If abortion, why not infanticide?

By J.C. von Krempach, J.D. | February 27, 2012

This leading question is often treated as a canard by supporters of abortion. However, it is seriously argued by two Italian utilitarians, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, and published online in the prestigious Journal of Medical Ethics this week.

They argue that both the fetus and the new-born infant are only potential persons without any interests. The abstract of their paper runs:

“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.”

For most of the abortion lobby, that would include infanticide ‘on demand’…
Read the full story here.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter