wrong leftist names sound-a-like
Posted on 06/30/2015 4:51:44 PM PDT by Morgana
While pro-life advocates work to remove tax funded abortions, Princeton University bio-ethicist, Peter Singer says he doesn’t want his tax dollars to pay for disabled babies.
In a radio interview in April with WorldNet Daily’s Aaron Klein, Peter Singer argued it is “reasonable” for government or private insurance companies to deny treatment to severely disabled babies.
Singer is both an advocate for abortion as well as infanticide.
On his faculty page, under the heading: The Sanctity of Human Life, Singer openly argues for infanticide:
“Newborn human babies have no sense of their own existence over time. So killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living. That doesn’t mean that it is not almost always a terrible thing to do. It is, but that is because most infants are loved and cherished by their parents, and to kill an infant is usually to do a great wrong to its parents.
“Sometimes, perhaps because the baby has a serious disability, parents think it better that their newborn infant should die. Many doctors will accept their wishes, to the extent of not giving the baby life-supporting medical treatment. That will often ensure that the baby dies. My view is different from this, only to the extent that if a decision is taken, by the parents and doctors, that it is better that a baby should die, I believe it should be possible to carry out that decision, not only by withholding or withdrawing life-support – which can lead to the baby dying slowly from dehydration or from an infection – but also by taking active steps to end the baby’s life swiftly and humanely. “
The video below is from Life Dynamics’ monthly pro-life show Life Talk TV. VIDEO ON LINK
According to WND, asked whether he envisions denying treatment to disabled infants to become more common in the U.S. under the new health-care law, Singer replied: “It does happen. Not necessarily because of costs.”
He continued:
If an infant is born with a massive hemorrhage in the brain that means it will be so severely disabled that if the infant lives it will never even be able to recognize its mother, it won’t be able to interact with any other human being, it will just lie there in the bed and you could feed it but that’s all that will happen, doctors will turn off the respirator that is keeping that infant alive.
I don’t know whether they are influenced by reducing costs. Probably they are just influenced by the fact that this will be a terrible burden for the parents to look after, and there will be no quality of life for the child.
So we are already taking steps that quite knowingly and intentionally are ending the lives of severely disabled infants.
And I think we ought to be more open in recognizing that this happens
.
Singer later stated, “I don’t want my health insurance premiums to be higher so that infants who can experience zero quality of life can have expensive treatments.”
Not Dead yet petition Peter Singer
Disability Rights groups have called Singer’s views “bigotry” against the disabled and have launched a petition demanding the Princeton University professor resign over his outspoken support for euthanasia and infanticide.
I’m amazed that ass is still alive.
Why does this soul-less asshat get any attention whatsoever?
Reread your tag line...
The family, the church, the community....NEVER the government!
Because many people agree with him that other people’s lives are of no value. “Just enough of me, way too much of you.”
The left wants the unwanted to die and that includes anyone that disagree with them.
Not to worry.
Very special things will happen to folks like him following CW-II.
And since the libs don’t like the Constitution, we will make sure that we do not read the parts that have the words “...cruel and unusual punishment...”
We’ll be watching that SOB.
Very closely.
The state & local governments have always been tasked with providing aid to those who desperately need it. That is the way it should be. They can add a back stop that even private charity can not provide.
That is the essence of the 9th and 10th amendments. They are the responsibility of the private citizenry and the states, not the Federal Government.
No one should complain about local and state programs that legitimately help the truly needy. Those that can not help themselves. That includes babies, particularly disabled and ill babies. It also includes mentally ill and mentally retarded adults who need real ongoing help.
Just for everything else, tho? Illegals, able workers on welfare, SSI, ....
Just another eugenicist
Add the obamas and relatives vacation trips and other expenses like attire, security and of course white slaves. Then there is the cost that the cities and towns accrue when they appear.
Those are really necessities.
I repeat, family, church, community....NEVER the state.
Read your tagline to refresh your mind.
Does this ethicist think his tax dollars should pay for the lifestyles of 20 year deadbeats who refuse to work?
wrong leftist names sound-a-like
It was not started on good intentions. Good intentions were the disguise, money, power and control were the reasons.
The needy were cared for before the feds took over, it is the very reason they took over. There were many community charities, the feds counted them up, counted their coin, salivated over the amount, and took it over.
Read The Tragedy of American Compassion by Marvin Olasky
Disabled babies don’t want to pay for any part of Singer’s public subsidized salary.
Two problems. One, their criteria sounded logical to non experts, but did not correlate with disability in reality.
second problem? One criteria was economic and the intelligence as estimated by the doctors involved.
guess what? Most of the untreated kids who died were Black. Most of my time practicing in the US was with poor whites, Hispanics, and Amerindians... They ran into a lot of prejudice in referral hospitals...
and ironically, some of those most prejudiced were Pakistani Muslim docs...
So essentially Singer is saying don't treat black babies.
Which is why a lot of minorities won't sign living wills.
much of the kerfuffle over cops shooting too many blacks is astroturfed, but I bet if someone checked about excess minority deaths in hospitals they would be shocked.
I guess the past tense of “Singer” is “Sanger”. The etymology makes perfect sense to me.
Sorry, but by definition the State is the community. In a republic, we are the state. The state and local governments are the proper place for societies welfare standards and the encroachment by the Federal Government is the problem, not the fact of their existence. City, county and state funded hospitals and welfare institutions are as old as the American Republic. Older in some Eastern States. Bellevue Hospital was started as a government funded hospital in 1736. It was always chartered as a way to provide for those who where medically under served. City Hospital In Cleveland (now Metro General) was founded in 1837 and has always been a publicly funded safety net hospital for the infirmed and destitute. My mind is completely refreshed as in the fact that though rarely benevolent, is not never benevolent and benign is not always the best option for a society.
I don’t want tax dollars paying for abortions ya big dope!
Those who don’t wish to crush Peter Singer’s head between two large rocks should feel free to refrain from doing so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.