Posted on 09/12/2006 4:28:08 PM PDT by wagglebee
PRINCETON, September 12, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a question and answer article published in the UK's Independent today, controversial Princeton University Professor Peter Singer repeats his notorious stand on the killing of disabled newborns. Asked, "Would you kill a disabled baby?", Singer responded, "Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole."
People who oppose Singer's position have maintained that Singer is the logical extension of the culture of death and that society will eventually embrace his stance if there is no shift to the culture of life. Alex Scadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition commented to LifeSiteNews.com about Singer saying, "at least he's consistent." In fact, Singer himself uses the abortion debate to justify his murderous stance.
"Many people find this shocking," continued Singer, "yet they support a woman's right to have an abortion." Concluding his point, Singer said, "One point on which I agree with opponents of abortion is that, from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the foetus and the newborn baby."
Singer's position, similar to the culture of death, is that there is no inherent dignity in man, there is no sanctity of human life. Man deserves no special treatment since, Singer rejects that man was created in the image and likeness of God.
Asked about the choice between killing 10 cows or a human, Singer said he would kill the cows, but not because they were of less value, but because humans would mourn the death more. "I've written that it is much worse to kill a being who is aware of having a past and a future, and who plans for the future. Normal humans have such plans, but I don't think cows do. And normal humans have family and friends who will grieve their death in ways more vivid and longer-lasting than the way cows may care about other cows. (Although a cow certainly misses her calf for a long time, if the calf is taken from her. That's why there is a major ethical problem with dairy products.) If I really had to make such a decision, I'd kill the cows."
Schadenberg commented saying, "Once again Singer is making distinctions between human beings he would consider normal and those he would consider not normal, thus he is deciding who is a person and who is not. Non-persons are allowed to be killed." The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition leader concluded, "even though Singer does not like to be compared to the Nazi's especially since his parents died in the Holocaust, his philosophical position is identical to what the Nazi's proposed. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is primarily concerned for the lives of people with disabilities and other vulnerable persons."
See the whole interview:
http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article1466409...
Wonder if he is related to Hilter...for sure he would have had a principal position in the Nazi party.....
Mmm, yes, it has been that long since they were teens :-) Fortunately, I was kidding. I do hear from them now and then. Some of them.
:-)
I think he loathes God. I think they're all in rebellion in one way or another, loathing God for getting in their way, or for not handing them paradise on a platter, or even for not being there. They try to usurp God's throne with earthly power, but it always crumbles.
Despising God's creatures is derivative. They hate their fellow humans, for we are all children of God. They hate life itself, God's gift to each of us. They are the historical pessimists. Their view of life is painted in shades of black. They peck at everything good, for it is a reflection of God and His creation. We see them do this every day.
They never learn that, when you make war on God, you lose.
*************
Excellent point. You're right.
Thanks very much.
Singer's mother had Alzheimer's disease, which rendered her, in Singer's system, a "nonperson". He is quoted as saing, "I think this has made me see how the issues of someone with these kinds of problems are really very difficult" (Singer's mother died about 5 years ago.)
There may be hope for his conversion; lket's abandon him. I'm going to close my eyes and fold my hands on the keyboard right now. Let's pray.
I am somewhat confused, Singer has stated that his mother had Alzheimer's, but he has also said that his parents were killed in Auschwitz. Now obviously these can't both be true -- but is it possible that neither is true? Maybe Singer just made the whole thing up, thinking that people wouldn't identify him as the Nazi he is because his parents were killed at Auschwitz and then trying to get sympathy for his Nazi beliefs by saying that his mother's Alzheimer's made her a "nonperson."
His parents immigrated from Vienna to Melbourne in 1938; that's easy to verify. He must have said that his grandparents and other relatives died in the Holocaust.
I thought I remembered seeing where he claimed his parents died in the Holocaust. In any event, Singer's beliefs are totally consistent with those of Hitler, Eichmann and Mengele, to call him a human being is a real stretch as far as I am concerned.
That's the bottom line: Singer is, in fact, vigorously supporting one of the main tenets of Naziism.
As a Father of a boy with hemophilia, a boy who is three merit badges short of Eagle Scout, I think that Professor Singer is morally disabled and should be dealt with accordingly.
Pro-Life PING
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
He gets that one right at least, and he's honest about it. More than can be said for most abortion proponents.
Groningen Protocol in Action
Didn't everyone see the blankness during Schiavo?
If this country could starve a woman to death for a week and a half... to allow that, we're finished to say the least.
Don't you notice how a certain party attracts to death and terrorists that kill, in spite of their "hate of religion".
Tells me all I need to know.
"Singer is a supreme Darwinist. This kind of horrific thinking is its natural ourworking."
"Wow. That's quite a leap."
Agreed. Just sweep up all the people with whom you disagree, and paint them with the same broad brush.
_____________________________________________________
It's not a leap since Singer himself has written "A Darwinian Left" in which he advocates a leftist Darwinist approach to human development...and ummm death.
Michigan Bill Would Require Cervical Cancer Vaccine for Girls
http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=295672
This man and his movement have influenced medical care here in the US. He has just one master.
I didn't think it was a leap at all. Though I would consider Singer to be a Utilitarianist.
It's even more "heated" over here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1700554/posts
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.