As many of you know, the Netherlands have begun euthanizing critically ill babies. This is the ultimate on the slippery slope. And I'm sure most of you can guess I'm completely against it.
After reading it, I couldn't help but wonder, and really want to know, how the pro-choice movement justifies that a baby is a baby only after it makes a slight geographical adjustment. Coming from in utero to the outside world does not change the baby, yet it is only at that time that the baby has rights.
On the "Right to Die" front, we have long believed that it would make the jump from consenting adults to non-consenting. Little did I think that it would also move to children. Granted, these are critically ill babies. But what justification do we have for becoming the instrument of death. Maybe it's me. I still believe in miracles. The loss of hope that such things can happen seems to me to be one more great tradgedy in all this.