The Telegraph.co.uk reports: “A group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued that killing young babies is no different from abortion, and should be allowed even when there is nothing physically wrong with the child.

Publication of the article, in the Journal of Medical Ethics, part of the British Medical Journal group, has raised a storm of protest.

However, the journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, has defended his decision, saying it was the job of such publications to air all sides of all arguments – however radical.

Two former Oxford associates of his, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, argued that there was no moral difference between abortion and killing babies in their article, After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?

They argued: ‘The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.’

Rather than being ‘actual persons’, newborns were ‘potential persons’…” (These educated dummies have one thing drastically right when they say that the killing on young babies is no different from abortion. However, they forget to acknowledge that all such executioners burn in Hell forever. — And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea – Mark 9:42; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments… – Luke 16:23.)