College students begin to embrace idea of killing born children
by Kelli
Kristina Garza, spokeswoman for Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, a pro-life organization that often sets up anti-abortion displays on campuses along the West Coast, said her group also frequently encounters college students who accept infanticide.
“For those who are firmly for abortion, because they understand it kills a human being, it’s very easy for them to accept killing a human being after birth,” Garza said. “There is this notion that is common on campus, that it’s OK to kill babies because somehow we don’t become human until we are self aware.”
“A common number that is going around is 4 years old,” she adds.
As for the trend, Garza said there’s an explanation for it. For one, the arguments put forth by Peter Singer and other philosophers who support infanticide are given as reading assignments to college students.
Singer wrote in 1979 that “human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons … [therefore] the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.”
~ Mairead McArdle, The College Fix, October 29
[HT: Gerard Nadal, Susie Allen; photo via mutualresponsibility.org]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Does that mean it is okay to abuse, experiment upon, or neglect children before they become self-aware also?
Probably :(
Comments reminded me of an issue I heard about a couple decades ago:
http://www.differentdream.com/2011/03/can-you-imagine-infant-surgery-without-anesthesia/
There has been a major topic of addressing the problem of infants not being given anesthesia if they were having surgery. I saw a speaker in the 90s talk about how they worked to change this practice after the official pronouncements came out from the professional societies infant surgery should include anesthesia.
This is yet another line of evidence that “science” and “medicine” are moving TOWARD recognizing the capacities of peripartum children, which serves to make it more obvious that they are human, and deserve dignity, regardless of their ability to gather together and exercise political force.
Pro-abortion forces have to keep making up even more ludicrous defenses as these various issues march on in science and medicine.
A person who is pro-abortion has to decide, if you politely ask, whether they believe the killed human is actually a human, is not a human, or is in some transition morphing phase.
There are some who actually do take the position that the killed pre-born human was indeed a human. They use a range of arguments to support the killing of an innocent life.
How does Peter Singer know that babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping that they exist over time? Does he have a test for this? What if it is like locked-in syndrome?
“Does he have a test for this?” Well asked MoJoanne. A medical ethicist should have rigorous scientific methods and standards. Mr. Singer has no such rigorous methodology and comes across as I outlined in the thread on Nancy Fitzmaurice — euthanasia and infanticide proponents sound more and more like they are concerned less about relieving human suffering and more about relieving their own discomfort with disabled persons and babies who can’t communicate the same as we do.
Interesting point, MoJoanne. At my older sister’s first Christmas, she was about three months old. My parents had a snow globe of a snowman holding a balloon. When packing it away that January, they cracked it so that all the water leaked out and the balloon part no longer floated up at the top of the globe. But they kept it and put it out again the next year anyway. My sister looked at it the next Christmas and asked, barely intelligible, “where balloon?” She remembered that there had once been a balloon bloating over the snowman in the globe, and noticed. She missed it.
She does not remember that balloon now. If it were not for my mother to have heard her question and recounted it, no one would ever know that a baby had noticed and remembered such a thing. Who knows what they truly know and think?
A friend of mine did sign language with her daughter starting at maybe six or eight months. One night, a few weeks in, at bedtime, her daughter was upset and kept signing “heart,” over and over. My friend assumed it was just a baby being nonsensical, going through a rote motion perhaps. Then later on she realized that she had put a new tissue box next to the crib, since the old one had run out. The old one had had hearts on it and the new one did not. Her daughter, less than a year old, immediately noticed and missed the hearts. Kids, even babies, know more than we may think.
Our problem is the whole Culture of Death. It steals our children and teaches them to hate life.
There is a widespread class of persons who believe that killing is suitable solution to just about any sort of problem. They also love contraception, of course — but an unwanted child is an unwanted child, and killing the child is a desirable option.
The ones who indulge in self-destructive behaviors with a death wish — cutting, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, promiscuity…. these kids have grown up in the Culture of Death. It is all they have ever known. So it makes sense that they would read Singer under a teacher who praises his Nazi-like disregard for human life.
I think that for most people, accepting infanticide comes from arguing (even with themselves) from a point of accepting consequence-free sex as a given, rather than an end. I know a lot of people for whom it is as simple as: x number of women do not want to get pregnant, and actively take steps to minimize that risk, but still do; ergo, it is unfair to deny them an abortion. This was how I once felt, too. Abortion was just the (tragic) righting of a totally sucky, unfair situation, essentially.
From there, you can go one of two places. You can be asked what is different about killing a newborn, realize, “Hm, nothing really,” and be forced to re-evaluate your logical givens and conclusions. Or you can be asked what is different about killing a newborn, realize, “Hm, nothing really,” and conclude that it is thus okay to kill a newborn.
After all, it’s sad, and no one WANTS to do it, but it’s only “fair.”
