Involuntary Euthanasia?, Who decides which life is valuable? Options

[Gomer]

There is an interesting discussion in Australia sparked by a couple of academics who have postulated that if a parent decides that they are no longer willing to spend the time or money to raise their child then they should be legally allowed to have that child killed. The debate naturally has extended to allowing the same principle to the mentally deficient, the elderly and anyone else that is deemed as not being valuable.

"Philosopher and medical ethicist Francesca Minerva argues that killing a newborn is little different to aborting it in the womb
Even a healthy baby could have its life snuffed out if the mother decides she can't afford to look after it, Dr Minerva suggested
Anti-abortion vicar: 'If infanticide is morally repulsive, then abortion is too'..."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-21...l#ixzz1nugnpMnP


"...KILLING newborn babies should be allowed if the mother wishes, Australian philosophers have argued in a prestigious journal.

Monash University's Alberto Giubilini and the University of Melbourne's Francesca Minerva say that a foetus and a newborn both lack a sense of life and aspiration..."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/kill...9-1226286900558

[Nitaibhangra]

The most notorious historical example for Euthanasia was Nazi Germany .
Dr. Mengele is well known to have engaged in this practice , and his " example " has inspired countless followers to this day :
I would double check on the influences and ideology these philosophers in this article are following .

It seems the Nazi ideology is spreading around the globe and getting new adepts day to day .
I smell a rotten fish ...

" In August 1944 Dr. Karl Brandt, Hitler's personal physician, was appointed Reich Commissioner for Sanitation and Health, ranked as the highest Reich authority. He was authorized to issue instructions to the medical organizations of the government, to the party, and the armed forces, in the field of health. He participated in the euthanasia program, which involved the systematic execution of the aged, insane, incurably ill, or deformed children by gas or lethal injections in nursing homes, hospitals and asylums. They were regarded as 'useless eaters' and a burden to the German war machine. "

Source : http://www.auschwitz.dk/doctors.htm

[ras]

There is an interesting discussion in Australia sparked by a couple of academics who have postulated that if a parent decides that they are no longer willing to spend the time or money to raise their child then they should be legally allowed to have that child killed. The debate naturally has extended to allowing the same principle to the mentally deficient, the elderly and anyone else that is deemed as not being valuable.

Any mention of the 'worthless as parents'? Maybe the mom, dad who raises child that thinks 21 y/o saggy pants fashion is cool could die too.

[Gomer]

The most notorious historical example for Euthanasia was Nazi Germany .

Germany became synonymous with eugenics during WWII. The history of the science goes back much further....

"Eugenics was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century.[5] The First International Congress of Eugenics in 1912 was supported by many prominent persons, including: its president Leonard Darwin, the son of Charles Darwin; honorary vice-president Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty and future Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; Auguste Forel, famous Swiss pathologist; Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone; among other prominent people.[6] The National Socialists' (NSDAP) approach to genetics and eugenics became focused on Eugen Fischer's concept of phenogenetics[7] and the Nazi twin study methods of Fischer and Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

The latest rationalisation for eliminating those perceived as being a burden is the need to reduce the population of the planet. Odd how hardly anyone mentions IVF in this regard.

In my opinion, it is better to assume the sanctity of the soul rather than to intellectualise that we are no more than animated tissue.