New pro-choice movements intent on MURDERING babies

Manwë was known for many things, but wisdom and power are two that lead the rest of his attributes. Join the Councils and discuss the more weighty matters of Tolkien Fandom.

New pro-choice movements intent on MURDERING babies

Postby The Heretic » Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:34 am

Journal of Medical Ethicsjme.bmj.com
J Med Ethics doi:10.1136/medethics-2011-100411
Law, ethics and medicine
Paper
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Abstract
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the 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.

http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/0 ... 1.abstract

Full article:
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/0 ... 00411.full

Various articles on the subject:

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/20 ... ade-legal/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... s-say.html
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/new ... d=10789084
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02 ... ostpopular
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/eu ... 36581.html
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/journa ... lready-le/
The Heretic
Rider of the Mark

 
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 7:01 am
Top

Postby vison » Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:40 am

For the luvva pete.

In spite of the oxymoron in the expression, we propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide’, to emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. Accordingly, a second terminological specification is that we call such a practice ‘after-birth abortion’ rather than ‘euthanasia’ because the best interest of the one who dies is not necessarily the primary criterion for the choice, contrary to what happens in the case of euthanasia.



Right. :roll:

Why did they bother with the rest of this crap? The crux of it sits right there.

I bet there's a note somewhere signed by whatshisname, the pope, saying, "Who's going to write this? Come on, guys. Take one for the team."
GM is alive.

Osama bin Laden is dead.
User avatar
vison
Ringbearer


 
Posts: 12696
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:15 pm
Top

Postby Democritus » Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:12 am

Ain't gonna happen...
User avatar
Democritus
Mariner

 
Posts: 5440
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2001 8:08 pm
Top

Postby Swordsman_Of_The_Tower » Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:20 am

New pro war movements intent of MURDERING men women and children of the brown race!
User avatar
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Postby Dave_LF » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:01 am

Nature is continuous; laws are binary. This will always lead to absurdities in edge cases.
User avatar
Dave_LF
Mariner

 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 8:39 pm
Top

Postby Jnyusa » Mon Mar 05, 2012 11:50 am

Oh Dave, stop being so reasonable about it and start frothing at the mouth.

Don't you want to fit in?
User avatar
Jnyusa
Mariner

 
Posts: 5934
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 8:24 pm
Top

Postby Goedril » Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:47 pm

It's the pregnancy that's being "aborted" in the first place, right? If the baby's already born, it seems really weird to call it an abortion rather than euthanasia or something.... Also, the burden of supporting the life of the baby/fetus/whatever falls unavoidably on the woman during the pregnancy (which is why, to me, it seems reasonable to say that she has the right to stop doing so by having an abortion), but, after the birth, that's not necessarily the case. And I really don't get the difference between "person" and "potential person"; "in someone's uterus and depending entirely on her to stay alive" and "born" seem a lot better defined. :| Very strange article....
Goedril
Petitioner to the Council
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 6:58 pm
Top

Postby Swordsman_Of_The_Tower » Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:04 pm

America's immature middle school attitude towards SEX is hilarious.
User avatar
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Postby Silverberry_Spritely » Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:05 pm

Anencephaly and other conditions that are incompatible with life make the idea seem reasonable.

NB4 "murderer!"
Silverberry_Spritely
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 6:59 pm
Location: The OTHER Party City
Top

Postby Swordsman_Of_The_Tower » Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:05 pm

User avatar
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Postby Griffon64 » Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:43 pm

Swordsman_Of_The_Tower wrote:http://mountainsageblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/TMW2012-02-29colorlowres.jpg

Ah, now that was funny.
User avatar
Griffon64
Mariner

 
Posts: 7276
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 11:47 pm
Top

Postby JewelSong » Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:08 pm

I read a bit about this article. It was never meant to be a real (a "modest") proposal. It is not a political stunt or really anything to do with the abortion issue, pro or con.

It's an ethics paper...basically a thought experiment, designed to elicit comment and dialogue from other philosophers. The two students who wrote it have been shocked at the amount of press and mail (including death threats) that they have gotten - which makes me think they must be incredibly naive.

In no way do the writers actually believe that infants should be killed.
User avatar
JewelSong
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4634
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 6:31 am
Top

Postby Frelga » Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:18 pm

As skmeone said on Failblog (on a different subject):

For Pete's sake, don't let those people see The Onion!
User avatar
Frelga
GNU Terry Pratchett


 
Posts: 9274
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 12:05 pm
Top

Postby Swordsman_Of_The_Tower » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:04 pm

Griffon64 wrote:
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower wrote:http://mountainsageblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/TMW2012-02-29colorlowres.jpg

Ah, now that was funny.


Oh, there are even better ones.

http://thismodernworld.com/wp-content/u ... lowre1.jpg
User avatar
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top


Return to Philosophy: Councils of Manwë

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests