-
Eugenic Abortion 2.0
May 23, 2013 | 67 comments
-
Yoani Sánchez Uncaged
April 12, 2013 | 163 comments
-
Take the Helmets Off
February 4, 2013 | 68 comments
-
Let’s Pay Women Not to Abort
January 23, 2013 | 69 comments
-
The Millennial Divide
January 22, 2013 | 30 comments
A Further Perspective
The Fourth Trimester Abortion
The anti-life crowd gives new life to arguments for infanticide.
While political liberals are busy advancing the fiction of a conservative “war on contraception,” their counterparts in academia are promoting a lie at the opposite end of the reproductive continuum. The anti-life crowd is giving new life to arguments for infanticide.
In a much-discussed recent article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva take the “pro-choice” argument to its logical and loathsome end. They argue that “when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.”
They propose to call the practice “after-birth abortion” rather than “infanticide” to stress their belief that the moral status of a newborn baby is no different from that of an unborn baby.
While other anti-life extremists limit their support for infanticide to those deemed genetically “unfit,” Giubilini and Minerva argue that the practice might be acceptable even in “cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.”
Risks to the well-being of the family include the “unbearable burden that a child can create for the psychological health of the woman or for her already existing children, regardless of the condition of the fetus.”
While the authors allow that both the unborn child and the newborn are “human beings,” they insist that neither has a right to life because they are “potential persons” not “persons.” “Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life,” they assert.
Predictably, the article has generated a lot of criticism. A Conservative congressman denounced it on the House floor, and both the authors and the journal have received demands for apologies and death threats.
Pro-life advocates shouldn’t be upset. Many abortion-rights supporters claim that something magical happens at the moment a baby passes through the birth canal. But the authors start from a premise that pro-lifers have long maintained: that there is no difference between the moral status of an unborn child and that of a newborn child.
The article leaves many questions unanswered. For one, if infanticide were legalized, would the law stipulate how infants could be killed? If infants are no different than unborn babies, can they also be aborted “after birth” in the same gruesome way, torn limb from limb without anesthesia? If not, why not?
Also, if newborns may be killed, why not two-year-olds, who also can have a substantial effect on the “well-being of a family.” What about teenagers? What if grandpa becomes an unbearable burden? Can a family euthanize him and call it a 240th trimester abortion?
According to the authors, a rights-bearing person is “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.” The authors claim that babies develop this self-awareness sometime “in the first days or few weeks after birth.”
But research and experience demonstrate that human beings have desires, needs and personalities that emerge well before they are born. Many mothers can attest to the reaction of their child in the womb to music, voices and other stimuli.
Yet, according to the authors, “the fetus and the newborn are potential persons” whose interest “amounts to zero.”
Arguments for infanticide are not new. In fact, the logic behind them has been embraced at the highest levels of government. As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama twice opposed legislation to define as “persons” babies who survive late-term abortions.
Obama said in a speech on the Illinois Senate floor that he could not accept that babies wholly emerged from their mother’s wombs are “persons,” and thus deserving of equal protection under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
About the Author
Daniel Allott is a writer in Washington, D.C.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (150) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Daniel Allott
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/21/the-fourth-trimester-abortion
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Self-Righteous Republic
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- The Great Train Robbery
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi.| 3.21.12 @ 6:29AM
I can't disagree with a word written here. This kind of untilitarianism is making Hitler look like a humanitarian. In Holland they liquidate the elderly, the babies who are defective, and even children and adults who may develop mental problems. All over the so called West we see these kinds of people pushing various forms of voluntary or even involintary euthanasia. The old in the nursing homes are next and most of the readers here know it.
Timothy L. Pennell| 3.21.12 @ 8:19AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, I implore you. It's time to make a stand.
The "Compassionate Left" is the most Brutal Killing Machine since the Days of Genghis Khan, and Attila the Hun. Marxism, Communism, Maoism, and Fabian Socialism. Between them they are responsible for more MURDERED people, than there were DEATHS, in WWII.
They use Forced Starvation. They use Forced Dislocation. They use their GULAGS and their DEATH CAMPS. They put a Bullet in your head, and charge your Family for the Cost of the Bullet.
Marx was in favour of the ELLIMINATION of 300 Million innocent souls, as a means to ease the transition from Freedom, to a life of SERVITUDE to the "More Equal Pigs" in an All Powerful Central Government.
The Irish Poet, and Fabian Socialist - Robert Frost - proposed making a Poisonous Gas, that we might be rid of the LESS WORTHY among us.
Adolph Hitler took up that Gauntlet, and used it in his Quest for Racial Purity, in the name of Aryan Superiority. What are 6 Million Jews, and Millions more in dead Gypsies, Christians, and Homosexuals, compared to what they were trying to create?
The Soviets confiscated the Crops from Ukraine, leaving them to STARVE in the Frozen Soviet Winter, while they used the food to feed their BETTERS, in Moscow. They filled their Frozen Gulags with people who's only "CRIME" was, speaking out for Freedom, and Justice, and Liberty. Millions died in the LEFT'S Forced Labour Camps.
Mao was the greatest MASS MURDERER of his own people, of the 20th Century, and he may very well even be, the greatest in the History of the Planet.
The Killing Fields of Cambodia began with Parades in the Streets, celebrating the LEFT'S Victory, and their rise to power. A New Age awaited. One of MORE for everyone. Everyone would have the same. Nobody would be treated better than anyone else. And that is exactly what happened. Everybody got the same bullet in their head. Everybody was the same. Everybody was Dead.
You need more. PURP?
Purp's buddy in Rhodesia - MUGABE - is a proud Marxist, with a love for his people, and a professed desire that all of his people share in the Utopia, that is Marxism. The Whites were Murdered, or Forced to leave. The Farmers, the Doctors, the Engineers. All were Forced out in the pursuit of a Racial Purity and a Free Marxist Totalitarian Wasteland.
As Rhodesia, they were the "Breadbasket of the Continent". (Like Ukraine) As Zimbabwe, they can barely feed themselves, and many die of Starvation (Like Ukraine) unless they've already died of Malaria, AIDS, a bullet to the head, or a Machete. Compliments of the LEFTIST Government.
Castro and Che? HEROS of the Progressive "Compassionate" Left. Lenin, Stalin, Min, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Chavez? ICONS of the "Tolerant" Left.
If Hitler had killed 6 Million Albanians, instead of Jews, he too, would adorn their tee shirts.
They are the Creators of Eugenics. They are the proliferators of Death Camps, and Killing Fields. ABORTION is the Creation of the Left. Margret Sanger is a Heroine of the Left, for her Crusade to get Abortion Legal. She saw it as an acceptable replacement for the Gas Chambers that their HERO - Robert Frost - had spoken of, and that Joseph Kennedy Sr.'s buddy - Hitler actually used, in her fight to reduce the number of Blacks and other Inferior Races, from America.