The only ‘culture of death’ in society is that wrought by certain elements of certain religions.
“There is a widespread class of persons who believe that killing is suitable solution to just about any sort of problem.” – that simply isn’t true. It only applies to a relatively narrow band of people.
“They also love contraception, of course” – well that is widespread, including those whose faith teaches ‘no’.
“but an unwanted child is an unwanted child, and killing the child is a desirable option.” – least worst, not ‘desirable’.
“The ones who indulge in self-destructive behaviors with a death wish — cutting, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, promiscuity….” – self-destructive behavior =/= death wish.
“these kids have grown up in the Culture of Death. It is all they have ever known.” – which one?
“So it makes sense that they would read Singer under a teacher who praises his Nazi-like disregard for human life.” – there is nothing Nazi-like about it.
Hysterical exaggerations really don’t do your case a lot of good.
The only ‘culture of death’ in society is that wrought by certain elements of certain religions. – Rubbish. Because I say so.
“There is a widespread class of persons who believe that killing is suitable solution to just about any sort of problem.” – that simply isn’t true. It only applies to a relatively narrow band of people. -Nonsense. It is widespread. Because I say so.
“They also love contraception, of course” – well that is widespread, including those whose faith teaches ‘no’. – You mean that “culture of death” kind of faith you were mentioning above?
“but an unwanted child is an unwanted child, and killing the child is a desirable option.” – least worst, not ‘desirable’. Yes, killing is the least worst thing we could possibly do to another human. Because I say so.
“The ones who indulge in self-destructive behaviors with a death wish — cutting, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, promiscuity….” – self-destructive behavior =/= death wish. – Nonetheless, a cry for help. Because I say so.
“these kids have grown up in the Culture of Death. It is all they have ever known.” – which one? – All of them. Of course. Including those in the multiverse.
“So it makes sense that they would read Singer under a teacher who praises his Nazi-like disregard for human life.” – there is nothing Nazi-like about it. – Nonsense, because I say so.
Hysterical exaggerations really don’t do your case a lot of good. – Everyone who disagrees with “Reality” is “hysterical.” Because I say so.
Kinda fun being “Reality” for about 3 minutes.
“Kinda fun being “Real-stupid-ity” for about 3 minutes.”
.
Just suspend reason and accountability and indulge yourself in a self made fantasy in which you are the fairy goddess of whatever outcome suits your fancy of the moment.
“The only ‘culture of death’ in society is that wrought by certain elements of certain religions. – Rubbish. Because I say so.” – what, like Del did? Make the claim and provide zip to show why? Back up the originating claim.
“There is a widespread class of persons who believe that killing is suitable solution to just about any sort of problem. – that simply isn’t true. It only applies to a relatively narrow band of people. -Nonsense. It is widespread. Because I say so.” – like Del did? With nothing to back it up?
“They also love contraception, of course” – well that is widespread, including those whose faith teaches ‘no’. – You mean that “culture of death” kind of faith you were mentioning above?” – not the most serious one no. The lesser ones.
“but an unwanted child is an unwanted child, and killing the child is a desirable option. – least worst, not ‘desirable’. Yes, killing is the least worst thing we could possibly do to another human. Because I say so.” – and Rick Perry.
“The ones who indulge in self-destructive behaviors with a death wish — cutting, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, promiscuity…. – self-destructive behavior =/= death wish. – Nonetheless, a cry for help. Because I say so.” – I agree. But cry for help =/= death wish.
“these kids have grown up in the Culture of Death. It is all they have ever known.” – which one? – All of them. Of course. Including those in the multiverse.” – no no, which ‘culture of death’?
“So it makes sense that they would read Singer under a teacher who praises his Nazi-like disregard for human life.” – there is nothing Nazi-like about it. – Nonsense, because I say so.” – again, back up the original claim.
“Hysterical exaggerations really don’t do your case a lot of good. – Everyone who disagrees with “Reality” is “hysterical.” Because I say so.’ – not at all, just when extreme, exaggerated, all-encompassing comments are expressed as if they are universally recognized. Without any reasoning to back them up.
“Kinda fun being “Reality” for about 3 minutes.” – with a bit more effort you might be able to do it for longer. Imagine how enjoyable that would be :-)
“Kinda fun being “Real-stupid-ity” for about 3 minutes.”
Just suspend reason and accountability and indulge yourself in a self made fantasy in which you are the fairy goddess of whatever outcome suits your fancy of the moment.” – Is that what it takes? I guess you’d know since that’s the character you assume.
In case anyone’s still paying attention to this thread, I would just like to point out that there is some skepticism out there about this claim.
http://studentsforlife.org/honesty/
JDC: In case anyone’s still paying attention to this thread, I would just like to point out that there is some skepticism out there about this claim. http://studentsforlife.org/honesty
Well of course – ’twas obvious all along.