Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva have advanced an incredible argument. They say that abortion is widely accepted, there is no moral difference between a foetus and a newborn baby, therefore what they want to call "after-birth abortion" (killing a newborn) should be permissible.
The world has sunk to new depths. Killing newborn babies should be "permissible"? Who are these people, and what is wrong with them?
Sources: Telegraph (accessed 00.06 GMT 02/03/12), JME (accessed 00.07 GMT 02/03/12)
Tags: abortion To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 Comments - Share Yours!:
In the case of these two let us make the age of being an thinking human at 50. Since they are under the age, we can kill them without a thought.
They disgust me.
BTW this might help: There are three comment formats in Blogger, pop-up, full-page and embedded beneath the post. The pop-up and full-page formats were updated a couple of days ago and lost the 'subscribe by email' function. The full-page format also lost the 'collapse comments' function. I was on the full-page comment format but immediately changed over to the embedded format which has the 'subscribe by email' option and also allows threaded comments which I really like now.
Isn't it clear enough though that one can use their own premises and reach an entirely different conclusion?
If there is no difference between a newborn baby and a foetus in a woman's womb ...
then since murdering a newborn baby is morally evil, so is abortion.
(And therefore, so are the authors of that JME article ..)
That follows, doesn't it?
I agree with Nick 100% on this.
Some casual wear ..
Post a Comment