NEW YORK, Dec 9 (LSN)—Professor Steven Pinker of MIT denied encouraging infanticide (or neo-naticide as he calls it) last week. In response to letters from people concerned about his views, Pinker asserted his innocence by quoting carefully selected passages from his November 2 article in the New York Times. Of note is that Pinker conveniently failed to quote those passages which most obviously indicate he encourages infanticide.

US Congressman Joseph Pitts and US Senator Dan Coats accused Pinker of supporting infanticide on December 3 in an article in the Chester County Press. Pitts and Coats pointed out that in his article, Pinker “lays the groundwork for a scientific and philosophical rationale for infanticide.” They argued that Pinker “suggests that infanticide—the active or passive killing of an infant—should be treated differently than the murder of an older child or an adult because a newborn is not a full-fledged person.”

Various quotes from Pinker’s New York Times piece are indeed chillingly anti-life:

– “In most cultures, neo-naticide is a form of triage.”  – “Full personhood is often not automatically granted at birth.”  – “Neo-naticide forces us to examine even that boundary.” [That is the boundary of birth for the recognition of the right to life.]

Pinker goes on to ask the question, “What makes a living being a person with a right not to be killed?” He first answers on behalf of radical animal-rights activists, saying that any sentient being should be granted the inalienable right to life


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.