Enter Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro/Abu Hussain. He has spent his entire Political Career, fighting for the MURDERS of Babies. He started his Political Career in the living room of two Weather Underground TERRORISTS, who had once proposed, going to all of the Hospitals, and KILLING all of the White Babies. These are his FRIENDS.
He is the latest, in a long line of Leftists who would be GOD. It's not enough to be King. It's never enough, to be an Emperor or a President. The ultimate Power of Life and Death, is the only thing that will satisfy the Blood Lust, that is The Left.
Everybody thinks "It can't happen here".
I wonder if that's what the Russians thought? I wonder if that's what the Chinese thought? I know that the Cambodians thought that they were FREE, at last. As did the Cubans and the Rhodesians.
After all: They were all promised HOPE and CHANGE, a better life, and a Worker's Paradise.
Sound Familiar?
cuban pete| 3.21.12 @ 8:49AM
TLP,
During the 2008 campaign BHO said that when life began was "above his pay grade". When BHO was in the legislature he voted present about 190 times. However,he voted to allow abortionists to kill a baby if some how that intrepid little soul survived a botched abortion.
If when life begins is "above his pay grade" why didn't BHO vote present on the born alive legislation as he did on so many other bills?
As always thanks for your posts.
CP
Teaghan| 3.21.12 @ 8:56AM
It's now about depopulation to ease the burden on the "viable" and Mother Earth. I hope the next president will jump on these murders when he enters the White House.
Teaghan| 3.21.12 @ 8:56AM
It's now about depopulation to ease the burden on the "viable" and Mother Earth. I hope the next president will jump on these murders when he enters the White House.
max_kain| 3.21.12 @ 9:32AM
I was just discussing this with my wife last night. There was an old movie about a real incident where a student asked a teacher how Adolf Hitler could have gotten so powerful. I don't remember everything but the teacher started a special club where members had benefits and a few other perks and they became rabidly supportive of the teacher, even taking to terrorizing some of the other students. The tactics he used were the same as Hitler's and when he revealed it, most of the class was devastated. I think that some conservative director needs to dust this off and compare to modern liberalism. Hell of a wake-up call.
Gene| 3.21.12 @ 10:41AM
On the Fabian Weinies?
I think you meant that %^&*# George Bernard Shaw and not Robert Frost.
Stopping By Woods on a Snowy Evening
Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.
My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.
He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake.
The only other sound's the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.
The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 12:44PM
53 plus MILLION CHILDREN MURDERED, by the Left since Roe vs. Wade!
53,000,000.
53 MILLION!!!!
Science calls the single celled organism the simplest form of life. Funny how we start out that way, yet are confused about where we are alive at that stage. If we aren't, how do we become 2 cells, then 3, 4, etc.?
53 Million Children! Good job Liberals!
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 12:44PM
if we are alive*
Joellen| 3.21.12 @ 1:52PM
Tim, EXCELLENT - only one thing I would add: why do you think they are pushing contraceptions - of course to control the population and control who gets to populate, thus absolute CONTROL. Can all who acknowledge what the left perpetuates spell EVIL?
Roy| 3.21.12 @ 2:19PM
One correction - as screwed up as Margaret Sanger was in many ways, she actually was against abortion, viewing it as a "disgrace to civilization".
Occam's Tool| 3.21.12 @ 11:05PM
On the other hand, I do support 75th- 150th trimester abortions and beyond for most of the Liberal Arts faculties and students at the Ivy League schools, especially the Law Schools (plus Georgetown), as it is fairly apparent that they have failed to develop a viable personality as defined by the authors in the article cited above.
BlitheBunny| 4.18.12 @ 5:35PM
Actually Margaret Sanger believed a fetus was a human being from conception, she thought of abortion as murder. She started planned parenthood to educate women on contraception. She felt that the prevention of pregnancy was more acceptable than abortion. Planned parenthood didn't add abortion to their list of services until much much later.
Alan Brooks| 3.21.12 @ 12:28PM
Well, lets face it the earth is over-populated. Better them than you right?
Joellen| 3.21.12 @ 2:01PM
Alan, better "who" than you? The slaughtered unborn babies in the womb. Me thinks, you really can be dense. Pro lifers defend life from conception till natural death. It's the pro death/abortion loyalist who "CHOOSE" who shall live and who shall die.
Alan Brooks| 3.22.12 @ 12:00AM
"Well, lets face it the earth is over-populated. Better them than you right?"
It was another case of ID theft, I was eating lunch when that was written, and can prove it if the AS computer guy would show you the record.
Alan Brooks| 3.22.12 @ 12:03AM
But I wish I had written it, it is not entirely inaccurate; too flip, but adequate.
My hunch is Pennell wrote it.
MikeBee| 3.21.12 @ 3:16PM
Alan,
Forget about the particulars of doing so for a minute, but the population of the entire world could fit in the state of Texas, each man, woman, or child standing on one acre of land. The world is very far from being overpopulated. If anything, we are underpopulated right now.
If every family in the U.S. would have an average of three children, in the present generation of folks who can have children, we would be well on our way to solving the problem of underfunded Social Security and Medicare, and also solving high health insurance rates. The U.S. could EASILY fit a lot more people in its borders, comfortably, and feed them all.
TR| 3.21.12 @ 11:29PM
Mike, I'm having trouble understanding you. There are 7 billion people on the planet. Texas is about 280,000 square miles. At 640 acres per square mile, that is less than 180 million acres. Far short of the 7 billion acres required for your example. Please do your math before you post.
MikeBee| 3.22.12 @ 10:29AM
TR,
Thanks for posting. I'm aware that the people who post here are VERY smart folks. I posted the above, really, to check it out. I once read the above on the internet, and have since wondered about its accuracy.
So, using your math, then, we reach the same conclusion: the world is VERY far from being overpopulated. 7 billion people, divided by 640 acres per square mile, equals about 11 million square miles of land needed, for each of these people to stand on an acre of land.
The U.S. is 3.5 million square miles of land, Canada is 3.5 million square miles of land, and South America is 6.9 million square miles of land. (We're not yet including Central America in this.)
So, while what I read on the internet has been proved false (thanks TR!), it is safe to claim, instead, that the population of the entire world can easily stand, each person on one acre of land, in the Americas, and there would be land to spare. Then, the entire continents of Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia, and (what else am I missing?) would be completely devoid of people. It is easy to see that the liberals' claim that the world is overpopulated (or close to it) is completely FALSE.
TR, thanks for the correction, and for helping this old man out with his example.
Alan Brooks| 3.21.12 @ 9:12PM
Abortion is a minor issue.
