Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

[jv_coach]

Posted Today, 12:20 PM

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

By 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, Medical Correspondent

1:38PM GMT 29 Feb 2012

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

They argued: “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.”

Rather than being “actual persons”, newborns were “potential persons”. They explained: “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’

 

[BS Wildcats]

17 minutes ago, jv_coach said:

Posted Today, 12:20 PM

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

By 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, Medical Correspondent

1:38PM GMT 29 Feb 2012

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

They argued: “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.”

Rather than being “actual persons”, newborns were “potential persons”. They explained: “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’

 

There are some sick and twisted people in this world.  Somebody should have killed the authors after they were born.

[jv_coach]

Maybe after they  wrote this article...

[BS Wildcats]

2 minutes ago, jv_coach said:

Maybe after they  wrote this article...

That would be fine as well.  They don't have any business walking the face of the Earth.

[Hagar]

29 minutes ago, jv_coach said:

Posted Today, 12:20 PM

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

By 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, Medical Correspondent

1:38PM GMT 29 Feb 2012

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

They argued: “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.”

Rather than being “actual persons”, newborns were “potential persons”. They explained: “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’

 

The crowning insult to this - It's okay to kill a human baby, but you'll go to jail for killing a litter of newborn dogs.  Can anyone explain the logic of this?

[jv_coach]

10 minutes ago, REBgp said:

The crowning insult to this - It's okay to kill a human baby, but you'll go to jail for killing a litter of newborn dogs.  Can anyone explain the logic of this?

What is Moral Relativism 

[westend1]

1 hour ago, REBgp said:

The crowning insult to this - It's okay to kill a human baby, but you'll go to jail for killing a litter of newborn dogs.  Can anyone explain the logic of this?

Who said this?

[baddog]

The same ones who would follow this crap are the same ones who are against the death penalty. Pieces of crap, all of them.

[Hagar]

10 hours ago, westend1 said:

Who said this?

You don't know that?  Sorry my friend, but you need to keep up with the news.

[texanabroad]

This makes me sick to my stomach.