The Rat continues: That’s the logic of two Australian ethicists, who argue in the latest online edition of the Journal of Medical Ethics that if abortion of a fetus is allowable, so too should be the termination of a newborn’s life.
The abstract in the journal sums it up quite nicely:
“Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue 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.”
Alberto Giubilini at Monash University and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne write that in “circumstances occur[ing] after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ should be permissible.”
Please read rest of article here: The Rat’s Right
I want to give credit as well to the source where I first read it. This is an article I found reposted by The Conservative Hill Billy. Sorry Hill Billy. I tried to cite you at the top and it wasn’t letting me.