Inquirens| 3.21.12 @ 9:52PM
Alan,
An abortion begins with two human beings and involves the killing of one of the human being by the other. (And, yes, insofar as an embryo or fetus is both an animate being and one that belongs to the species _Homo sapiens_, it definitely counts as a human being.) Insofar as a human life is taken, it hardly seems that "abortion is a minor issue". Would it be too much to ask you to give reasons how you have come to this conclusion? Or is your goal nothing more than to _épater les bourgeois_?
Alan Brooks| 3.22.12 @ 12:05AM
Nuclear proliferation is a major issue; abortion is a side issue.
Alan Brooks| 3.22.12 @ 12:06AM
...btw, I did not write the below- but wish I had.
"Well, lets face it the earth is over-populated. Better them than you right?"
Inquirens| 3.22.12 @ 10:52AM
"Well, lets face it the earth is over-populated. Better them than you right?"
This is a rather tired old canard, Alan, for the so-called "population bomb" predicted in the 1970s has never gone off: to be sure, the population of the earth is increasing, but we are far from exhausting the livable space on the earth.
"Better them than you, right?"
Your logic is "either them or us". Why the zero/sum, Alan? Why settle for an OR when an AND is possible?
I also note that in your use of pronouns you seek to distance "them" (the aborted) from "us" (clearly, the unaborted. But, insofar as the aborted are human beings and we, the unaborted, are also human beings, it seems that a pronoun of solidarity ("we") should be used for both groups rather than one of exclusion ("they").
You should wish to have written wiser things than what you claim you wish you had written.
Inquirens| 3.22.12 @ 10:42AM
Alan,
Am I correct in assuming that, in your opinion, a "major issue" is one that affects a large number of people? That, at least, seems to be the thought lurking behind your opaque statement that "Nuclear proliferation is a major issue; abortion is a side issue". If that is indeed the case, I fail to see how abortion is "side issue". It is true that a single act of abortion, in the normal course of things, leads to the death of a single individual. However, if one considers abortion _in the aggregate_ as a social phenomenon then it is clear that it has had far greater impact upon the US population than nuclear proliferation. 53,000,000 human beings--1/6 of the current US population-- have died over the past 40 years as a result of abortion; have _any_ died as a direct result of nuclear proliferation?
Would you consider capital punishment a serious issue? If so, then more people have died as a result of capital punishment in the past 40 years than as a result of nuclear proliferation. (Of course, the state typically had good reason for the executions--the persons put to death were not innocent persons--whereas all persons killed _in utero_ are innocent.)
If one accepts the premise that "death-dealing is a serious issue" (as any reasonable person does), your claim that "abortion is a side issue" is a vacuous one: if you wish to make flat assertions such as the ones you present in your posts, you need to provide a sounder rationale than you are willing to do.
MikeBee| 3.22.12 @ 11:18AM
Alan,
Abortion is an "a priori" issue. If life is not protected, a priori, then it makes entirely no sense to attempt to protect any other rights of man. Who cares about nuclear war, if life is meaningless?
idalily| 3.22.12 @ 3:20PM
Alan, it's not a minor issue to the baby.
Appleby| 3.21.12 @ 6:49AM
There are "abortion tourists" arriving every day in Canada from countries where ultrasounds for sex selection leading to murder are illegal. They come here to murder their children for the crime of being female, have a couple of days of shopping, and tootle on home hoping to have more productive sex next time.
Canada has absolutely no restriction on abortion; indeed, they have awarded the Order of Canada to the butcher who pioneered this We're-Not-Americans thinking. I suppose Canada will be a proud pioneer in the murder of babies after they are born, too. This is a shame and a crime and a disgrace, but hey, nothing should stand in the way of free and unlimited sex without consequences, not even murder.
There are times I wonder what on earth has possessed the Modern World. But of course I know it is not a What...it is Satan. Denying that Satan exists, of course, lands all the burden of those murders on the killer Moms. And if they think there is no punishment for this, they are delusional.
KyMouse| 3.21.12 @ 7:38AM
Well said, Appleby.
It's interesting to ask pro-abortion people whether they approve of killing unborn babies because they are the "wrong" sex.
But hey, why NOT kill them because they're female, if the mother has the absolute right to make the "choice"?
It's a great question for radical feminist co-workers or acquaintances.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 8:56AM
While we're asking pro-abortion people such questions, we should add another one: why are anti-abortion people so often opposed to the death penalty for people who are actually guilty of something? Surely it's not because of the issue of guilt or innocence, or they would be against abortion, too.
darcy| 3.21.12 @ 10:06AM
Is that really the case? that anti-abortion people are also opposed to capital punishment? I always thought it was the case that people who had no qualms about taking the innocent life of the unborn were full-bore opposers of capital punishment for those sentenced to death for heinous crimes.
At any rate, I'm both pro-life for the unborn and pro-capital punishment.
And Appleby: Just as you say, Satan is alive and active -- Ephesians 6:10-20.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 10:57AM
darcy,
Pro-Abortion activists are generally the most vehement opponents of capital punishment. I have read their screeds for over 30 years. They also see it as "hypocritical" to be pro-death penalty and anti-abortion and rudely criticize anyone who holds such beliefs. Their reasoning is simple (and simplistic, even juvenile). A convicted murderer is a human being worthy or respect as a human being and not to be "murdered" by the State. "Don't murder in my name!" they exclaim. But an unborn baby is not and cannot be a human being and is therefore deserving of no respect as a human being and can be discarded as a waste product.
Let's say for example that a man is accused of murdering a pregnant woman. The prosecutor wants to charge him with TWO homicides, the mother and the child. Such people as described above will (and HAVE!) vehemently protested against the second murder charge on the basis that an unborn baby is not a human being and cannot therefore be murdered. And they will oppose a death sentence under absolutely any circumstances. Note that such protesters have no personal stake in the case at hand. Their interest is solely to promote the concept that an unborn baby is not a human being and cannot be legally considered as such.
It is also generally true that Pro-Life supporters also support capital punishment, because they understand the legal and moral difference between the innocent and the guilty.
markenoff| 3.21.12 @ 3:16PM
The 14th Amendment implicitly allows for the deprivation of life, liberty or property so long as due process is applied. It also explicitly prohibits the deprivation of life liberty or property without the due process of law. That is why the state can execute convicted criminals and why those who support killing unborn human babies are desperate to deny them personhood.
Todd S| 3.21.12 @ 12:38PM
It is always the liberals caterwauling about capital punishment and how uncivilized it is but these same people have no issues with killing babies in the 3rd trimester if needs be because it is "choice". And they also turn a blind eye to killer abortion doctors like that scumbag in Philadelphia, didn't dare inspect on the heinous and brutal conditions while clowns like Bloomberg want to ban salt in restaurants. Not sure what Bill is talking about really.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 1:17PM
You found the mistake in my post: I should have said pro-abortion people, not anti-abortion people. Sorry for the error.
darcy| 3.21.12 @ 3:11PM
It seems that the message of the left, the Democrat Party of death, is that it's OK to kill; you get to kill the unborn, and if you kill individuals it's not a big enough deal that the state should require you to pay with your life for the murder you've committed. It's perfectly logical; in both cases, the murderer is made an object of sympathy and treated with kit gloves, on the one hand, and with a lengthy prison sentence (if that) on the other.
