Infanticide
Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 9 viewsNotes
Transcript
Infanticide by defined is; the crime of killing a child within a year of birth. It is the practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth. It is also a person who kills an infant, especially their own child.
In our previous class we talked about abortion early every argument that could be made against abortion could also be made against Infanticide (and euthanasia.)
Stanley J. Grenz and Jay T. Smith say this in their book, In Pocket Dictionary of Ethics (p. 60).
“The killing of an infant either by the parents or with their express permission. Although infanticide was a common practice in the ancient Mediterranean world, it fell out of favor, largely due to the influence of Christianity. Ethicists today are in general agreement that infanticide motivated by malice is unethical. More controversial are those cases of infanticide that stem from an attempt to extend mercy to a child suffering extreme pain or a low quality of life (see life, quality of) because of some infirmity or physical or mental disorder” Stanley J. Grenz and Jay T. Smith
In this course we have discuss the necessity of why it is important to define our value and principles. When we have clear and defined values and principles we draw lines and stand firm when face moral dilemmas.
Wayne Grudem says, “if it is justified to kill an unborn human because the fetus is not wanted, might be deformed, or might not be able to function fully as a human being, then by the same logic some infants and most of the elderly may be eliminated for the same reason. Thus, if abortion is morally right, then so is infanticide and euthanasia for the same reasons. In short, "today, no unwanted baby; tomorrow, no unwanted infant or grandparent."’
With the increasing lack of desire to define when life begins become the evil desire to determine if a life is valuable enough to live.
Governor Ralph Northam said this in 2019, “If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,”
Fact checker would say that his comments where taken off of context and where talking about “nonviable fetus.”
The idea that a parent(s) discovers at 30 weeks that the fetus (baby) was not viable and would die shortly after birth.
Abortion and infanticide are deeply connected.
Abortion is literally Pre-natal infanticide or foeticide!
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volumes I–XV (Pre-natal Infanticide) says this,
Among the ancient philosophers and medieval theologians there was considerable discussion as to when the human embryo could be said to possess human life. This is no longer a question among modern biologists. At the very moment of conception a human being comes into existence. At any time after this the deprivation of life in this living matter, if done deliberately, is murder.
Knowingly or unknowingly his answer attempts to justify both Pre-natal infanticide and post-natal infanticide. The life is not viable, “The infant would be delivered… kept comfortable… be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother”
Choosing if the child lives or dies will not be in the hand of man, not God.
4 “The Spirit of God has made me, And the breath of the Almighty gives me life.
Here are two arguments for both abortion and infanticide
Unable to interact with other and survive on their own, Sentient
Grudem says, “A newborn is still unable to talk or perform moral actions. This is also true for a person in a coma due to a serious accident. Moreover, a newborn infant is surely unable to survive without its mother. (Some people would say that most junior high students are unable to survive without their mothers!) Such an objection is not persuasive.”
As a Christian we know miracles happen. People come out of comas and even nonviable fetus become viable.
2. Birth Defects
The question becomes should parents have the right to spare children from suffering? Moreover should parents have the right to spare themselves from watching their children suffer and face the suffering of being a caretaker? Whether before or after the birth of the child.
Norman Geiler says this, “It is argued by many in favor of infanticide that the parents should have the first and initial right to make the choice about imperiled children.Thus, if the parents do not want the imperiled child, then the child should not be born.”
We must remember that there are MANY instances when a diagnosis of birth defects are given in error. There are time where a child is born normal after a diagnosis and some birth defects are small and unnoticeable.
THe potition of the Christian should be one of faith and truth.
11 The Lord said to him, “Who has made man’s mouth? Or who makes him mute or deaf, or seeing or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?
Randy Alcorn quotes an example of a medical school professor who presented the following case study and asked students what they would do:
The father had syphilis and the mother had tuberculosis. Of four previous children, the first was blind, the second died, the third was both deaf and dumb, and the fourth had tuberculosis. What would you advise the woman to do when she finds she is pregnant again?
One student answered, "I would advise an abortion." Then the professor said, "Congratulations. ... You have just killed Beethoven."
Example of Infanticide in the Bible
15 Then the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, one of whom was named Shiphrah and the other was named Puah; 16 and he said, “When you are helping the Hebrew women to give birth and see them upon the birthstool, if it is a son, then you shall put him to death; but if it is a daughter, then she shall live.”
16 Then when Herod saw that he had been tricked by the magi, he became very enraged, and sent and slew all the male children who were in Bethlehem and all its vicinity, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the magi. 17 Then what had been spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: 18 “A voice was heard in Ramah, Weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children; And she refused to be comforted, Because they were no more.”
19 “It was he who took shrewd advantage of our race and mistreated our fathers so that they would expose their infants and they would not survive.
Active infanticide, involves a procedure that actually takes the life of the infant.
Passive infanticide, simply allows an infant to die by withholding needed treatments.
Norman Geiler says this, “In the final analysis there is no real difference for the infant since it dies a preventable death.
He also adds, “In 1982, the Supreme Court in Indiana ruled that parents could permit their Down syndrome baby to starve to death. It is not an uncommon practice in hospitals to allow deformed or handicapped infants to die without food, water, or treatment. Others get a DR (do not resuscitate) order. A professor of pediatrics at the University of Wisconsin stated boldly, "It is common in the United States to withhold routine surgery and medical care from infants with Down Syndrome for the explicit purpose of hastening death." It is even more so today.
Closing arguments against Infanticide from Norman Geisler
Thou shall not Kill
“The arguments against infanticide are the same as those against homicide. The infant is an innocent human being. And it is morally wrong to intentionally kill an innocent human being.”
2. God is Sovereign over life
“Only God gave life (Gen. 1:21), and only God has the right to take life (Deut. 32:39; Job 1:21). Just because an infant is not fully developed does not mean it is not fully human.”
Mr. Geisler sums it up best by saying, “An infant human is a human by essence, not by accidental characteristics. Here, intentional infanticide is a morally culpable form of homicide.