In a horrific article in the journal of Bioethics, a Norwegian bioethicist argued that parents may have the right to kill their infant children, even after they are born.
Joona Räsänen argued that pro-life arguments against infanticide “are not convincing” and “cannot show infanticide to be immoral.”
[T]here might be an argument that gives, for example, the genetic parents a right to kill (or leave to die) their newborn infant even if the infant has a right to life. For example, it might be argued that people have a right to their genetic privacy and having the newborn infant in the world that carries the genetic material of the genetic parents violates their right to genetic privacy. Put another way: the fetus does not have a right to the genetic material of her parents.
So a new far-left argument for infanticide is that a child may somehow violate its parents’ “right to privacy.” If only these liberals would stand up for the right to privacy on hundreds of other issues, perhaps this argument could be considered sincere. Rather, it is the ranting of a deranged lunatic.
The real unanswered question is this: If parents have a right to “genetic privacy,” what would stop them from killing adult children? Can a 90-year-old grandmother kill her 60-year-old son in the name of “genetic privacy?”
Today, we call that murder. Tomorrow, it would be legal if far-left fantasyland academics had their way.
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.