Perpetrators are more worthy than are their victims. Those who do evil are protected by the state -- this is the tendency I detect in the left's sanctioning of abortion and opposing capital punishment.
This fourth trimester murder issue follows the same logic: it's OK to kill innocent people.
Are these people lunatics? or what?
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 4:20PM
Just deluded by the father of lies, darcy.
L. Ross| 3.21.12 @ 7:03AM
I think this study is very valuable and should be promoted. First, it is logically consistent. What is the differenc between killing a baby who is due to be born in a week vs. killing a baby less than a week old? Second, it is an opportunity to see straight into their black hearts. Liberals don't often share so honestly about themselves. This was nice of them.
W| 3.21.12 @ 7:18AM
The argument that you can kill a baby after birth follows logically from allowing a baby to be killed up to the moment of birth. Peter Singer has proposed allowing killing the baby up to age 2.
You can't blame the Canadian judge, or any judge, for a lenient sentence on a woman who kills her baby immediately after birth rather than ten minutes or ten days before birth. The judge is applying common sense logic to an illogical system that punishes one mother who kills immediately after birth but provides for a free abortion immediately before birth.
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 12:27PM
W:
That the discussion has reached this point simply demonstrates the fact that abortion is nothing less than the idolotrous worship of the goddess Choice. There is little difference from those who sacrificed children to Moloch and those who would today sacrifice them to Choice or Gaia.
Let us hope and pray that there is still time for people and the nation to turn from these ways; that we have not yet been "weighed in the balance and found wanting".
W| 3.21.12 @ 1:50PM
Al Adab
Well said. If you follow the logic of "choice" it leads logically to these absurd, though logical, conclusions.
But unfortunately the Supreme Court has removed this issue from the legislatures and only a constitutional amendment will outlaw abortion.
Skippy| 3.21.12 @ 4:09PM
Actually if SCOTUS throws out Roe, abortion reverts to the States, where it should have been decided all along.
I don't believe a Const. amendment is required.
Imagine if elected legislatures rather than unelected judges wrote laws!
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 4:21PM
If six million make a holocaust, what does 53 million make?
W| 3.21.12 @ 5:54PM
You are correct it will go back to the states, however there will be states that allow abortion and states that do not. You can bet California, NY, etc. will. There will be a range of laws from banning abortion to allowing it at various stages. The only way to prevent states from allowing it is to have a constitutional amendment.
Terrible Ted| 3.21.12 @ 11:51PM
Abortions are performed by liberal women more than conservative women. By extension, at least arguably, they are aborting future liberals more often than conservatives. Natural selection?
idalily| 3.21.12 @ 2:50PM
And to those who say up to age 2 is okay, I say, "Why stop there?"
I mean, really, why is age 2 so special? Why not give parents the right to murder their offspring until the child is 18? At that point, the child becomes an adult and would have the legal rights that come with adulthood. So why not grant the right to choose life along with voting and military service?
IOW, these abortionists are crazy.
Clint| 3.21.12 @ 7:55AM
"In 2005, 2007, 2009, and again in 2011, Dr.Ron Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, which would have life defined as beginning at conception at the Federal level."
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
DMF| 3.21.12 @ 8:01AM
I wonder if the "pro-choice" crowd has thought about the potential that the woman would lose her overriding "choice" after her baby is born. Presumably, if the father does not want the baby, he could decide to abort it, post-birth, exercising his now equally valid "choice."
Louis Jenkins| 3.21.12 @ 8:15AM
What a bunch of "Hog Wash!" Post birth abortion is wrong, just like abortion in general. The leftist liberals, and even the smilling moderate conservatives better get their act straight! One day they will pay for their acts. God is not pleased.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 8:36AM
WOW....Burdensom...Since when in the world since the beginning of humankind have children NOT been a BURDEN!
We all were a burden folks...for two years someone had to clean up your backside of poop, pick up two boatloads of toys over the years...feed you, clothe you, keep you safe while throwing in some sense of morals.
They FINALLY have dug themselves a BIG HOLE in trying to make the world better for WHO....NOBODY ! They all died! The silly LIBERALS have finally done it .....and the world is LAUGHING!!
Naturalborn Texican| 3.21.12 @ 10:41PM
Gee, Mimi...I never considered my three beautiful children as burdens. I took care of them when they were little because I WANTED to do that as their mother who saw them the greatest blessing a mother could ever experience, NOT a burden.
I taught and nurtured the 3 of them thru infancy into childhood and through out their teenage years. Even today they discuss their ideas, dreams, and beliefs with me, and ask often ask for MY ideas and advice.
They are my greatest joy. And my 3 precious grandchildren are my most precious reward!!!
I am very sorry you had such a negative experience with your children. I wouldn't trade anything - and that includes the "burdensome care giving" that I joyfully, and gladly did for my children. Even in the middle of the night.
You have my deepest sympathy....because you have totally MISSED the wonder and the joy that children can bring into a person's life.
Occam's Tool| 3.22.12 @ 10:52AM
I don't think Mimi meant what you think she meant, Texican. I think she, like I, agree with you completely. I love my babies to pieces.
Naturalborn Texicanette| 3.22.12 @ 10:26PM
Reread Mimi's post and see now what she really meant. Guess I was just reading too fast and jumping to conclusions without thinking. As I re-read the post I understand the point Mimi is making. Mimi, I apologize...hope I haven't offended you. I simply wanted to express the joy I have found in my own kids.
And thank you OT. I appreciate the kind words you used to encourage me to re-read Mimi's post.
David W| 3.21.12 @ 8:38AM
Let us hope that the eventual GOP nominee finds the clip of Obama supporting his position or at least the quote. And that during the debates the GOP nominee asks Obama about this, and if, as a Christian, does he not believe that life is precious? Or, perhaps ask if it would be okay for a white man to post-birth abort a black baby, even if it is against the mother's wish, if the mother is poor and cannot afford to take care of it? See what kind of stuttering response he gets from Obama then.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 8:51AM
"Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life," assert Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.
Perhaps this standard should be applied to the aforementioned authors. Thomas Jefferson would take issue with this.
It seems that far too much attention is being paid to those who theorize about sociology to point of absurdity, such as Giubilini and Minerva. Their writings amount to nothing more than mental masturbation, in essence pleasuring themselves with their "intellectual" pursuits and prowess. This is typical of Leftists who fancy their lunacies as "scientific" and thus superior.
