The evils of ethics

Melbourne's Age newspaper is running an online poll on whether the killing of newborn babies is ethical.

The poll is in response to a peer-reviewed academic paper that argues,

What we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

It also states,

The same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn.

Alberto Giubilini of Monash University and Dr Francesca Minerva of Melbourne University write:

There have to be good reasons for the killing of newborn babies. if economical, social or psychological circumstances change such that taking care of the offspring becomes an unbearable burden on someone, then people should be given the chance of not being forced to do something they cannot afford.

So if raising children is going to become an unbearable burden, financially and emotionally, it's ok. That means no child is safe. This passes for ethical thinking in two of Melbourne's leading universities. (What is it with Melbourne ethicists?) Where do we draw the line?

Matthew Archbold:

Once we become the arbiters of who is human and who isn’t, this is the calamitous yet inevitable end. Once you say all human life is not sacred, the rest is just drawing random lines in the sand.

Do we need any more evidence or the reality of sin? That our society is ripe for God's just judgment? That our only hope is in the mercy of God through Jesus Christ?