On the recordMarch 7, 2012
On February 23, the Journal of Medical Ethics published an article, entitled, ``After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?'' The authors argue that an infant child can be killed since they do not have the same moral status as a ``person.'' They go even further to say that adoption is not always in the best interest of an unwanted child. The furor over this article has been immense. Unfortunately, the editors defend publishing this article on the basis that there should be reasoned engagement on the subject. This article may have the form of scholarly argument, but its substance is madness. The authors maintain that a baby can only be granted personhood through the recognition of other human beings. They fundamentally reject something that we all hold dear: that all men are endowed by their Creator with the right to life. A healthy amount of anger over this article is not only natural but also right. It is shocking and sad to see such destructive arguments given credence in a premier medical journal. ____________________
