An LSU Students for Life member talks with other students on campus about abortion. Louisiana college students have not indicated their support for infanticide, LARTL Youth Programs Director Kandace Landreau said.

By Sandy Cunningham, Communications Director

A Facebook post by a friend and former colleague on the issue of "post-birth abortion" recently caught my attention. He wrote:  

"The headline says 'More college students support post-birth abortion.' There are so many things I can say about this, but I'll limit myself to: if the baby's already born, how can killing it be called an abortion, as opposed to being called 'killing it'?"

As you can imagine, responses to this post most certainly weren't supportive of the idea. In fact, once it was clarified that it was no misprint, my friend added:

"The story went on to say that some college age kids think it's OK to 'abort' a child as old as 4 or 5 years because they're not yet 'aware.' Incredible."

In response, those commenting called it what it is. MURDER.  

What is "post-birth abortion" anyway? It's an oxymoron, for sure. You can't kill an unborn child if that child is already born. And why does this article posted on the website thecollegefix.com say pro-life activists are seeing a trend in the growing acceptance of post-birth abortion on college campuses?

Kristina Garza, spokeswoman for Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, a pro-life organization that often sets up displays on campuses along the West Coast, is quoted in the article as saying her group frequently encounters college students who accept infanticide.

"For those who are firmly for abortion, because they understand it kills a human being, it's very easy for them to accept killing a human being after birth," Garza told Maiead McArdle, who wrote the article. "There is this notion that is common on campus that it's OK to kill babies because somehow we don't become human until we are self-aware."

Garza told McArdle that arguments put forth by Peter Singer and other philosophers who support infanticide are given as reading assignments to college students. Singer wrote in 1979 that "human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons ... [therefore] the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee."

Two bioethicists, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, published a paper in 2012 in the Journal of Medical Ethics titled "After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?" They wrote:  

"[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. ... [W]e propose to call this practice 'after-birth abortion', rather than 'infanticide,' to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus ... rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk."

Mark Harrington, director of the pro-life group Created Equal, told McArdle he also sees this viewpoint becoming "increasingly popular." Campuses where the high school, college students, local activists and staff members of Created Equal have encountered this opinion include Purdue, the University of Minnesota, the University of Central Florida and Ohio State, he said.

Kandace Landreneau, Youth Programs Director for Louisiana Right to Life, has not encountered logic this misguided on any of Louisiana's college campuses.  However, she believes that more effective techniques of pro-life persuasion have forced "pro-choice" people to either choose between being pro-life and being pro-infanticide.

"The fact is that there is not that much difference between the unborn child and the born child, especially not enough difference to warrant their systematic destruction," she said. "We have stressed this point on campuses across Louisiana.  We push people to see that if they are fine with abortion, then the logic of their position allows the killing of newborn babies. But the overwhelming majority of students are not OK with killing newborns, which then challenges their dogmatic acceptance of abortion."   

On the rare occasion people do agree with Singer and "post-birth abortion," Landreneau believes they are mostly arguing in the theoretical realm, and when push comes to shove, they would not put their ideas into practice. 

"Occasionally you will have philosophy majors argue with you, at length, about when humans become persons. The majority of the time they are people who have read and agree with Peter Singer (a professor at Princeton) when he says that humans become persons at 2 years of age because that is when they become self-aware.

"When I do happen upon someone who is comfortable with Singer's idea of infanticide up until 2 years of age, they usually only need to be asked the question "Would you be OK killing a 2-year-old?" for them to change their tune a little bit."

As for this thinking becoming a trend, Landreneau said: "I've had many conversations with students, and this rarely comes up, so I wouldn't say there's a significant trend...yet. But the fact that there are people who believe it's OK to euthanize children, in general, is horrifying."

Most of the arguments pro-lifers receive on local college campuses include "Women should have a right to do whatever they want with their bodies" and "I would never have an abortion, but I can't impose my view on someone else," Landreneau said.

To read the complete article on thecollegefix.com, CLICK HERE. To learn more about Peter Singer's outrageous defense of infanticide, CLICK HERE. Contact Kandace Landreneau to help our college students spread the pro-life message on campus!  You can email her at [email protected].