Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva have published a paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics arguing that it is acceptable to abort children after they have been born.  I haven’t been able to access the article, because 1 day access costs $30.00, but a few points need to be kept in mind.

First, everyone who argues for abortion does so only because their parents did not get an abortion.  In essence, they are saying their own existence doesn’t really matter.  We have no reason to take seriously those who believe their own existence is of no real consequence.

Second, pro-life advocates have often argued that “the few inches from the birth canal to the outside world can’t be what constitute someone as human.”  Giubilini and Minerva are taking this argument very seriously, but in the opposite direction.  Rather than affirming personhood in the womb as the pro-life advocate does, they are denying personhood outside of the womb.

Third, if Giubilini and Minerva are materialists (and I don’t know if they are), there is no reason why matter outside the womb should be morally irrelevant that does not also constitute Giubilini and Minerva as morally irrelevant.

Fourth, we are now seeing, in full force, the absurdity of ethics apart from God.  We can’t even define personhood, yet there are “people” with “rights” which now include denying that young members of the species are “people” with “rights.”  If this weren’t so serious, it would almost be funny.  Apparently a fully-formed, breathing, human baby is not a person.  That’s odd, what is he or she then, a duck?  A squirrel?  A frog?  A baby is definitely a human something, but apparently he or she can’t be a human person.

Fifth, Kant said we should only act in a way that we could universally will everyone else to act.  If we universally willed abortion, the human species would go extinct.  The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines genocide as “preventing births within a group.”  Certainly preventing births among humans is species genocide.

Finally, this is pretty much pointless.  Arguments for abortion are not driven by rationality, they are driven by a sin-clouded mind.  Abortion is simply the working out of a consistent secular worldview wherein everyone does what is right in their own eyes.  Van Til and Bahnsen were right:  There is no neutrality, and autonomy is just rebellion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s