People described as 'medical ethics experts' have gone on record as claiming that newborn babies have no right to life. Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, they argue: "The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a foetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life."
To be sure we are in no doubt about the chilling nature of their convoluted message, Alberto Ciubilini and Francesca Minerva, add: "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." (my italics) To these primitive ethicists, infanticide is therefore fine. It adds a new dimension to the euphemism of 'pro-choice' - now you can choose whether to kill your baby before or after birth.
What is the 'moral status' of these sociopaths, preoccupied with snuffing out human life rather than protecting it? Not all that elevated, it would seem. Their comments have reportedly received a hostile response from several quarters. Curiously, the reaction has upset the journal's editor, Julian Savulescu. He describes the critics as "opposing the values of a liberal society" by indulging in "witch ethics".
How cynical can you get? What we are dealing with here are not the values of a civilised society but those of an abortion-obsessed culture. The death-wish fanatics who constantly seek to widen its boundaries would be regarded as deeply sinister if they were not so desperately sick.
