Marxists are the societal alchemists, they have transformed Sanctity of Life into Sanctity of Pronouns. 'Safe but rare'...(anyone remember that lie?) into 'Common and often' (in the future: Common and mandatory)
The philosophers of infanticide are correct in their fundamental point that killing a baby in the womb or birth canal is no different than killing a baby outside the birth canal. We are an infanticide promoting nation. All honest abortion advocates believe exactly what they said (that killing it inside or out is the same, not the notion of personhood).
I know of at least two (maybe three) hard left feminists who don't see anything wrong with admitting that mothers can kill their babies inside the womb. One publically advocates that right to murder the baby outside the womb, even days or weeks later, and not for health reasons...just because. No questions asked, they have a right to murder, any objections based on personhood of the baby is irrelevant to them. So the progression has continued...'it's not a person, it's a blob of tissue mass...it's a person only if he/she is viable outside the womb...it's a person if he/she can manage to escape the birth canal free and clear...he/she is a person but not worth having...he/she is not a person, just F-ing kill it and get on with your life!'
But even those mothers of death wouldn't go as far as to claim the baby isn't a person with rights. Like the Lacy Peterson case, one can go to jail for murdering a baby. The mothers of death reserve that murder privilege for the mother and no one else. But what these medical ethics professors are saying implies so much more. "No personhood" indicates no killing of persons. In that point of view, a mother, or a stranger on the street, could bash a newborn's skull in with a Bikelock and it wouldn't be murder. They could then hang that baby on the wall to decorate their home or sell it as art in to an Art Gallery and it would 'meh', whatever floats your boat.
Where the Marxist aberrations of nature are incorrect is in assuming that it's up to them to define personhood.
"“We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.”
As such they argued it was “not possible to damage a newborn by preventing her from developing the potentiality to become a person in the morally relevant sense”.
The authors therefore concluded 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”. "
"They argued: “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.”
“We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.”
As such they argued it was “not possible to damage a newborn by preventing her from developing the potentiality to become a person in the morally relevant sense”.
The authors therefore concluded 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”.
THAT is the most chilling part...that is the view that is being pushed worldwide. One more tiny step and the so called 'experts' will be the ones to attribute 'personhood' only to those people they find relevant to themselves to feed the infant Totalitarian Global society that is being nurtured as we speak. It will grow into the monster that feeds on human sacrifice, and it won't be just for babies anymore.
Yes, and the JME editor noticed that too. From the article::
He [Prof Julian Savulescu] said the journal would consider publishing an article positing that, if there was no moral difference between abortion and killing newborns, then abortion too should be illegal.
I can't find that they ever published such a paper.
Truly, truly abhorent. Western universities are at the forefront of our cultural decline and are brainwashing future generations with Marxist subversion. When innocent human life is regarded as expendable as expressed here, you have to wonder what the hell is coming next!? -_-
Marxism is evil and anti-humanity...and no matter how much it's worshipped within the Ivory Towers of arrogance, the fact remains evident in the trail of bodies and suffering Marxists leave in their wake.
Goddam it, as an agnostic this is why we need religion. Secular society has killed the notion of natural rights/ law and all that is left is a nihilistic void and death cult. John Locke would be ashamed.
kestrel9 ago
Marxists are the societal alchemists, they have transformed Sanctity of Life into Sanctity of Pronouns. 'Safe but rare'...(anyone remember that lie?) into 'Common and often' (in the future: Common and mandatory)
The philosophers of infanticide are correct in their fundamental point that killing a baby in the womb or birth canal is no different than killing a baby outside the birth canal. We are an infanticide promoting nation. All honest abortion advocates believe exactly what they said (that killing it inside or out is the same, not the notion of personhood).
