Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012
- Published on: 18 May 2012Newborns, really?Show More
This article is so shameful. Newborn babies feel,breathe,bleed, and learn. Once a baby is born, (I believe the moment it is conceived but that is a different discussion), it is a person with rights. Who are you or their parents to take away their opportunity to make a contribution to the world? No one took away this author's opportunities in life by killing them the moment after birth. No, no one had the right, no one even...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 18 May 2012Re:My opinion on controversial paper published about infanticideShow More
Establishing Personhood A recent publication of modern philosophical thought by two ethicists from Melbourne, Australia, both with ties to Oxford University, Dr. Alberto Guibilini and Dr. Francesca Minerva's "Afterbirth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?" published February 23, 2012 in the Journal of Medical Ethics, takes Descartes founding principle of modern philosophical thought: "I think, therefore I am," to its log...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 18 May 2012Unfortunately, my prediction of 34 years ago was correct.Show More
In my senior year at Case Western Reserve University, I took a course on satiric writing. I wrote a paper responding to the Roe v. Wade decision, showing the logical result of proclaiming unborn babies were not human. Sadly, Minerva & Giubilini have fulfilled one of my predictions. Here is the paper from 34 years ago:
The Final Solution to Overpopulation
Of course, abortion is the best form of bi...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 18 May 2012Academic, ageist, immoral, or desperate for citation metrics?Show More
My first response is: this is sickening.
My second response is: this is one long attempt, disguised in pseudo- learned language and academic words, to justify and rationalise the killing of infants. The language, and the reputation of the journals in which it is published, are meant to blind us to the sheer immorality of what they propose. But with however much academic pomp they propose their theory, even a ch...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 18 May 2012Ask them firstShow More
Some people with very bad prognosis at birth and with a pack of bad diagnoses grow up to become relatively happy people. Some don't. There are many cases when fetuses that were presumed to have Down syndrome, apperaed healthy babies at birth. Courts try to avoid capital punishment and usually wait for years before executing people with death sentence because of possible errors. Still, sometimes (hovewer, rarely) truth com...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 18 May 2012Re:Re:A response to 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?I notice you don't have the Giubilina and Minerva -paper on line. No doubt you have publisher's remorse, and wish to sweep this horror under the rug. The paper would have been all right in a Nazi journal, perhaps edited by Dr. Mengele. It has no place in your precious, effete Journal of Medical Ethics The storm of criticism is richly deserved. If the authors are M.D.s, their degrees should be rescinded. God knows I wouldn't wan...Show MoreConflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 18 May 2012You b*Show More
I had to vomit after reading your article praising the murder of babies. I am the mother of 3 special needs children, two adopted from China. My children are a precious gift who enrich all the lives they touch. Which is a great deal more than I can say for you!!!! Just who do you think you are to decide life or death for another. Is your name God? Be thankful your parents let you live even though you have become the...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.