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...
"But then some animals are more equal than others and therfore some humans are less equal than some animals and should be treated as less important citizens and if you'd follow me into this chamber it will all be clear..."
Peter is one of the most evil men on planet earth. One wonders why lightening hasn't struck him yet. The problem is so many agree with him and revere him. Mostly liberal democrats of course, but also many in the medical profession have been brainwashed and desensitizes to death.
Well if it is just that simple let me give it a shot.... Ahem.
" Question: Should professor singer be allowed to live?"
"Not if it is in the best interest of society...." And whom is to decide what is in the best interest of society? Why not Free Republic? Seems like a perfectly acceptable authority in which to decide Dr. Singers value and usefulness....
That logic holds as much validity as Singers. I am wondering if he would like to live under such a decision making strategy?
[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."]
I wonder who raised Singer, if his parents died in the Holocaust - their jailers? Or maybe it was wolves.
I'd rather kill a cow than Peter Singer, the cow is much better to eat.
Vielen Dank. Das war was ich suchte.
"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.
I think SS-Totenkopfverbande would fit Singer well.
"He'll kill anyone!"
Anyone that can't defend themselves. I'd like to see him try to take out my eldest brother. Imagine a Mike Tyson sort of fellow up against a Gilligan (of Gilligan's Island) sort of fellow.
To prey on the defenseless and weak. Singer is a murderer.
Is he the reincarnation of Himmler?
...
Some should ask him how he'd feel about killing retarded adults.
More likely Eichmann or Mengele.
Why hasn't this total psychopath been locked away yet?
He would probably agree with it.
Oh those insightful "Progressives"... wanting to "progress" our society back to the times of the Spartans.
I have publicly debated Singer in years gone by.
He told me a good portion of his family were killed by the Nazis, then went on to preach philosophy straight from Hitler's mouth. Strange fellow!
I'm sure he would, BUT would he admit it?
If this guy had lived in the 30's&40's he would have performed experiments in Hitler's death camps.
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.