We have seen the future, and it sucks.

UK: Killing Babies No Different From Abortion, Experts Say

29th February 2012

Read it.

They’re right, of course — but:

Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued.

Welcome back to the 1920s. Margaret Sanger, call your office.

Calling these guys ‘ethicists’ is like calling a Democrat a democrat.

4 Responses to “UK: Killing Babies No Different From Abortion, Experts Say”

  1. Jay Says:

    I reject all advice from anybody who says “different to”.

  2. Bob Says:

    Decades ago, pro-lifers were warning that the killing would not end with unborn babies, that it would eventually be extended to newborns, the disabled, the frail elderly, etc. Everyone said we were crazy. I take no pleasure from the fact that we were right.

  3. Whitehawk Says:

    Doesn’t matter which side of the cervix… it’s the same thing. If you can “moralize” it on one side it’s no stretch to “moralize” it on the other.

  4. Dennis Nagle Says:

    Exactly. Which is why I advocate for Death Panels.
    If people become useless drains on the community or demonstrate that they are lacking in ‘intrinsic worth’–even if they’re newborn–we should just snuff ’em.
    Why put them, and ourselves, through all the trouble and expense of keeping them around?