Bioethicists devoid of all ethics
It is frightening to realize that two “bioethicists” can be so coldhearted (“Premeditated murder of newborns,” Commentary, March 13). To think they call themselves ethicists. Clearly, from what they write, theorize and/or philosophize, these people have no ethics, morals or anything remotely associated with true human logic.
Then there is the esteemed Nobel laureate James Watson, who, of all things, unraveled “the mystery of DNA,” the essence of human life, writing recently in Prism magazine, “If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice only a few are given under the present system. The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose and save a lot of misery and suffering. I believe this view is the only rational, compassionate attitude to have.”
What he writes is neither rational nor compassionate — especially from the baby’s perspective — which no none seems to care about. One would think that an intellectual giant of the magnitude of Mr. Watson, who discovered the complexity of human life and thus should clearly understand it, would never espouse such a frightening idea as a basis for justifying murder.
This reminds me of Romans 1:21-23: “For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.”
I find this thinking so disturbing, but I am even more troubled by the fact that this horrific scenario is given so much credence by otherwise rational people and held up as a legitimate standard for us to consider. It is as heinous and evil as anything devised by Hitler. NELSON B. GUTIERREZ Centreville