Teaghan| 3.21.12 @ 9:02AM
I hope they will have an explanation for this thought when they meet their maker.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 9:15AM
It is philosophical masturbation by those who love themselves SO Much, they believe they are G_ds. Was this not what Rousseau, Hegel and Nietzsche were talking about with "Supermen' and "Noble Savages," and "The social Contract" (1762) that promoted the idea that "if one fails to bend to the general will, they must be forced to be free?" If the "supermen" Obama or Sebelius decide that you are expendable for the "collective" good, then it is a duty to die for the good of the whole.
But this is their hour. They have a regime that urinates on the Constitution weekly, and desecrates the Bible at every opportunity. It is time for Satan and his forces to use obfuscation and intimidation to advance evil. And Judas rationalizes his betrayal.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 11:05AM
There is an old joke that goes something like this:
A Russian Commissar and his soldiers seize a Ukranian farm. They take the peasant farmer to the side of the barn and stand him up to be shot. He protests, "But why are you doing this? I am just a poor farmer."
Commissar: "This is for the PEOPLE!"
Farmer: "But I am one of the people too!"
Commissar: "Then you should feel good about this! FIRE!"
One should not cross Commissar Sibelius.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 9:36AM
If being human does not ascribe to a person the right to life, what quality DOES give a person the right to life?
MikeBee| 3.21.12 @ 10:41AM
Bill,
Once you've grown up, IF you subscribe to the same belief system and ideals of Liberals, you are entitled to live. Otherwise, you are excrement, some sort of lower form of life which must be excised.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 1:19PM
So then the slaughter of all non-human species to the point of extinction is OK?
MikeBee| 3.21.12 @ 3:19PM
No, no. The libs believe that all animals EXCEPT humans are highly intellectual beings, with the highest being the dolphin. Only human beings who disagree with liberals display themselves to be unworthy of life.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 8:53AM
It seems likely to me that "after-birth abortion" will not get any traction, that its existence is just another of the many manifestations of the attempts at "thinking outside the box" a certain class of persons finds necessary.
But if it does manage to enter the cultural debate, that for me will be confirmation of something fundamentalists and evangelicals have been saying for decades, that Satan is indeed a force and has been spreading his ideas among our people in yet another attempt to entice us into sin. I find that kind of thinking a bit extreme and paranoid, the product of a religious belief that is a bit too intense for me, but events over the years have repeatedly caused me to think that there is indeed a Satanic influence and a Satanic agenda that people fall for.
Teaghan| 3.21.12 @ 9:03AM
Confirmation is already quite clear, Bill.
just look at obamacare and you need look no further.
Nite| 3.21.12 @ 10:39AM
The British Healthcare System embraced by Obama and the Democrats have decided that the very young and very old have no worth to society, so healthcare would be rationed. This too was peddled by Ezekiel Emanuel, who believes the same as the people whose findings were discussed in this article. Dr. Berwick, the left wing loon who wrote all the regulations for Medicare feels the same way about rationing. The Independent Payment Advisory Board will follow these guidelines for Seniors. This lead to it being called "Death Panels" by Sarah Palin, and indeed it is.
Sewing Susie| 4.8.12 @ 7:15PM
You wouldn't think polygamy would get traction, but it obviously has. You wouldn't think pedophilia would get any traction, but the movement has begun in the academic realm to legitimize "intergenerational sex" as just another choice of lifestyle.
You wouldn't have thought that Der Fuhrer's "final solution" would have gotten traction with the German people, or anybody else, but it certainly did.
The father of lies has a lot of power over his minions.
Appleby| 3.21.12 @ 9:08AM
How about we extend "post-birth abortion" to Occupiers who are still living with their parents at age 30, playing video games in the basement and venturing forth only to cash the cheques, troll for free sex, loot stores and set cars on fire?
Dick Nome| 3.21.12 @ 9:20AM
Any culture or society that embraces this has nothing but contempt for the individual and his humanity. Only an atheist with no belief in God could accept this garbage. Tyranny would be the end in this kind of environment as existed in the old Soviet Union and currently in N. Korea.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 9:29AM
Maybe we could adopt the leftist approach to those who do little or nothing, characterize them as anti-social parasites and send them to labor camps to perform productive labor for the collective.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 9:30AM
The above was intended to be a response to Appleby.
Appleby| 3.21.12 @ 10:59AM
There is a passage in Deuteronomy that advocates executing disobedient (adult) children. Perhaps that would apply in this case.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 1:20PM
Shoot, the classical Greeks were one up on that: they just exposed unwanted children on a hillside until they died.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 11:11AM
It is no accident that Leftist Socialists and Communists are almost universally aetheists. They can not allow the worship of anythign greater than themselves because they recognize nothing greater than themselves. Thew eschew God and worship their own egos.
The Israelites freed from Pharoah's rule fabricated with their own hands a golden calf to worship while Moses was with God on the mountain. In essence they were worshipping their own egos and turning their backs on God who saved their sorry "@$$3$." Likewise, Leftists worship government, the creation of their own hands, as an extension of their own egos, and have turned their backs on God.
Miriam| 3.21.12 @ 9:26AM
This reminds me of the Bible story about the two women who each claimed the living child was hers. Solomon would have had a tough time figuring out who the real mother was these days when parents sue over not having the chance to abort their children. What a world!
Harry the Horrible| 3.21.12 @ 9:32AM
Is there anybody who didn't see this coming years ago?
Abortion leads to infanticide and euthanasia. Its a logical progression.
Likewise "gay rights" lead to gay marriage and will, eventually lead to normalization of other perversions like pedophilia.
"Tolerance" has led us to these straights. Its time to put an end to it.
Ammo Guy| 3.21.12 @ 11:08AM
Of course, where it will get interesting will be if and when a "gay gene" is identified - what normal parents would want to bring a gay child into this world? Seems like abortion would be the answer to our "gay problem." I'm just sayin'
Riff Raff| 3.21.12 @ 11:14AM
If "gay" people do not procreate (and historically, they mostly do not), and if such a "gay gene" existed, then how is it passed on? If homosexuality were truly genetic, should it not have worked its way out of the gene pool by now?
Harry the Horrible| 3.21.12 @ 4:29PM
Don't see a problem with "gays." Just a problem with "tolerance."
They're sick and we need to stop indulging their illness.
Pity, not hatred, is the answer.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 2:02PM
The Slippery Slope is going full speed ahead....this criminal stuff and Obama-care will finish the job!
Ned the Red| 3.21.12 @ 9:37AM
"Keeping you is no profit;
losing you is no loss."
Khmer Rouge
Mike G| 3.21.12 @ 9:41AM
"...an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence ..."
So the word "person" can now be defined differently? Theoretically speaking, a redefinition could cause the elimination of anyone. For example, a definition such as "any human whose (religion, skin color, sexual orientation, lack of teeth, IQ, conservative politics, liberal politics, economic plight, joblessness, poor health, good health,...) is no longer a person.
