The bloodthirsty Princeton “bioethics” professor Peter Singer is at it again. This time, he took his class to a local hospital to show them premature infants. His thesis is that it is ethical to kill a baby when doctors predict he has a low chance of survival. Not an unborn baby, mind you, but one who has been born. And it’s treated as a valid subject, worthy of debate, at an Ivy League university. It’s coming, folks.
First there was abortion, then partial-birth abortion—which is essentially infanticide—and now full-blown infanticide. To the hospital’s neonatal medicine director’s credit, he rejected Singer’s arguments, but the damage had been done to the students.
“Is it ethical to keep a baby alive without the chances of it being healthy and able to go to public school, whether a special school or not, or whether it would hurt the baby and everyone involved?” Courtney Mazo ‘08 said on the bus ride to the hospital. “Who makes the decisions to keep going with care, and what do you do if the parents and doctors conflict? And when is it better to refuse care instead of doing everything you can?” But, she noted, with medical advances, premature infants can live longer. Other questions—such as cost of treatment and quality of life—nevertheless remain.