The Ethics of Infanticide - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-01-2012, 05:21 PM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,440
Local Time: 04:05 PM
The Ethics of Infanticide

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say - Telegraph

Quote:
Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued.

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.”

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 actual study is available here:
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
__________________

nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 05:25 PM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 11:05 AM
That's pretty fucked up
__________________

Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 05:27 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Quote:
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”.
Others may disagree with me on this, but I feel disgusted when people say newborns are not actual persons.

Just because their brains are not fully developed does not mean they're not people. Our brains supposedly don't finish developing until we're in our early 20s. Does that mean young adults, teens and children are not people, and therefore have no rights?

These kinds of beliefs are far too radical to me, and also far too dangerous.
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 05:38 PM   #4
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 56,921
Local Time: 03:05 AM
I read this this morning as well. Very dangerous and irresponsible thing to publish, I think. Here's what the author had to say:

Quote:
Dr Minerva said she had notified police about the death threats and feared for her safety.
''This was a theoretical and academic article,'' she said.
''I didn't mean to change any laws. I'm not in favour of infanticide. I'm just using logical arguments.''
The paper had been taken out of context, she said. It was intended for an academic community.
''This debate is not new. The debate has been going on for 30 years,'' she said. ''I don't think people outside bioethics should learn anything from this paper. I've received hundreds of emails saying, 'You should die'.''

This disturbed me the most:

Quote:
Avoiding the term ''infanticide'', the pair say ''after-birth abortion'' should be permitted when disabilities, such as Down syndrome, are not detected during pregnancy, or if economic or psychological circumstances change and ''taking care of the offspring becomes an unbearable burden on someone''.
Sends a shiver down my spine.
cobl04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 05:40 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Quote:
The paper had been taken out of context, she said.


same old excuse, all the time

Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 05:50 PM   #6
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 56,921
Local Time: 03:05 AM
I'm pro-choice, but if you are going to have an abortion you'd do it before, y'know, the kid's born, right?

To suggest it's alright to kill the infant because it has a disease/order that wasn't picked up during pregnancy is disgusting.
cobl04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 06:12 PM   #7
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Normally ethicists use the term non-voluntary euthanasia to refer to what these ethicists are arguing for. Not sure why these particular authors chose to do otherwise. It's rather like calling smothering someone to death "withdrawal of life support."
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 06:17 PM   #8
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 12:05 PM
This is so stupid.
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 06:20 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,563
Local Time: 12:05 PM
In Michigan you can anonymously surrender a newborn within 72 hours of birth to any emergency services provider (hospital, fire station....). You get 28 days to change your mind. Seems like a fair compromise to me.
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 06:52 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,955
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobl04 View Post
I'm pro-choice, but if you are going to have an abortion you'd do it before, y'know, the kid's born, right?

To suggest it's alright to kill the infant because it has a disease/order that wasn't picked up during pregnancy is disgusting.
This.

That article. Yeah. Ummmmmmmmmmm. NO. Just no. Truly disturbing on so many levels.
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:02 PM   #11
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,266
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
That's pretty fucked up

I agree.



"Simple morality dictates that unless and until someone can prove the unborn human is not alive, we must give it the benefit of the doubt and assume it is (alive). And, thus, it should be entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

~Ronald Reagan 1982
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:12 PM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 12:05 PM
That has literally nothing to do with what we are talking about. Can he be suspended for taking this thread way off topic?
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:16 PM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 11:05 AM
It's best to just ignore him. As he's proven in the Personhood Amendments thread, he's great at making embarrassingly irrelevant posts and then not having the balls to address them when he's called on it
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:20 PM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
That has literally nothing to do with what we are talking about. Can he be suspended for taking this thread way off topic?
Just ignore him. He's not worth the arguments or the hassle.
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:21 PM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,266
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
It's best to just ignore him. As he's proven in the Personhood Amendments thread, he's pretty good at making embarrassingly irrelevant posts and then not having the balls to address them when he's called on it

Call me.
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:31 PM   #16
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,472
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse

Call me.
How coy of you.

The instances in FYM where you've been questioned, challenged and/or "called" on something you've posted, and to which you either ignored the responses entirely or didn't address the specific issue, are simply too numerous to list here.

It would be great if you could actually take part in the ongoing discussion, rather than simply interject your own tangentially related thought/quote/link without any explanation or inclination to expand on it when asked.
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:31 PM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post
Call me.


Oh, here, because you seemed to have lost the link:

Personhood Amendments

why don't you go and explain why you're a liar and a bigot and then come back
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:33 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,266
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
How coy of you.

The instances in FYM where you've been questioned, challenged and/or "called" on something you've posted, and to which you either ignored the responses entirely or didn't address the specific issue, are simply too numerous to list here.

It would be great if you could actually take part in the ongoing discussion, rather than simply interject your own tangentially related thought/quote/link without any explanation or inclination to expand on it when asked.

Ask a question. What would you like to dicuss?
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:34 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 12:05 PM
Getting back on topic...

It's these people such as Francesca Minerva who give ammunition to the conservatives, who believe all liberals think like her. I remember Glenn Beck mentioned people like her on his show (Note: I never had watched his show; my parents are big fans of him. Try not to feel sorry for me).
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 07:34 PM   #20
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,472
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse

Ask a question. What would you like to dicuss?
There is an ongoing discussion in this thread. Jump on in.
__________________

Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×