You get the idea, just let the politicians pick something to insert, and voila!
kwan| 3.21.12 @ 9:44AM
We now see why the left wants to disconnect the populace from their religious beliefs and wants to "force" the Catholic Church to support abortion and birth control. Like termites they attack the foundations of the religion in order to destroy it. Their ultimate goal being to replace God with the State.
Melvin| 3.21.12 @ 9:52AM
As a human being I cannot grasp or conceptualize the idea of murdering my own child. When our children became teenagers I somewhat entertained this thought, but an infant, a baby this is completely against the law of humanity.
Furthermore I deplore the sector of science if one could call it that of developing boutique babies, or the parents cavalier attitude of, "If they had known that their child had Downs Syndrome they would have aborted it. "
The Liberals have so programmed or numbed society to the abortion issue. That parents could take such a cavalier attitude and cast aside a living, breathing baby because it wasn't perfect, just isn't human.
It isn't just children who are suffering from infanticide, there is geriatricide. We in the US are just know becoming aware of this especially with the discussion of Obama Care, but Europe has suffered through some rather unbearable Summers with extreme heat and thousands of Senior citizens that were stuck in sub-standard facilities or jammed in facilities that more resembled human warehousing died from heat exhaustion because the caregivers and families where on extended holidays and didn't want the burden of taking care of mum and dad, so it was easier to stick the old goats into facilities akin to a dog kennel.
Taking care of the parents I suppose gets in the way of a good tan while visiting Spain.
So how do we solve this culture of death. The answer is simple. Take the culture war to a whole new level I suppose. If murdering a two or three year old is perfectly acceptable, then why not murdering a 33 or 43 year old. After all they are still my children. Get them before they get me type mentality.
darcy| 3.21.12 @ 10:30AM
From there, the logic follows that if one can murder person A because that person is one's offspring, then why not murder anyone for any reason? Wholesale slaughter, with the state, of course, deciding who is worthy and who is not.
If the state decides your rights, the state can take them away. Interesting, isn't it, how our looming fiscal disaster mirrors our daily-worsening moral disaster/degeneracy.
But, of course, Republicans like Mitch Daniels think we can fix our fiscal problems and place our 'social issues' on the back burner. Not at this rate, we can't. And he's a fool, and those like him, who are either naive enough to think it and treacherous enough to tell us manana when they have NO intention of restoring traditional moral values. And why should they? The state-sponsored thieving would have to be curtailed!
Appleby| 3.21.12 @ 11:01AM
Makes "The Hunger Games" sound even more creepy, eh?
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 12:33PM
There you have it darcy. Good to see you here again. If our rights come from the state, then the state can indeed remove them. This nation is the only one founded on the opposite principle that rights are inherent and that government exists only to protect them.
The state sponsored religion which worships Choice, Tolerance, Diversity and Gaia is an idolotrous neo-pagan one which has led us to the point where we are actually debating such issues as this. How long before we see the handwriting on the wall Mene Mene Tekel Upares?
W| 3.21.12 @ 1:53PM
Al Adab
Does sharia law or the Koran permit a parent to kill a child for the "honor killings?" I don't know enough about this issue.
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 3:22PM
W:
There are many laws which, when broken, call for stoning. Adultery being one and the definition under sharia is rather broad and includes fornication, etc. Apostacy is another. Not unlike some of the Mosaic law from which Christ set us free. Remember Paul noted that The Law made us all sinners, but Christ set us free. Honor killing is just a euphemism to help explain the mindset.
It is interesting the think that if Obama as a child in his Indonesian madrassa repeated the litany of Moslem faith, he is today apostate for claiming Christianity.
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 3:41PM
W:
I could be a little more specific and suggest you read through Suras three and five. In them are a number of punishments prescribed and it also helps understand the opressive nature of the Law.
W| 3.21.12 @ 5:56PM
Al Adab
Thanks, I have been remiss in not reading the Koran. Will have to buy one and read it.
darcy| 3.21.12 @ 2:13PM
Greetings to you, too, Al Adab. About the handwriting on the wall, we can read it like Daniel did, I would say, but still too many others are blinded; they are indeed modern-day pagans. Nevertheless, it is a good day for us to reacquaint ourselves with the fifth chapter of Daniel and find comfort in the knowledge that it is God who has set the limits to man's iniquity, and He will judge rightly.
Hope things are going well for you in, was it, east Texas?
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 3:27PM
darcy:
He indeed judges the nations. There is no gurantee that ours must survive, only that we will survive. Many read the writing, but how many have ears to hear?
Jefferson (the old diest) said, "Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever".
Ken is the one from east Texas around Houston I believe.
Sandra| 3.21.12 @ 10:02AM
I have searched the Journal of Medical Ethics website but can't find the original articles that is referred to but not linked. Please clarify.
Bob| 3.21.12 @ 10:22AM
No surprise it may have been pulled, since the authors have been receiving threats over it. But don't play stupid, do a Google search.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 2:08PM
It was in the Washinton Times!
Occam's Tool| 3.22.12 @ 10:54AM
Pulled. Here's how to get it: go to Pubmed and put in the title. Then arrange to pay for it and you can get it.
Bob| 3.21.12 @ 10:20AM
This just makes me angry. "Potential persons"? What a load of BS. Pro-choicers make me sick.
Gene| 3.21.12 @ 10:37AM
The only problem with all this logic is that one day, when you are in your 300th Trimester and start the beginning stages of Algenheimers, and you poop in your pants on the front seat of your Granddaughter-In-Law's car, they are going to talk about your quality of life and rather than have you suffer, they will take you to the nearest "Euthanasia Center" and have a 301st Trimester Abortion while playing a segment of your favorite music in a room of your favorite color for a grand "Bon Voyage".
Claire Solt| 3.21.12 @ 10:38AM
Conservatives need to ;earn tp finish their sentences. It is not enough to denounce the culture of death. Do you have a cogent argument for your pro life position? Men need to beware the slippery slope. The way libs always push the envelope they will, no doubt, soon argue that women also have the right to off the father who burdened them. They are never satisfied.
gearjammer| 3.21.12 @ 10:42AM
Get rid of non citizens illegal or legal if not a net plus to the USA. That leaves a ton of money to help a few unfortunate babies born with these awful problems. Take care of our own ! Old young whatever-not Obama and company-kill and fund " dream act " is their motto. Add our most horrendously wounded soldiers to the Obama /dem list of expandles. Get run over and totally maimed and rendered helpless by a drunk non citizen without a license or registered car-you get put down like an old dog-their kid's get free college.
