Two days ago, College Fix reported that pro-life activists say they are encountering more and more college students who believe in post-birth abortion. One even suggested that killing a child 4 or 5 years of age might be okay because the children are “not aware”.
While the article only deals with anecdotal and hearsay evidence, since abortion has become as normal as having a tooth extracted, late term abortion is being presented as a woman’s right and a woman’s choice, even if the baby is a moment away from birth. A natural progression for the extremists is a post-birth or 4th trimester abortion.
Even using the word “abortion” to refer to killing a born-alive baby is absurd and extreme, but it is the pro-lifers who are called extremists.
In July 2013 several students at George Mason University passed around a petition demanding 4th trimester abortions – the 4th trimester referring to after the baby is born.
A petition like that would have engendered ridicule ten years ago.
According to the Abortion Survivors Network there are an estimated 44,000 abortion survivors living in the country today. They were the lucky ones. So many more are not.
Recently two bioethicists, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, published a paper in the peer-reviewed the Journal of Medical Ethics, entitled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”
They claim that killing born-alive babies is no different than abortion.