« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Abortion and Infanticide: Why the progressives are correct on this one

Think carefully.

If I tell you that killing an unborn child the day before he is delivered is morally the same as killing the same newborn infant two days later, you would probably agree with that.  You should, because really they are morally equal.

So when a panel of progressive ethicists says exactly that, then lets stand up and applaud.  For once a finding we can all agree on!

What we probably do not agree on is what this means.

To me, it means that, since it is morally wrong to kill an infant, it is equally morally wrong to kill an unborn infant two days earlier.  This seems intuitively obvious to me.

This progressive think-tank has done more to answer the question:  “what is wrong with having an abortion” than all the arguments about when the fetus has fingers or toes or whatever combined.

COMMENTS

  • dajeeps

    The commerce clause, general welfare, or necessary and proper? Ugh.

    Sorry I couldn’t help myself. The morbidity of the debate seems like it should be a clue that it’s something government really shouldn’t have anything to do with, from a philosophical point of view, of course. Roe v. Wade was a bad decision on so many levels, I couldn’t even begin to count them.

    • chadd65203

      For the British to allow such rubbish to be published as “scientific” is quite beyond me. The land of the Magna Carta has given credence to a moral argument more befitting Stalin’s USSR or current day China, than this noble and once-great country.

  • Pingback: Theron Rosenthal

  • Pingback: Manie Kerley