By John-Henry Westen

PRINCETON, September 12, 2006 ( – In a question and answer article published in the UK’s Independent today, controversial Princeton University Professor Peter Singer repeats his notorious stand on the killing of disabled newborns.  Asked, “Would you kill a disabled baby?”, Singer responded, “Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole.”

People who oppose Singer’s position have maintained that Singer is the logical extension of the culture of death and that society will eventually embrace his stance if there is no shift to the culture of life.  Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition commented to about Singer saying, “at least he’s consistent.” 

In fact, Singer himself uses the abortion debate to justify his murderous stance. 

“Many people find this shocking,” continued Singer, “yet they support a woman’s right to have an abortion.”  Concluding his point, Singer said, “One point on which I agree with opponents of abortion is that, from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the foetus and the newborn baby.”

Singer’s position, similar to the culture of death, is that there is no inherent dignity in man, there is no sanctity of human life.  Man deserves no special treatment since, Singer rejects that man was created in the image and likeness of God. 

Asked about the choice between killing 10 cows or a human, Singer said he would kill the cows, but not because they were of less value, but because humans would mourn the death more.  “I’ve written that it is much worse to kill a being who is aware of having a past and a future, and who plans for the future. Normal humans have such plans, but I don’t think cows do. And normal humans have family and friends who will grieve their death in ways more vivid and longer-lasting than the way cows may care about other cows. (Although a cow certainly misses her calf for a long time, if the calf is taken from her. That’s why there is a major ethical problem with dairy products.) If I really had to make such a decision, I’d kill the cows.”

Schadenberg commented saying, “Once again Singer is making distinctions between human beings he would consider normal and those he would consider not normal, thus he is deciding who is a person and who is not.  Non-persons are allowed to be killed.”  The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition leader concluded, “even though Singer does not like to be compared to the Nazi’s especially since his parents died in the Holocaust, his philosophical position is identical to what the Nazi’s proposed.  The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is primarily concerned for the lives of people with disabilities and other vulnerable persons.”

See the whole interview:


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.