um whats wrong with that kind of thinking? If you want to pitch being genetically human as all there is to being a person go for it.
Yes killing them outside is illegal. however Obama voted in favor of a state bill in IL that would allow doctors to let babies die who survived abortions after they came out of the womb. That is a fact. And killing them inside the womb is illegal if its past a certain week range.
The point is, the doctor who wrote the article and some here like Stg42 want to change the law so babies that have been born and are inconvenient or the wrong sex can legally be killed since they aren't a "person". Stg42: You are aware that intelligence is inate and a newborn might easily be more intelligent than you. I do appreciate your taking the liberal position that killing the innocent for convenience is appropriate. I keep meeting people who don't believe anyone is evil enough to believe killing small babies is okay.
perhaps but this goes beyond that. It brings into question morals and ethics and defending the sanctity of life. do not forget that perhaps your mommy thought it morally wrong to kill you and thus she gave birth to you
A 4" long birth canal... and the completely arbitrary determinations of fallible men and women... have defined which innocent life is worthy of living and which can be exterminated.... Such power we've relinquished to government bureaucrats....in the name of "choice" (convenience) and women's "rights". Terrifying, if you think about it.
Can anyone actually encapsulate the argument of the article? I mean objectively, not in emotive terms.
For whatever reason the link to the original article doesn't seem to be working for me. Regardless, I believe the argument is that, according to the authors, the conditions necessary to grant an individual "personhood" aren't met until some finite point after a baby is born. Therefore it's not immoral to kill a newborn because they're not really a person yet. For this argument to hold water you have to agree with the authors' definition of personhood and agree with them that personhood is the condition that determines whether or not ending the life of a developing human is ok or not. Personally, I happen to agree on the second point but believe that "personhood" occurs long before they seem to believe.
As a pro lifer I view all babies whether sick or otherwise to be sacred. This is why I have condemned fascist Margaret Sanger and her Republican financiers so many times on this forum. Further, it is why I have condemned the pagan practice of killing females babies which has been done MILLIONS of times in India: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2728976&page=1#.T1jVBnk7hNU In reading the article by Minerva, Savulescu, and others, a pattern or method appears to be evident that is being overlooked. The following article suggests that a Jonathan Swift style satire was being made by the article by those medical ethicists: http://www.popehat.com/2012/02/29/s...xecuted-by-the-state-or-by-individual-actors/ Don't know if you are familiar with what they are driving at ~ Swift wrote an essay called "A Modest Proposal" in which he suggested that the best way to end poverty in Ireland was to serve children as pudding and other ''pleasantries''. Clearly he was joking as he was of Irish descent. It is suggested on the site that a Swiftian satire was being made by the ethicists. If this is so, I say that it is not funny and beyond the scope of medical professionals. Had the ethicists been comedy writers and used the appropriate format such as comedy TV or magazine, then I would accept this writing as comedy or satire. However, this was not the format - instead, it appears that a medical publication was used. No proper indication was made to suggest that it was Swiftian satire or anything else. On that basis, the criticism they were subjected to should come as no surprise. Infanticide and abortion are two different topics. Under the Anglo-Saxon common law, abortion was legal. Infanticide never was. Abortion has always been accepted on medically ethical grounds. Infanticide never has been. In pagan societies such as in India, abortion was not acceptable. But infanticide was and, sadly enough, remains a practice. To me, both practices are evil. The way to address these issues, however, is not through satire. This especially so in view of all the division and heightened tensions we see in the world today. The better way is to say that society needs to take a very careful and thoughtful approach to its problems. To weigh all risks and interests. And to settle conflicting issues with intelligent discourse.
