The “Fourth Trimester” Abortion

Posted By on March 24, 2012

For years we’ve been told that the “slippery slope” line of argumentation is a logical fallacy, but recent events are demonstrating that it’s not far to go from contraception to abortion to infanticide in a single generation:

While political liberals are busy advancing the fiction of a conservative “war on contraception,” their counterparts in academia are promoting a lie at the opposite end of the reproductive continuum. The anti-life crowd is giving new life to arguments for infanticide.

In a much-discussed recent article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva take the “pro-choice” argument to its logical and loathsome end. They argue that “when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.”

They propose to call the practice “after-birth abortion” rather than “infanticide” to stress their belief that the moral status of a newborn baby is no different from that of an unborn baby.

Read the rest on the American Spectator site. Can anyone really register surprise at this? It has been inevitable from the start. As Rome went, so goes Western Civilization.

About The Author

Mrs. Chancey is the mother of 12 children, all of whom keep the household bubbling with life, learning, and levity. Jennie co-founded LAF in 2002 with Lydia Sherman and has been delighted to hear from women all over the world who enjoy their femininity and love to cultivate womanly virtues.


2 Responses to “The “Fourth Trimester” Abortion”

  1. Jesscupcakek says:

    Actually, the article can be viewed as very pro-life. The last quoted paragraph makes the point: if the moral status of an unborn baby is the same as a newborn baby, pro-choicers shouldn’t have a problem with ‘after-birth abortion’ but they do (and really, who would be okay with that?). If a newborn and unborn baby are morally the same, then killing either of them, whether in the womb or out is ethically very wrong. Somewhere in the article they make a great point by noting that if infanticide can be called an ‘after-birth abortion’ then the flip side is that an abortion can be called (I don’t remember their term so I’ll just use the following) ‘in utero infanticide’ which is really what it is after all!

    The authors got tons of death threats because people didn’t really understand this. Somewhere I read that one of the authors even commented that the article can definitely be viewed as pro-life because of almost exactly what I mentioned above. It really gets you thinking! If everyone can agree that killing a newborn is absolutely wrong and newborns and unborn babies are the same based on the authors’ criteria (in the article; don’t remember all of it) then everyone should agree by the same logic that killing an unborn child is just as repugnant.

  2. Very good point, Jess. I really hope this pushes people to open their eyes and understand that life is life–inside the womb or outside of it.

%d bloggers like this: