Argument: Abortions encourage infanticide

Issue Report: Abortion


Ronald Reagan, “Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation”, Human Life Review, Spring 1984 – “Late-term abortions, especially when the baby survives, but is then killed by starvation, neglect, or suffocation, show once again the link between abortion and infanticide. The time to stop both is now.”[1]

Peter Singer, Princeton ethicist, Practical Ethics, pp. 185-8, 1993 – “Suppose that a newborn baby is diagnosed as a haemophiliac. The parents, daunted by the prospect of bringing up a child with this condition, are not anxious for him to live. Could euthanasia be defended here?. . . When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infact has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him… It may still be objected that to replace either a fetus or a newborn infant is wrong because it suggests to disabled people living today that their lives are less worth living than the lives of people who are not disabled. Yet, it is surely flying in the face of reality to deny that, on average, this is so.”[2]