[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 37 (Wednesday, March 7, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H1220]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          AFTER-BIRTH ABORTION

  (Mr. PITTS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, on February 23, the Journal of Medical Ethics 
published an article, entitled, ``After-birth abortion: why should the 
baby live?''
  The authors argue that an infant child can be killed since they do 
not have the same moral status as a ``person.'' They go even further to 
say that adoption is not always in the best interest of an unwanted 
child.
  The furor over this article has been immense. Unfortunately, the 
editors defend publishing this article on the basis that there should 
be reasoned engagement on the subject.
  This article may have the form of scholarly argument, but its 
substance is madness. The authors maintain that a baby can only be 
granted personhood through the recognition of other human beings. They 
fundamentally reject something that we all hold dear: that all men are 
endowed by their Creator with the right to life.
  A healthy amount of anger over this article is not only natural but 
also right. It is shocking and sad to see such destructive arguments 
given credence in a premier medical journal.

                          ____________________