What has gone wrong with the world 2

[SweetPea]

Anyone read the Telegraph? I don't but this was flagged up elsewhere:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html

..... you couldn't make this stuff up!

[Nearly Sane]

Anyone read the Telegraph? I don't but this was flagged up elsewhere:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html

..... you couldn't make this stuff up!

It's a misuse of the word expert.

[SweetPea]

It's a misuse of the word expert.

Right on, Nearly. The article too, is written in a way that says..... because the experts are professors, this gives them authority.

[Nearly Sane]

Right on, Nearly. The article too, is written in a way that says..... because the experts are professors, this gives them authority.

which reads to me ad if the article is following an agenda to go done the route that expert opinion in general is problematic. Thus leads to the sort of anti vaccination nonsense.

[Rhiannon]

which reads to me ad if the article is following an agenda to go done the route that expert opinion in general is problematic. Thus leads to the sort of anti vaccination nonsense.

Agreed.

[SweetPea]

which reads to me ad if the article is following an agenda to go done the route that expert opinion in general is problematic. Thus leads to the sort of anti vaccination nonsense.

Well, it's not meant to. If 'Joe Bloggs' had been mentioned as the expert (with no title) would anyone listen?

[Nearly Sane]

Well, it's not meant to. If 'Joe Bloggs' had been mentioned as the expert (with no title) would anyone listen?

The article obviously doesn't agree with the conclusion so it isn't using 'expert' as a reason to believe, but rather to disparage the notion of expert.

[SweetPea]

At least this stuff is reported, and needs to be exposed. It's almost inconceivable that anyone would be contemplating such an idea.

[Rhiannon]

NS is right. This article takes an idea that is both absurd and abhorrent and then says it is a theory that 'experts' have. In other words, it sows the seed of the idea that 'experts' believe in things that are damaging to ordinary people. Read on though and it is apparent that they aren't 'experts' at all. See Michael Gove on 'experts' for an idea of how this can be missed by politicians.

[Nearly Sane]

NS is right. This article takes an idea that is both absurd and abhorrent and then says it is a theory that 'experts' have. In other words, it sows the seed of the idea that 'experts' believe in things that are damaging to ordinary people. Read on though and it is apparent that they aren't 'experts' at all. See Michael Gove on 'experts' for an idea of how this can be missed by politicians.

Note it also refers to a 'group' which implies something official when it's merely the two authors and the fact that thet have worked with the editor. It therefore implies that the editor agrees, when from the rest of the story, this isn't clear at all. Further without reading the the actual article,I am not clear if this is the actual proposal of the authors, or an effective thought experiment based on consistency of moral precepts.


It is as is noted in the article not a new idea, and follows generally from Peter Singer's analysis of utilitarianism. At base though the purpose of the article is to denude context and place any academic statement as no more correct than any other statement.

[Rhiannon]

Yes, it seems to be an exercise in 'if this, so then that'.

[Bubbles]

I thought it was quite shocking.

What one person suggests, another one carries out.

 

Babies are little persons with their own personality.

At only a few hours old, in hospital  one of my sons heard a champagne cork and managed to lift his head in an attempt to see what was going on, we were amazed at the time.

They are as fully human as any other person.

[Rhiannon]

Infanticide happens already.

[Bubbles]

Yes and it never used to be illegal.

however I don't think they knew how to deal with the baby blues or what caused it, now you can get help.

[Rhiannon]

Post natal depression is not a leading cause of infanticide.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes and it never used to be illegal.

however I don't think they knew how to deal with the baby blues or what caused it, now you can get help.

Not quite sure what you mean by it not being illegal and where you are saying that applied. It wasn't a specific crime in the UK till Victorian times (iirc) but it was still murder. The move to making it a specific crime was to avoud the death penalty since it was felt that a woman murdering her children was by definition not of sound mind. That said go back far enough and it was less likely to be enforced, but given infant mortality it was a lot harder to prove.

[SweetPea]

I thought it was quite shocking.

What one person suggests, another one carries out.

 

Babies are little persons with their own personality.

At only a few hours old, in hospital  one of my sons heard a champagne cork and managed to lift his head in an attempt to see what was going on, we were amazed at the time.

They are as fully human as any other person.

Agreed, Rose.

What is so frightening is at the moment this is a meme, but over time we have seen all too often memes become reality.... take for example transhumanism, now encroaching on society.

[ad_orientem]

Any deniers of the slippery slope out there still?

[Bubbles]

Not quite sure what you mean by it not being illegal and where you are saying that applied. It wasn't a specific crime in the UK till Victorian times (iirc) but it was still murder. The move to making it a specific crime was to avoud the death penalty since it was felt that a woman murdering her children was by definition not of sound mind. That said go back far enough and it was less likely to be enforced, but given infant mortality it was a lot harder to prove.

Yes I think you are right.

[Rhiannon]

In English law there's a definition of infanticide. However the article mentions disability and the child just not being wanted after delivery. And of course there is the killing of female babies found in some cultures.

[Nearly Sane]

Any deniers of the slippery slope out there still?

Yes, it's a fallacy. And I would be careful given that your god was keen in the old killing of infants thing, so you would be arguing that it started it.

[ad_orientem]

Yes, it's a fallacy. And I would be careful given that your god was keen in the old killing of infants thing, so you would be arguing that it started it.

You're deluded.

[Harrowby Hall]

You're deluded.

No, you are deluded.

Whose god was it that drowned everyone in the world except one family?

Whose god was it that killed the first-born in Egypt?

Whose god was it that permitted Herod to slaughter the innocents?

[Rhiannon]

No, you are deluded.

Whose god was it that drowned everyone in the world except one family?

Whose god was it that killed the first-born in Egypt?

Whose god was it that permitted Herod to slaughter the innocents?

It's all right because Jesus. That's why ad-o wears poly cotton.

[floo]

You're deluded.

You are deluded if you think the deeds attributed to the Biblical god are acceptable.