I hate to interrupt a string of lighthearted cultural observations, sports references, and stories about awkward moments in the annals of entertainment history with something more serious—but here goes.
A fascinating journal article came to my attention a couple of weeks ago. The piece was remarkable in its content and unintentionally provided me with a helpful (if unnecessary) reminder about the current state of political discourse in the United States.
The paper, “After-birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?” appeared in the Journal of Medical Ethics on February 23rd. The title is appropriately suggestive of the subject matter. The crux of the argument advanced by authors Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva is that, since abortion is accepted (or at least legal) in many circumstances wholly unconnected to the health of the baby or the mother, and since a newborn baby has not yet achieved true “personhood,” it therefore follows that after-birth abortion—or, more properly, the killing of an infant—should be permissible in all cases where an abortion would also be permitted.
My initial reaction to the article was that it was perhaps a hoax—a “Modest Proposal”-style strawman created by someone on the right in an attempt to portray the frightening logical conclusion at the end of a slippery slope. This is not the case.
The manner by which I discovered this article is quite relevant. The piece popped up on my Facebook newsfeed along with some commentary by the conservative-leaning person who posted it, noting that this was how those on the left conceptualized the rights of the unborn (or, in this case, the newly born).
Outrage from pro-life folks who caught wind of the article has been widespread and powerful. They attack the viewpoint presented by Giubilini and Minerva as offensive, insensitive, or even unconscionable. I prefer to use different terminology.
Refreshing. Consistent. Intellectually honest.
I suppose I should note here that I would be vehemently opposed to any measure that allowed for what I consider to be infanticide. Put mildly, I do not agree with the conclusions drawn by the authors of this paper as to the morality of terminating the lives of infants. I nonetheless applaud them for having the audacity to publish it and for accepting the unfortunate consequences of doing so.
Continue reading →
SitCombat: 3/29/12
30 Rock has won an unprecedented four consecutive weeks of SitCombat. The Office had been red-hot for the middle part of the season, but a recent swoon has seen 30 Rock and Archer benefit from the Office’s decent but unspectacular run of late.
Can the Office use a repeat to take back the throne it held for much of the winter? Will 30 Rock triumph a fifth straight week?
This was SitCombat for March 29, 2012:
Continue reading →
Share this: