Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 157

Thread: "Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say"

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    11,799

    "Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say"

    "The article, 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.”'
    Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say - Telegraph

    The "pro-choice" position taken to its natural conclusions. The fact this is even being discussed is frightening stuff.
    “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” - Reagan

    "A young man who wishes to remain a sound atheist cannot be too careful of his reading."
    - C. S. Lewis

    "I suffer more harassment as a former homosexual than I ever did as an out and proud homosexual." - Greg Quinlan, PFOX

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by jyoshu View Post
    Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say - Telegraph

    The "pro-choice" position taken to its natural conclusions. The fact this is even being discussed is frightening stuff.
    “We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.”

    sinjin - This definition of person is not one I've heard before nor one with which I agree.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    7,822
    Isn't the UK Telegraph something of a sensationalist rag?
    Brother, you can believe in stones as long as you do not hurl them at me. Wafa Sultan

    “War is an American way to teach geography,” British soldier

    War is sweet to those who have not tasted it, but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach. – Pindar

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,870
    Quote Originally Posted by simone View Post
    Isn't the UK Telegraph something of a sensationalist rag?
    The telegraph is reporting it.
    These people are not made up.
    No doubt you agree with them Simone

    Catch the leftie twist on the guardians article...
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...at-free-speech
    Richard Dawkins quote..
    .'I dont think its a very important question whether Jesus existed. Some historians.. MOST historians think he did.
    I dont really care, precisely because its petty. Maybe I've alluded to the possibilty that some historians think Jesus never existed. I take that back Jesus existed........

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    23
    yeah, except the babies are not parasites living off a woman's body and fetuses are.

    big difference.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,870
    Quote Originally Posted by zombiemeathead View Post
    yeah, except the babies are not parasites living off a woman's body and fetuses are.

    big difference.
    So a baby that feeds off the teat of a mother is not a ' parasite' whereas a fetus that feeds off the placenta is a parasite?
    Richard Dawkins quote..
    .'I dont think its a very important question whether Jesus existed. Some historians.. MOST historians think he did.
    I dont really care, precisely because its petty. Maybe I've alluded to the possibilty that some historians think Jesus never existed. I take that back Jesus existed........

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    6
    Well that is no surprise; the statement is true when you take someone’s life without a doubt that is killing. Think about it, life actually started during fertilization stage which means unborn child is human being now; have rights. Thus, abortion is not different from killing no matter in what state they are now.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by janeswan View Post
    Well that is no surprise; the statement is true when you take someone’s life without a doubt that is killing. Think about it, life actually started during fertilization stage which means unborn child is human being now; have rights. Thus, abortion is not different from killing no matter in what state they are now.
    I disagree. A fertilized human ovum has a long way to go before it becomes a sentient "being".
    Abortion is indeed killing, but not the killing of a human being; a.k.a. person.

    There is no chicken in an omelet.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    I disagree. A fertilized human ovum has a long way to go before it becomes a sentient "being".
    Abortion is indeed killing, but not the killing of a human being; a.k.a. person.

    There is no chicken in an omelet.
    Eggs used for cooking aren't fertilized.

    Jyoshu is correct, this is the natural evolution because at no point did any pro-deathers ever stop and consider by what principle they were deciding who has a right to life and who does not except whether they wanted them alive or not. None of the superficial excuses were rational, and indeed without a comprehensive moral theory there was no hope of it. If there is anything the left fears it is the concept of a comprehensive moral theory.

    If sensation was sufficient then animals would have a right to life. If lack of conscious thought made it OK to kill then killing a sleeping person would be alright. If it is permissible to kill the child because it is dependent on you than you would be able to kill them up until they got a job.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    Eggs used for cooking aren't fertilized.
    Fertilized eggs are eaten all the time.

    Jyoshu is correct, this is the natural evolution because at no point did any pro-deathers ever stop and consider by what principle they were deciding who has a right to life and who does not except whether they wanted them alive or not. None of the superficial excuses were rational, and indeed without a comprehensive moral theory there was no hope of it. If there is anything the left fears it is the concept of a comprehensive moral theory.
    Moral theory untehtered to a religious dogma is fine with me.

    If sensation was sufficient then animals would have a right to life. If lack of conscious thought made it OK to kill then killing a sleeping person would be alright.
    There's a world of difference between someone sleeping or in a coma and someone brain dead.

    If it is permissible to kill the child because it is dependent on you than you would be able to kill them up until they got a job.
    What child?
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    Fertilized eggs are eaten all the time.
    So are chickens.

    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    Moral theory untehtered to a religious dogma is fine with me.
    Then you would be a rare but rational individual. Subjectivism infects so very many.

    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    There's a world of difference between someone sleeping or in a coma and someone brain dead.
    Is that where you would draw the line? Brain dead? because as soon as there is a brain there is activity.

    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    What child?
    Any child, including the ones killed before birth.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Like many, I draw the line when the fetus has reached the stage where the physical structures
    necessary for consciousness have developed. That's not until the third trimester.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    Like many, I draw the line when the fetus has reached the stage where the physical structures
    necessary for consciousness have developed. That's not until the third trimester.
    You said brain dead, now you say consciousness. What are the physical structures necessary for consciousness? since you must know what they are to know if they are present or not.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    What are the physical structures necessary for consciousness? since you must know what they are to know if they are present or not.
    The thalamo-cortical complex.

    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    You said brain dead, now you say consciousness.
    That was in response to your suggestion that we might kill sleeping people since they are unconscious. Fetuses that have not developed sufficiently are not unconscious in the same way as a sleeping person. They are "pre-conscious" and are more akin to the brain dead in that they have no higher brain function since they have no higher brain.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    277
    Either these people are making extreme statements for the purpose of drawing attention to the subject to get people discussing the matter, or there are some seriously sick individuals out there that need to be visited by the authorities for advocating murder.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •