The nation was shocked at the arrest of a Philadelphia doctor and staff members for the murder of babies who were allegedly born via induced premature delivery, and then killed. The clinic also did late term abortions, including after viability.
Over at Secondhand Smoke, I ask an important question: How is what happened in Philadelphia morally different than what Peter Singer’s values would allow? (Peter Singer is the (in)famous Princeton bioethics professor who argues that a newborn infant is not a person, and thus can be killed in some circumstances.)
I extensively quote Singer on the issues of infanticide and late term abortion. Here is my answer:
Recapping: Singer supports late term abortion if the the reason to kill is “good,” which, considering his example cited [gender balancing a family], is a very low standard indeed. He strongly implies that a full term fetus has greater moral worth than a prematurely born baby. Besides, we are repeatedly told we have no right to judge a woman’s reasons. So, to answer my own question, other than technical issues of clinical procedures and sanitary methods, I can’t think of a single reason Singer’s values would not permit a “professionally” operated abortion/infanticide abattoir. And that should tell us all we need to know about Peter Singer’s values.
If you want details, hit the above link.