Friday, 2 March 2012

Incitement to murder:"but it's only theoretical"!

You really have to wonder sometimes at the highly selective view extreme secularists take of what is and isn't acceptable.

Academic freedom!

When it comes to criticising homosexuality or other forms of immorality, expressing a view that homosexual behaviour is sinful is these days viewed as "hate speech".

And at law of course, incitement to commit some crimes is indeed a crime.

But 'philosophers' advocating outright murder of newborns is, apparently, perfectly ok because it is "purely theroretical".  Indeed, the outraged responses to the article, according to the journal's editor, represent a threat to academic discussion and freedom!

Abortion and infanticide are equivalent

You may have read about the Melbourne academics - based at Monash and Melbourne Universities - who have come under attack over the last few days following the release of an article in an 'ethics' journal advocating that infanticide be allowed.

The article in question itself correctly concludes that killing newborns is morally equivalent to abortion.

The problem of course is the rationale it uses to reach that conclusion, namely that because the foetus and new-born allegedly 'cannot conceptualize' their life, it is ok to kill them if the child represents an inconvenience to the mother.

 No surprise that this view of "ethics" should come out of Melbourne - this is after all the State in which late term abortion is permitted.

And there shouldn't really be any surprise at this logical extension of the arguments for abortion - indeed a Canadian court recently accepted just this argument in an infanticide case.

Reversion to paganism

The real importance of the story, it seems to me, is that it provides yet more evidence of the unravelling of Western civilization. 

When Christianity was legalized in the Roman Empire, one of the first pieces of legislation Constantine's Christian advisors put up was a prohibition on infanticide, which back then was normally done by 'exposing' newborn infants at the whim of the father.

Now we are apparently more enlightened about it all - it is the decision of the mother, and should be done 'painlessly'.

Yes, I'm sure that makes all the difference in the world to the child denied a life.

10 comments:

HolyCatholicApostoli said...

Readers may be interested in the following article from the Ruth Institute:
"‘After-birth abortion’ is logically sound: that’s why it will boost the pro-life movement"

http://www.ruthblog.org/2012/02/29/after-birth-abortion-is-logically-sound-thats-why-it-will-boost-the-pro-life-movement/

Kate said...

Unfortunately I don't agree it will help the pro-life case.

It would be nice to think that people will be sufficiently outraged about killing babies to take the logical step backwards. But human nature just doesn't work that way.

All it actually does is provide a rationale for taking the next logical step.

Exactly the same tactics as the homosexualist movement has employed, shock as a prelude to normalisation...

Martin S. said...

Write to the Attorney General? Victoria Police? Worth a read of the statute.

Antonia Romanesca said...

Killing infants the minute they are born because they are unwanted by the mother or parents..? Done 'for the sake of the child also', no doubt! Plus this mooted by academics at Melbourne Uni., 'experts in ethics'..who are working at Australia's allegedly top and most prestigious sandstone university, a place many Year 12 students would give their eye teeth to attend...also this Killing Proposal is being mooted by Monash academics, who generally exert themselves to be as much like Melb Uni academics as possible but have regrettably missed out on the sandstone edifices and beauty of Newman College. ~~~ Just what path is our society going down, you have to ask, given that these notions have been given airtime in the media..?

Antonia Romanesca said...

Killing infants the minute they are born because they are unwanted by the mother or parents..? Done 'for the sake of the child also', no doubt! Plus this mooted by academics at Melbourne Uni., 'experts in ethics'..who are working at Australia's allegedly top and most prestigious sandstone university, a place many Year 12 students would give their eye teeth to attend...also this Killing Proposal is being mooted by Monash academics, who generally exert themselves to be as much like Melb Uni academics as possible but have regrettably missed out on the sandstone edifices and beauty of Newman College. ~~~ Just what path is our society going down, you have to ask, given that these notions have been given airtime in the media..?

Matthias said...

Nothing new .Peter Singer talked about this 20 years ago and Francis Schaeffer the protestant theologian and philosopher-called it then what it is now VICIOUS

Cardinal Pole said...

"When Christianity was legalized in the Roman Empire, one of the first pieces of legislation Constantine's Christian advisors put up was a prohibition on infanticide"

Where can I read more about that?

Kate said...

Someone else may be able to suggest a more extended account of this period of law reform, but a useful summary of the reforms carried out in the years 315-21 and the lead up to it can be found in Volume 1 of Warren Carroll's History of Christendom series (The Founding of Christendom) - he also provides some footnotes for further reading.

Cardinal Pole said...

Thanks for that information, Terra.

Cardinal Pole said...

Earlier today I remembered that a while ago I came across an article at Mr. Knight's on-line version of The Catholic Encyclopedia on Christianity's influence on civil law. Here's the reference for that article:

"Influence of the Church on Civil Law", section "Paternal authority (potestas paterna)",
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09066a.htm

(I would, however, still be interested to read any other information on the topic, especially on how that influence was brought to bear.)