Consistency in the Movement

A fairly recent article showed what I would say is a consistent pro-choice/pro-abortion position, one also espoused by Princeton University Ethics professor Peter Singer.  If the argument for abortion is that the baby’s life “isn’t viable” and the baby can’t take care of himself, what’s the difference between a six month old child and the baby in the womb, from an ethical stance?  Link below shows some “experts” being consistent in their ethical framework.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

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.”

via Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say – Telegraph.

Abortion is murder because God says the life is His, and in His image.  What makes it wrong isn’t our scientific knowledge of when life begins (though that supports it) it’s that God says it’s wrong and His image is on that child, even in the womb.

Oh, and for an example of folks trying to serve both baby and mother with excellent Gospel centered maternity care, check out The Morning Center!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s