Mike| 3.21.12 @ 11:01AM
Thank you, for such insightful piece on of all days, March 21st World Down Syndrome Awareness Day
Richard| 3.21.12 @ 11:44AM
Once humans are considered as not having intrinsic value and once a group benefit calculus is accepted then it is ok to kill anyone if that person is not valued by the group for whatever reason. Thus if his care is too burdensome or costly he can be killed, if he is ugly to the group he can be killed, if his family doesn't want him he can be killed, if he is genetically inferior he can be killed. There is literally no stopping and eventually the strong will determine who lives at their whim.
griff page| 3.21.12 @ 12:02PM
This is disgusting....................
PracticallyCatholic | 3.21.12 @ 12:14PM
Are we surprised? We have a President who - in the IL state legislature - voted against saving the lives of babies that survive abortion, and has publicly stated that 'Maybe you're better off not having surgery, but taking painkillers' to an elderly person. We're well down the slippery slope of completely ignoring the dignity of life in any form and playing God ourselves by determining what constitutes a 'quality of life' for others to the point that if we don't feel it passes our judgement, others be deemed to die.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 2:14PM
When it comess to the value of life, this President is absent of any wisdom, caring and so immature that this issue alone should be the one factor that puts him Miles away from the Presidency.....Never...NEVER have we had one so un-worthy of the OFFICE!
John Tannehill| 3.21.12 @ 12:16PM
This from the people who howl for human, not "person" rights and all under the umbrella of ethics. And I'm sure they'll also tell me there is no Satan in this world. Count on it.
Gary| 3.21.12 @ 12:32PM
One word, abomination, fits this evil perspective. As a grandfather of a three month old, and a three year old, it sickens me. As a widower who lost my dear wife after 41 years of marriage, suddenly in an accident, it saddens me. Life is a precious and fragile gift, and cavalier discussions on how to destroy humans for "convenience" is cold and frightening. These people would be in good company with Hitler and his henchmen.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 2:20PM
Yes Gary....As they laid the emaciated , bones only bodies like sticks in a row in miles of ditches...no time to cover them, with the American soldier outside of town....This scenario we are discussing today ...Smells to high heaven of HITLER himself!
bill carson| 3.21.12 @ 12:33PM
All these killers and would be killers of children will, one day, have to answer for their crimes.
Terri| 3.21.12 @ 12:37PM
That article is disturbing on so many levels. "According to the authors, a rights-bearing person is '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.'" Then based on this assertion, I would like to go on record saying that I have memories of being in the womb and my twin sister being literally ripped away from me, as she shoved me to the top of the uterus where God covered me (Ps 139:13 KJV). We were both screaming, and we both felt the anguish of being ripped apart. I have spent my whole life looking for that unknown something, and that something was my twin sister. Being deprived of her existence DID represent a loss to her. She did NOT want to die. I knew it. I felt it. It represented a loss to me. I relived this loss years later when my boyfriend died. When I remembered what I felt in the womb in the abortion, it was the same depth of emotion that I went through when Tim died - that feeling of him being taken away. I was angry at him for not taking me with him, for leaving me behind. And that is what I felt when my sister Leanne was killed. She was a person. I was a person. And now I remain, and I will speak out for her, and the millions of others like her.
cicero| 3.21.12 @ 12:50PM
What are of you whining about? I think, if we combine this with some of the other justifications put forth by the Left, we may have something here. They used to say that the object of our afffections weren't "human" until they could exist on their own. If you combine that with the "unbearable burden" argument, those of us who have or are raising teenagers may be onto something. At least under this scenario, you could wait until it is provable that there is some socially redeeming value to the little buggers. If they still cannot take care of themselves, or present an unbearable burden, you can snuff them anytine you want up until they negate one of the above criteria. It may even get them to move out of the house within a reasonable peroid of time.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 3:32PM
If nothing else, it will scare the shit out of them!
Chad| 3.21.12 @ 1:13PM
"Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life,"
So that means when we see these fools on the street we can shoot them down and use this argument in court correct?
cowgirl| 3.21.12 @ 1:16PM
Turn the tables and think of it this way.
More Abortion, Less Liberals. Let them have their cake and eat it too.
Time to take this country back.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 3:27PM
Except that, for children who live past the abortion time frame, growing up with liberal parents often results in conservative kids.
cowgirl| 3.22.12 @ 8:47AM
The statistics says one out of five children born to liberals would turn out to be conservative. I happened to have a friend who was one of four children born to San Francisco Hippie parents. He turned conservative - the other three liberals.
Howard| 3.21.12 @ 1:20PM
Now the ideas postulated represent liberalism at it's manifest achievement. While these lefties are willing to murder newborns, heaven forbid hardened murderers be executed. After all, it would be "barbaric".
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 2:24PM
Abortion within...Abortion without..THE SAME !
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 3:30PM
Good point; in a culture ruled solely by logic and rationality, once it's conceded that a parent has a right to kill a child, it seems as if it would be hard to draw a bright line between the child at risk of death and the child who is safe.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 3:26PM
People commonly prefer male children to female children, so the "after birth abortion" will probably fall disproportionately on female children. Isn't that sexist or something? I suppose not when it's abortion.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 3:29PM
Suppose a kid who is slated for an afterbirth abortion manages to kill his parents? Is he prosecutable? Is self-defense a valid defense for a kid who can be killed?
EchoMike| 3.21.12 @ 3:54PM
But we had better not execute murders and rapists that would be inhumane.
CVO| 3.21.12 @ 7:13PM
No they need therapy and understanding...and aquatic centers, and gourmet food and racquetball courts and HBO. And a very early release so they can kill and rape again, and again....
C. S. P. Schofield| 3.21.12 @ 4:11PM
I do get so tired of the Edgy Intellectual Left and their never ending drive to be outrageous. I wonder if the mother weaned them too soon or too late?
Bob Miller| 3.21.12 @ 4:15PM
This form of murder pushed by self-styled "ethicists" is only the latest version of the progressive eugenicists' dream.
Kingofthenet| 3.21.12 @ 4:50PM
yeah, the magical thing that happens is BIRTH, before that if you give an unborn 'rights', every single one is taken from the Mother.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 5:13PM
Nonsense. This statement is so patently absurd it requires no refutation. King obviously flunked logic.
Kingofthenet| 3.21.12 @ 5:45PM
A ship can't have two Captains , same with a body, ANYTIME you make a medical decision that does not put the women number 1 and only, than it's too the detriment of the women.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 6:29PM
Again, this is senseless. A woman's rights are not negated by being pregnant and recognizing that a baby has a right to life. Utterly absurd. If this were true, then a pregnant woman could be shot on site with no consequences, and this is not and never was the case. Again, utterly absurd. You flunk again.
Occam's Tool| 3.22.12 @ 10:56AM
It's to, King. Work on it. And most abortions do not involve emergency decisions about whom to save. That's actually, VERY RARE.
Just think how 50 million more young working Americans would have solved the entitlement crisis. When there's no one there to wipe your aged ass (I assume you have no kids), you will have no one but yourself to blame. My babies love me.
