According to today's London Telegraph, medical ethicists from Oxford University - in an article published in the Journal of Medical Ethics - have stated that "[p]arents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion."
I'm not making this up. Really. It goes on to say:
“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’.
Did you get that? They consider newborn babies as "potential persons." Instead of calling it what it is - infanticide (murder) - they use the colloquial term, "after-birth abortion." Wow.
"To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and
euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human
freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others
and against others. This is the death of true freedom: "Truly, truly, I say to
you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn 8:34)." - Evangelium Vitae, 20.
No comments:
Post a Comment