I know of at least two (maybe three) hard left feminists who don't see anything wrong with admitting that mothers can kill their babies inside the womb. One publically advocates that right to murder the baby outside the womb, even days or weeks later, and not for health reasons...just because. No questions asked, they have a right to murder, any objections based on personhood of the baby is irrelevant to them. So the progression has continued...'it's not a person, it's a blob of tissue mass...it's a person only if he/she is viable outside the womb...it's a person if he/she can manage to escape the birth canal free and clear...he/she is a person but not worth having...he/she is not a person, just F-ing kill it and get on with your life!'
But even those mothers of death wouldn't go as far as to claim the baby isn't a person with rights. Like the Lacy Peterson case, one can go to jail for murdering a baby. The mothers of death reserve that murder privilege for the mother and no one else. But what these medical ethics professors are saying implies so much more. "No personhood" indicates no killing of persons. In that point of view, a mother, or a stranger on the street, could bash a newborn's skull in with a Bikelock and it wouldn't be murder. They could then hang that baby on the wall to decorate their home or sell it as art in to an Art Gallery and it would 'meh', whatever floats your boat.
Where the Marxist aberrations of nature are incorrect is in assuming that it's up to them to define personhood.
"“We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.” As such they argued it was “not possible to damage a newborn by preventing her from developing the potentiality to become a person in the morally relevant sense”. The authors therefore concluded 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”. "
"They argued: “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.” “We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.” As such they argued it was “not possible to damage a newborn by preventing her from developing the potentiality to become a person in the morally relevant sense”. The authors therefore concluded 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”.
THAT is the most chilling part...that is the view that is being pushed worldwide. One more tiny step and the so called 'experts' will be the ones to attribute 'personhood' only to those people they find relevant to themselves to feed the infant Totalitarian Global society that is being nurtured as we speak. It will grow into the monster that feeds on human sacrifice, and it won't be just for babies anymore.
KosherHiveKicker ago
Zionist Jews - How To Kill Goyim Children And Families,, Influence People
Oy Vey
fartyshorts ago
Note that this was in 2012: http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411 / https://web.archive.org/web/20170425155913/http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411 / https://archive.is/9nqVV
Still available elsewhere as well (on request / paid): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305713125_Partial-Birth_and_After-Birth_Abortion
Another one by him: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alberto_Giubilini/publication/263904695_Euthanasia_What_is_the_genuine_problem/links/0deec53c4f3c16be7e000000/Euthanasia-What-is-the-genuine-problem.pdf
fartyshorts ago
Her response afterwards: http://www.ibtimes.com/dr-francesca-minerva-after-birth-abortion-article-defended-after-death-threats-419638
Vic138 ago
Notice how if the sentence is reversed it takes a whole different meaning:
"Abortion is no different than killing babies."
rooting4redpillers ago
Yes, and the JME editor noticed that too. From the article::
I can't find that they ever published such a paper.
Amino69 ago
Truly, truly abhorent. Western universities are at the forefront of our cultural decline and are brainwashing future generations with Marxist subversion. When innocent human life is regarded as expendable as expressed here, you have to wonder what the hell is coming next!? -_-
kestrel9 ago
Upvoat if I could.
kestrel9 ago
Marxism is evil and anti-humanity...and no matter how much it's worshipped within the Ivory Towers of arrogance, the fact remains evident in the trail of bodies and suffering Marxists leave in their wake.
acme2011 ago
They are totally trying to normalize child sacrifice!
InOtherNews ago
You see that one of the authors of the After-birth article was Francesca MINERVA. Minerva -
As Minerva Medica, she was the goddess of medicine and doctors
Tanngrisnir ago
Goddam it, as an agnostic this is why we need religion. Secular society has killed the notion of natural rights/ law and all that is left is a nihilistic void and death cult. John Locke would be ashamed.
PizzagateBot ago
Hi! I created the following archive link(s) for this voat submission:
WARC files are created with https://webrecorder.io/
WARCs can be viewed offline with WARC replay tools like https://github.com/webrecorder/webrecorderplayer-electron
Final WARC will be created after 1 week from posting.
Let me know if you would like to see a !RemindMe function.
PizzagateBot ago
Hi! I used Google to find related Voat posts using the URL(s) in your post and created the following link(s):