Quantum Windbag
Gold Member
- May 9, 2010
- 58,308
- 5,099
- 245
I guess people who scoff at the idea that fetus's have no rights would have no problem believing babies have none either. Yet there are idiots that think that slippery slopes never happen.
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? -- Giubilini and Minerva -- Journal of Medical Ethics
More here.
Ethicists Argue for Acceptance of After-Birth Abortions | TheBlaze.com
I hope some idiot comes in here and tells me no one is pro abortion
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.
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? -- Giubilini and Minerva -- Journal of Medical Ethics
More here.
Ethicists Argue for Acceptance of After-Birth Abortions | TheBlaze.com
I hope some idiot comes in here and tells me no one is pro abortion