Wednesday, February 29, 2012

JME editors defend publication of "After-birth abortion" paper

Further to my previous post, in a blog post yesterday, the editors of JME defended the publication of the paper following a "storm of opposition" (referring mainly to comments on The Blaze blog post), closing with:
...What the response to this article reveals, through the microscope of the web, is the deep disorder of the modern world. Not that people would give arguments in favour of infanticide, but the deep opposition that exists now to liberal values and fanatical opposition to any kind of reasoned engagement.
So, killing babies is a liberal value? As for "opposition to ... reasoned engagement", they got lots of reasoned response (eg. the National Catholic Register). They just cherry picked the angriest comments to justify their "defence". And there's a virtual tsunami of 'reasoned engagement' in the comment thread to the JME's own blog post - eg. this short one:
Savulescu is correct, our society gets overly hysterical and can't handle intellectual discussion on moral ethics. I long for a society where you could freely and calmly discuss genocide. Like, say, Germany 1933.


Halfwise said...

The term "newborns" is so darn vague. Why not allow termination of pregnancy and, er, "post-delivery entities" up to at least the point at which they become self-sufficient financially? That would be around age 25, the way things are trending.

Most cities would immediately experience a drop in their murder rates. Those other deaths? Ah, just "terminations of post-delivery entities," not murders at all.

Same with road deaths. Immediate statistical benefit, analogous really to still-births when you think of it.

While we are on the subject, at the far end of the age range sits another bunch of post-delivery entities who are not self-sufficient and might be an inconvenience. Yes, I am talking about old people. No reason to count them as living creatures either. Parasites at best, when you look at them through the lenses of the JME.

Quality of life for every human! And if you are an inconvenience, it is likely that you are not human.

Simple, really.

/Sarc off

JR said...

I had mixed feelings about that paper - ill, disgusted, sad, disbelief, outrage ...
How to respond?

Sarcasm's good. The authors deserve all they get.