abortion

Journal of Medical Ethics suggests parents should have right to murder their newborn babies, claiming it is same as abortion

Thursday, April 12, 2012 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer
Tags: Medical ethics, newborn babies, abortion

eTrust Pro Certified

Most Viewed Articles
Popular on Facebook
CDC issues flu vaccine apology: this year's vaccine doesn't work!
Biologist explains how marijuana causes tumor cells to commit suicide
Depopulation test run? 75% of children who received vaccines in Mexican town now dead or hospitalized
BAM! Chipotle goes 100% non-GMO; flatly rejecting the biotech industry and its toxic food ingredients
Companies begin planting microchips under employees' skin
U2's Bono partners with Monsanto to destroy African agriculture with GMOs
NJ cops bust teenagers shoveling snow without a permit
Russia throws down the gauntlet: energy supply to Europe cut off; petrodollar abandoned as currency war escalates
McDonald's in global profit free fall as people everywhere increasingly reject chemically-altered toxic fast food
Chemotherapy kills cancer patients faster than no treatment at all
Why flu shots are the greatest medical fraud in history
600 strains of an aerosolized thought control vaccine already tested on humans; deployed via air, food and water
Italian court rules mercury and aluminum in vaccines cause autism: US media continues total blackout of medical truth
Flu vaccine kills 13 in Italy; death toll rises
The 21 curious questions we're never allowed to ask about vaccines
Vicious attack on Dr. Oz actually waged by biotech mafia; plot to destroy Oz launched after episode on glyphosate toxicity went viral
Orthorexia Nervosa - New mental disorder aimed at people who insist on eating a clean diet
Whooping cough outbreak at Massachusetts high school affected only vaccinated students

Delicious
(NaturalNews) Since abortion on-demand is legal throughout most of the First World, the next logical step in the minds of some of the world's pseudo-intellectual elite is to legalize the murder of babies after they are born as well. A new article published in the Journal of Medical Ethics (JME) suggests that parents should be able to choose whether or not they want to murder their children after birth because these tiny individuals apparently do not yet possess a "moral right to life," and are thus not actually "persons."

Alberto Giubilini, from The University of Milan, and Francesca Minerva, a post-doctoral fellow at The University of Melbourne's Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics make their case in a paper entitled After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? that if abortion is legal, then infanticide should be legal. And this argument is based on their philosophical assessment that the two forms of murder are virtually the same thing from an ethical perspective.

"Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health," write the authors in their abstract. "[T]he authors argue that what we call 'after-birth abortion' (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled."

As reprehensible as this notion is, the authors have a point in likening abortion to infanticide -- they are technically the same thing. After all, what makes a baby inside the womb any less of a person than a baby outside the womb? According to current standards, the baby is still a "fetus" during the few moments before delivery, but once outside the birth canal magically transforms into a person, a dubious double-standard that the authors appear to be targeting.

On the other hand, it seems clear by their own arguments that both Giubilini and Minerva, as well as JME editor Julian Savulescu from Oxford University's Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, actually support the idea of murdering newborn babies, and are not simply pointing out the logical fallacy of allowing abortion but restricting infanticide.

"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," wrote the two authors in an utterly disgusting and dehumanizing defense of their position. "Rather than being 'actual persons, newborns were 'potential persons."

Sources for this article include:

http://jme.bmj.com

http://www.telegraph.co.uk

http://www.christianpost.com

Join over four million monthly readers. Your privacy is protected. Unsubscribe at any time.
comments powered by Disqus
Take Action: Support NaturalNews.com by linking back to this article from your website

Permalink to this article:

Embed article link: (copy HTML code below):

Reprinting this article:
Non-commercial use OK, cite NaturalNews.com with clickable link.

Follow Natural News on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus, and Pinterest

Colloidal Silver

Advertise with NaturalNews...

Support NaturalNews Sponsors:

Advertise with NaturalNews...

GET SHOW DETAILS
+ a FREE GIFT

Sign up for the FREE Natural News Email Newsletter

Receive breaking news on GMOs, vaccines, fluoride, radiation protection, natural cures, food safety alerts and interviews with the world's top experts on natural health and more.

Join over 7 million monthly readers of NaturalNews.com, the internet's No. 1 natural health news site. (Source: Alexa.com)

Your email address *

Please enter the code you see above*

No Thanks

Already have it and love it!

Natural News supports and helps fund these organizations:

* Required. Once you click submit, we will send you an email asking you to confirm your free registration. Your privacy is assured and your information is kept confidential. You may unsubscribe at anytime.