Posted on 01/08/2018 7:42:55 AM PST by ebb tide
A University of Tennessee student has argued that two-year-old children have no right to life because they cannot communicate.
Students for Life of America have released a video interview of the unnamed student to illustrate the extreme positions taken by the pro-abortion movement.
In the short clip, the male student is asked what he thinks about the argument that children can be “aborted” until the age of two.
“I’ll buy that,” says the student although he proceeds to argue for the death of two-year olds, believing them to be incapable of communication.
“The fact of the matter is that without communication, we have no way of knowing if you’re sentient or not,” he says. “I mean, it’s no different than this tree. It’s alive, but is it sentient? I don’t know. I can’t communicate with it.”
He brushes off his interviewer’s, Brenna Lewis’s, observation that comparing a tree to a two-year-old child is “tough”.
“Can the two-year-old talk to me?” the student demands, rolling not only his eyes, but his head. “In some instances, I’m fairly certain that is. But generally speaking, the child still has in inability to communicate. And until we communicate that as such, at what point does sentience become an issue? We can’t really debate whether that is the situation or not.”
The student’s views echo those of Peter Singer, the Australian philosopher best known for advocating the infanticide of disabled children. In his 1979 work Practical Ethics, he wrote:
The fact that a being is a human being, in the sense of a member of the species Homo sapiens, is not relevant to the wrongness of killing it; it is, rather, characteristics like rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness that make a difference. Infants lack these characteristics. Killing them, therefore, cannot be equated with killing normal human beings, or any other self-conscious beings.
More recently, Singer argued in the Scotsman newspaper that pre-rational human beings have no right to life. “We have no obligation to allow every being with the potential to become a rational being to realise that potential,” he wrote.
But what is particularly odd about the Tennessee student’s comparison of a two-year-old with a tree is that he seems to believe two year olds can’t communicate. Newborn babies learn very quickly that if they make certain noises, there are certain results: a yell brings food, comfort, companionship. By six months of age, children recognize the basic sounds of their language. Before they are a year old, they understand words for everyday items (e.g. “cracker” and “cup”) and may even respond to such commands as “Come here.” They may already have one or two words in their spoken repertoire---but children as young as nine months have been taught a form of sign language.
Of course, what is more to the point is that a healthy-looking young man studying at an American university can so coolly argue against the right of children to live, even children who have left their mothers’ wombs and are physically independent of their mother’s bodies, even if their survival still depends on maternal care. Whatever would his mother say?
I know plenty of liberals in their 20s that are incapable of meaningful communication.
We should probably start with them first.
This is what the Marxists are teaching our young skulls full of mush at our so called “colleges” and “universities”.
Sounds like she’d fit in on the college football playoff committee.
I agree.
King Herod would have agreed. He ordered the killing of all boy babies up to the age of two in Bethlehem.
Lena Dunham molested (Raped, really) a baby. She’s still free......
... and breathing. For some reason.
So there is that.
USA Today said that it wasn’t sexual abuse, it was sexual exploration. So perhaps this student is just exploring an ethics problem.
And here is another ethics problem: If we keep shielding, defending and even justifying this sort of evil then are we just as responsible ? What is the logical conclusion ?
Can’t communicate? At two they should be talking a bit and even at 1 they can certainly communicate. They let you know when they are hungry, when they need changing, etc. etc.
The “culture of death” is never stationary and content. It is voracious, expanding and always looking for new victims, like its author.
The only thing that matters is that it’s news.
HEIL!!!!!!!!!
Hitler lives through his tireless descendants.
Hey genius,plants, including trees, do communicate.
Try killing a tree in front of these tree-huggers and see what happens.
Did you miss the part about "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit..." in your Civics class (there was money well-spent).
Now, Little Rocket Science Man, get back to class and continue your mal-education.
...his identify will not remain a secret. Azzholes like him amass a great deal of enemies....
identify = identity
This psychotic pinhead most likely thinks Trump is the one who is mentally defective.
Sooooo....
If i throat punch this guy, can we abort him?
No picture of this creep, huh? Good grief..do they all need attention this bad?
She wouldn't say anything. She wouldn't have to. Because he'd have been murdered at age two because he couldn't communicate yet.
Based on the drivel pouring out of his "college-educated" (nowadays, college-educated is considered an oxymoron) mouth, killing him off at age two would probably have the been the best possible course of action for this utterly stupid human idiot.
No tears from me at Armageddon.
I was thinking the same. A mother gets to know a newborns cries.
Therefore, the one who can’t HEAR the meaning of the infant’s cries (or whimpers) is deaf and therefore should be treated as she wants to treat the innocent.
You can tell i’m quite angry. Thank the LORD I have faith in His righteous justice. It is in His hands.
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.