By Chris deVinck
July 17, 2013 (NationalRightToLifeNews) Editor’s note. Mr. deVinck is author of one of the greatest books we ever reviewed at National Right to Life News—“The Power of the Powerless: a brother’s legacy of love.” He subsequently wrote the following essay for us, which appeared in the August 10, 1999, edition of NRL News. It is, in every sense, perfect for our year-long “Roe at 40” series in which we are running some of the best stories from NRL News going all the way back to 1973! Please share this with your friends, using your social networks.
On the front page of the New York Times this past April, there appeared a story about the impending appointment of Peter Singer, a controversial Australian bioethicist, who was to assume the prestigious Ira W. DeCamp Professorship of Bioethics at Princeton University’s Center for Human Values.
Professor Singer, according to the Times, is an outspoken advocate for euthanasia “not only for terminally ill adults,” the Times stated, “but also for severely disabled infants.” Not surprisingly, advocates for the disabled vigorously protested his selection.
The newspaper ran a helpful sidebar which quoted from Professor Singer’s influential textbook, Practical Ethics. One minute is all that is needed to understand why the protesters were so angry: “Killing a disabled infant,” Singer writes, “is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.” Continues…