Worried about that kid you just had? Feel like you really wanted a girl, but God saw fit to give you a boy? Don’t worry! Ethicists (using that term very loosely) have now said that you should be able to
murder abort the baby after it’s born!
The Blaze reports:
Alberto Giubilini with Monash University in Melbourne and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne write that in “circumstances occur[ing] after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.”
The two are quick to note that they prefer the term “after-birth abortion“ as opposed to ”infanticide.” Why? Because it “[emphasizes] 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.” The authors also do not agree with the term euthanasia for this practice as the best interest of the person who would be killed is not necessarily the primary reason his or her life is being terminated. In other words, it may be in the parents’ best interest to terminate the life, not the newborns.
The circumstances, the authors state, where after-birth abortion should be considered acceptable include instances where the newborn would be putting the well-being of the family at risk, even if it had the potential for an “acceptable” life. The authors cite Downs Syndrome as an example, stating that while the quality of life of individuals with Downs is often reported as happy, “such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care.”
“Why don’t we call chocolate pudding,” Glenn joked over their preference for “after birth abortion” over “infanticide”. Glenn said that changing the language is a longtime progressive tactic that started when Woodrow Wilson scared everyone with similar radical ideas.
“Why don’t we just wait to see if we like the baby,” Glenn said of the ridiculousness of the debate.
“They’re just poking us with a stick. That’s all they’re doing,” he added.
“ Now, the question is are we even awake enough? Do we even care enough this time around to have it swing back so far the other way. I don’t think so,” Glenn said.