I see.
Since the baby can't feed itself we can let it die of 'natural' causes?
That applies to every baby.
This is a consequence of Government Healthcare. They don't want to 'waste' the money on someone they deem as unable to be 'productive'.
Where will this end?
In a few years we could close down about 90% of nursing homes, dialysis clinics, transplant facilities. Just 'allow' them to die. Redirect the money toward AIDS patients ( an excluded group).
As anything else in our society, our rules and laws are built on precedent.
What starts as allowing severely disabled babies to die slowly morphs into more lax rules.
One example is the Medical Leave Act.
Remember when the argument was " We need to allow these people to take up to 3 months, unpaid, for medical or care purposes"?
Now the argument is that they should be paid during their leave.
And I'll bet they get it.
I do understand the "slippery slope" argument. But I also think that there are situations when inserting a feeding tube in a baby who is terminal is the wrong thing to do.
I think that God gave us the ability to discern which is right or wrong in these situations, and that we are not required to use any and all means necessary to prolong life.
The "slippery slope" can also go the other way. As medical advancements are made, more and more people's lives could be prolonged through artificial means. Is this why God gave us these techniques? And where do you draw the line?