasm tag? Seriously? You're that dense?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wurlitzer

That is the point-—they are godless Marxists.. redundant, I know-—but their worldview is a “Big Lie”-—the idea that there is no Objective Truth.

It is why they were never allowed to take the oath of citizenship—their ideology is incompatible with a Constitution which believes in Natural Rights from God which is the basis of reason and logic.

We have ignored our Constitution-—since Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr—and thrown out logic and reason-—the foundation of Just Law.

Now—the irrational Postmodern German Philosophy rules in Western Civ....and is destroying freedom and all Natural Rights and is destroying The Rule of Law and replacing it with Stalin’s Separation of Church and State.

We are based on jurisprudence which believes in Supra Positive Law-—higher law than man-made up stuff like “abortion” and things which deny natural rights to all.

Laws of Nature and God’s Laws are the standard that our legal system should be forced to follow-—it is the Supreme Law of America-—or used to be until the Marxists infiltrated our legal system—with Socialist judges and the Communist ACLU and unconstitutional laws.


46 posted on 05/07/2012 5:45:33 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

How very sad. But according to their definition wouldn’t a new born or a one or two month old also not be aware enough so in their mind could still be legally and morally killed?


47 posted on 05/07/2012 5:50:20 PM PDT by WhyisaTexasgirlinPA (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lacrew
The list is endless.

You're onto them.

48 posted on 05/07/2012 5:52:29 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WhyisaTexasgirlinPA

Peter Singer and others think that babies can be killed after birth if they don’t “measure up” in some way.


49 posted on 05/07/2012 6:01:16 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
next they'll say they don't feel any pain either...
50 posted on 05/07/2012 6:16:56 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson