|
Post by hefferman1 on Mar 3, 2012 12:04:10 GMT -5
Ethicists argue for acceptance of AFTER BIRTH ABORTIONS. www.theblaze.com/stories/ethicists-argue-in-favor-of-after-birth-abortions-as-newborns-are-not-persons/The line that scares the crap out of me is "Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life: spare embryos where research on embryo stem cells is permitted, fetuses where abortion is permitted, criminals where capital punishment is legal." Think about that, "being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life." In her writing she talks about children being born with Downs Syndrome and it might be in the best interest of the parents to not allow the child to develop into a person. This is the same argument the Nazis used to kill thousands of people in Germany, and it lead to the murder of millions of Jewish people.
|
|
|
Post by safetalker on Mar 3, 2012 20:38:58 GMT -5
That is because we are not considered as people here is an excerpt from Title 7 USC USC TITLE 7 (AGRICULTURE), CHAPTER 6, SUB-CHAPTER II, § 136 Definitions (d) Animal The term “animal” means all vertebrate and invertebrate species, including but not limited to man and other mammals, birds, fish, and shellfish. We are breeding stock to make things that can be sold to pay the Debt.
|
|