Dipesto| 3.21.12 @ 5:14PM
Mollie Yard some years ago came to the local wildly liberal college in Iowa I lived near, and in her speech to a crowded student union, opined that children do not develope human thinking processses till they are at least 5 or 6 so--therefore, killing them before those ages is permissible, if the mother is being burdened by these creatures and unable to fulfill her own career and lifestyle choices. These was around a time when there was a surge in child -by-mother drownings. The audience in the hall and the local media were very sedate about what Ms. Yard was saying.
Dipesto| 3.21.12 @ 5:15PM
"These" should be "this." Sorry about the typo.
Rurik| 3.21.12 @ 5:56PM
Why not a 180th trimester abortion?
As W. S. Gilbert said "I've got a little list."
Occam's Tool| 3.22.12 @ 10:58AM
Rurik---see my comment above. You beat me too it. I assume that both the authors are childless, being Italians, who have one of the lowest birthrates in Europe.
CVO| 3.21.12 @ 7:09PM
Excellent article. Sound reasoning. God protect us from these cold and calculating monsters.
Dmitry Aleksandrovich| 3.21.12 @ 9:34PM
In a sane society Giubilini and Minerva would be put in straight jackets and locked away in a padded room of a mental institution. After my last two children were born I remember the doctor's trying being really pushy in their advice that my wife would get her tubes tied. I could only imagine what they would be trying to convince my wife to do if this thinking became prominent in medical circles and my son was born as he was with two holes in his heart. If I heard a doctor talking about an after birth abortion for my child I would be inclined to strangle the doctor with my bare hands for suggesting such a thing.
Aces and Eights| 3.21.12 @ 10:23PM
And you inclination would be right, proper, and moral. We have fallen so far as a society that I truly wonder if we can survive another generation.
Occam's Tool| 3.22.12 @ 11:00AM
Restraint chairs, Dmitry. Straight jackets result in renal failure.
You are absolutely correct on this issue. And I say that as someone who dislikes you intensely.
Dmitry Aleksandrovich | 3.22.12 @ 1:37PM
You only dislike me because you don't know me. I am an honorable man and I have absolutely no hatred for your people. However as you are a Jew and are thus concerned with the issues of Israel, Iam an Orthodox Christian with many Shia Muslim relatives and yes I am concerned for the welfare of the ancient Christian communities of the Middle East and for Shia Muslims who the Wahhabists hate even more than Christians and Jews.
POST American| 3.22.12 @ 3:59AM
-----------------BOTTOMLESS LINE--------------------
----AND one and all should be beating
the drums over leading capstone EUGENIST,
Princeton's Dr Peter Singer's call for
legalizing,even promoting, the
selective extermination of children
up to 3 years of age.
Remember kiddies! --they start with the
invisible ---the old and the unborn, and they
work in toward the 'unfit' --the'costly'
--the 'inconvenient' ---even as you move out
into one of those catagories.
Capstone Social Darwinism, hiding behind
the 'justifications' of actuarial psychopathy,
USURY and their 'fave' redoubts in TAX FREE
'chair--'IT'--Abel' foundations IS the very
fountainhead of this poison.
MAKE NO MISTAKE
AND, we might add, the onus is on the
junk science of EUGENICS to prove its
value ---and work its 'miracles'.
Thus far all we've seen are the ever trotted
out features on 'Now the blind can see'
---or some marvels of prosthesis. ALLLL
this is thing more than highly refined applied mechanics.
Their 'science' of the brain? 'cures' for cancer?
and cloning 'marvels' fail to convince ---even
as they nauseate sense and outrage decency.
Their agendas for MASSIVE public sterilization
and dumb down ---and the testimony of
statistics themselves viz a viz America's
ever skyrocketing cancer figures, are far more revealing.
"Understand, Gobalism, 'FREE trade',
USURY, TREASON and EUGENICS are
always intertwined. ----ALWAYS."
AGAIN ------------------ALWAYS. . .
------------------HAC/ Nuremberg 2012----------------
sikiş | 3.22.12 @ 5:36AM
Talking about real estate loving it Here’s some mildly amuzing stuff I found: Thought for the day? : Crime doesn’t pay… does that mean my job is a crime?
rherman1@gmu.edu| 3.22.12 @ 12:17PM
I am the parent of a non perfect child with Down Syndrome. We had testing done after seeing some indicators initially that told us the child was going to be normal. Imagine our surprise when she turned out to be special. What these people fail to understand is the positive affect these children can have on their lives. My daughter has literally saved my life. I couldn't imagine not having her in my life. I feel sorry for people who have to have their lives so perfectly planned. They are missing out on so much.
ChuckL| 3.22.12 @ 3:03PM
Inconsideration of the display of a completely defective brain in the body known as Barack H. Obama II, I suggest that he be granted the implementation of a Fourth Trimester Abortion.
It would fit well with his Illinois law that required the ?Doctor? in a case of botched abortion in which the intended victim survived to kill the baby.
Lyneil Vandermolen| 3.22.12 @ 3:30PM
Would welfare recipients, criminals and illegal aliens also qualify for really late post birth abortions? After all, they drain on our system and reduce the quality of modern life. How about Muslim jihadis? If you think hard enough, just about everyone would qualify, as would the "ethicisists" who thought of this idea.
brenda| 3.23.12 @ 12:38AM
This is the evilest , satanic beyond words thing these people could have even thought up to try and get into law. It doesnt surprise me as if u can kill something unborn why would they care about what the human baby feeels after its born if it was killed. Believe u me it would not be a preety way to diospose of either since the baby usually is a big one. This is so sick and I cannot believe how deceitful wicked the human mind and heart is. This is proff of our thinking is going to hell. Shame on anyone who thinks this is normal or RIGHT. What if tese people who thought this up were considered to be a THREAT TO SOCIETY. tHEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN Another statistic abortion......
David Severy | 3.25.12 @ 4:30PM
From the article:
They argue that "when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible."
There are no circumstances by which we can justify an abortion. Perhaps God can justify it by causing a spontaneous miscarriage or still birth, but abortion and infanticide by the will of man are both murder.
Even when the mothers life is endangered in birthing, let the doctor then decide to save the mother. Some mothers have prefered the doctor save the infant in those circumstances! But generally I think: save the mother; she is (or ought to be) needed by her lawful husband.
POST American| 3.26.12 @ 3:54AM
---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------
------------------------'ALWAYS'-------------------------
DJFK| 3.26.12 @ 2:56PM
The world is claimed to be overpopulated, because the world is claimed to be on a "food shortage."
Which is kind of true, since farmers are paid out not to sow and/or reap annually. This i don't know first hand, but i have heard this from a friend who runs a grain silo. Any excess food in the country is dumped into the sea or burned, to save the Freemasons'/Jesuits' profits.
There is more than enough food and therefore, not nearly an overpopulation. If only the politically inspired food wasting can be stopped.