|Lilly, not yet viable.|
Simply put, they want to take the abortion arguments and extend them after birth, because babies really aren’t viable on their own and aren’t morally relevant. They argue that parents should have the right to terminate their born or unborn children for any number of reasons including money, health, inconvenience, and simply put, “want to”.
Sounds perfectly logical to me. I never could understand why you can kill them before but not after birth. What's the difference? So yeah, if we allow abortion I think that this is a-okay too based on those arguments--babies certainly aren't viable persons until they can feed themselves and are potty trained. (Although that whole they aren't "morally relevant" might be harder to prove on paper.)
So, maybe we should vote? At what age do human beings start 'counting' as human beings? When they can walk? When they can feed themselves? After potty training? When they get a job and contribute to the household good?
|Lilly, still making no relevant contribution|
to our family. Just a drain.
(Of course, think of all the car dancing and fantastic jokes I’d have missed out on, so maybe she’s not a great example.)
|Carter "Big Drain on Resources" Johnson|
|Elaina "We Should have Chosen|
One and Ditched the Other" Johnson
|Elise "I Can't Dress Myself, Much Less Make a |
Link to the article and another opinion: http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=37315