Here we go again. Just when I thought we could all concentrate on sorting out our pensions (again), along comes a “medical ethicist” with a gem of an idea: get those medics to kill babies.
“Kill babies” not being the basically accurate but “insensitive” description of abortion utilised by prolife activists, but actually to kill living, newborn babies.
Quite why this is needed is not clear, from press reports of Australian/Italian hottie ethicist Francesca Minerva’s magnum opus (with co-author Alberto Giubilini) in the satirically titled Journal of Medical Ethics, which, inevitably, is published by the parent group of the dreaded pc-bible British Medical Journal. The esteemed JoME is edited by notorious fellow..er..ethicist, and noted eugenicist Julian Savulescu, who has plenty of past form.
If we’re going to be really petty, and I am, it’s amusing to note that judging by their names, our ethical trio are genetically from countries with historically strong fascist traditions. You can take the boy out of Bucharest, but…etc etc.
Interestingly, I do sort of agree with one aspect of Fran and Al’s thinking, in that they equate the foetus with the neonate, but here’s a few quotes:
“both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons”
“the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant”
“adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people”.
By agreeing with them, I mean that like Will Heaven in the Telegraph, it seems logical that if you can abort foetuses you should be able to kill babies, as there actually isn’t a lot of difference. It’s not as if a neonate can feed itself. In fact, if you’re happy to bump off the more dependent members of society, that would take in the elderly, a lot of people in wheelchairs, confused people, possibly people on Jobseekers’ Allowance and so on.
The concept of a potential person is fascinating too. Who decides when they’ve achieved their potential? Sounds like another job for us doctors.
I don’t like invoking Godwin’s Law so easily, but there is a whiff of the camps about this one. My personal take on this, if I enthusiastically embrace Fran and Al’s uber-moral relativism, is that it could stretch to include smug, lazy, stupid academics masquerading under the title of ethicists. They definitely seem like a drain on society, probably can’t feed themselves and many of them are downright ugly.
Hilariously, Julian is hurt that people have taken offence with the rigorous intellectual discussions that he publishes, and has been complaining about “personally abusive correspondence…..threatening their lives and personal safety“. Bless.
The Knife has previously posted on how he gets sick of being appointed as an executioner every time the whole tired Dignitas/euthanasia/abortion debate gets dragged out by tossers like this.
However, in the case of these parasitic ethicists, I’m prepared to shoulder that burden.