In the Journal of Medical Ethics, two ethicists argue plainly for the killing of babies post birth. They’re not hedging their bets. They’re saying it plain and simple. And I, for one, thank them for it.
Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, associated respectively with Monash University, in Melbourne, Australia, and with the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, in the UK, wrote a piece called “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”
February 27, 2012 at 5:02 pm
The quotes around "ethicist" aren't really fair. Just because they're apocalyptically bad at the job doesn't mean that's not the job they're doing.
February 27, 2012 at 5:14 pm
@Sophia's Favorite: Infanticide, promoting the crime of infanticide, enabling infanticide and complicity in infanticide is the crime of homicide. Ethics it is not. So, if someone recommended that I be put to death, they are doing an "apocalyptically bad" job of preventing homicide.
February 27, 2012 at 7:46 pm
Full text available at:
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.full
Shudder. Please tell me this is a "modest-proposal"-type satire.
February 28, 2012 at 1:17 am
@ Mary De Voe: if you argue that something monstrously immoral is moral, you may be a very, very bad ethicist, but "ethics" is still the subject you're discussing. The Flat Earth Society centers around a particular theory in astrophysics—it's just one that's been debunked since the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt (whose third king appointed Eratosthenes as his librarian; Eratosthenes is credited with demonstrating that the Earth is round, c. in the 3rd century BC).
And jeepers, it was a joke.
February 28, 2012 at 10:52 pm
Remember being told the "slippery slope argument" won't wash? If you like science fiction, read The Pre-Persons by Philip K Dick. AT http://www.e-reading.org.ua/bookreader.php/71701/Dick_-_Complete_Stories_5_-_The_Eye_of_Sibyl_and_Other_Stories_%28v3.0%29.html#label47 wait until the table of contents appears as a drop-down menu at the top, and then go to The Pre-Persons. He saw it coming 40 years ago.
February 29, 2012 at 1:41 am
@Sophia's Favorite: "ethics" must be put in quotes because the "ethicists" will not admit that the human being, being put to death, does not have to be a proven person. It has always been assumed that every human being is a person. What else could they be? Simple deductive reasoning will conclude that if the human being is human that human being is a person. Enter Roe v. Wade. The human being being put to death only has to be a human being and/but is also a person. Now, flat earth ethics does not include that human being. Although the earth must be respected it is not a person. And yes, it does mean that "ethics" is not the job they are doing. Promoting and enabling homicide makes these "an accessory before the fact", a prosecutable crime. In any given day, I thoroughly enjoy your posts, but on this one you messed with human life and I could not let it pass.
@ Joe in Canada. God does not make any Pre-Persons. Pre-persons what nonsense. And Dred Scott, the slave, was a half person. If hell is being stupid forever, then count the abortion proponents already in hell. Go to Greek mythology and see the head of Medusa, with her snakes for hair. Nancy Pelosi, with her snakes for hair, can turn men's hearts to stone.