A voice for the unborn
“We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life – the unborn – without diminishing the value of all human life … there is no cause more important.” – Ronald Regan
There seems to be a drastic decline in the value of human life. The lives of innocent children and the unborn are no exception. This is evident from the following report of a testimony given in trial in Trinidad: “He also told of a failed attempt to kill her because there was a child with her but said if he was offered more money he would have also killed the child” [www.trinidadexpress.com]. The value of human life in its earliest stages is diminishing even more in light of research which deliberately destroys one human being so that another may benefit immediately. Michael Kinsley, in favour of stem-cell research, writes: “An embryo feels nothing, thinks nothing, cannot suffer and is not aware of its own existence.” Peter Singer of Princeton University takes this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, “Human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons.” Therefore, “the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.”
In, “Should the Baby live?”, Mr. Singer writes, “When we kill a newborn, there is no person whose life has begun. When I think of myself as the person I am now, I realize that I did not come into existence until sometime after my birth.” Mr. Singer completely misses the mark. If he did not exist until sometime after “his birth”, in what sense is the birth his? The only way he can make sense is to admit that he existed (in the embryonic stage) before birth. One cannot help but wonder what the proponents of stem-cell research or abortion would say if they were the ones about to be killed. The sad irony is, people who defend these practices are alive and kicking.
There seems to be a drastic decline in the value of human life. The lives of innocent children and the unborn are no exception. This is evident from the following report of a testimony given in trial in Trinidad: “He also told of a failed attempt to kill her because there was a child with her but said if he was offered more money he would have also killed the child” [www.trinidadexpress.com]. The value of human life in its earliest stages is diminishing even more in light of research which deliberately destroys one human being so that another may benefit immediately. Michael Kinsley, in favour of stem-cell research, writes: “An embryo feels nothing, thinks nothing, cannot suffer and is not aware of its own existence.” Peter Singer of Princeton University takes this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, “Human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons.” Therefore, “the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.”
In, “Should the Baby live?”, Mr. Singer writes, “When we kill a newborn, there is no person whose life has begun. When I think of myself as the person I am now, I realize that I did not come into existence until sometime after my birth.” Mr. Singer completely misses the mark. If he did not exist until sometime after “his birth”, in what sense is the birth his? The only way he can make sense is to admit that he existed (in the embryonic stage) before birth. One cannot help but wonder what the proponents of stem-cell research or abortion would say if they were the ones about to be killed. The sad irony is, people who defend these practices are alive and kicking.
