The greatest gift men like Singer give the world isn’t some argument on abortion or rationing health care. It is the ability to pose questions that make us think.

Those of us who can think that is.

MikeN, feel like giving it a try? I don’t recommend it, honestly. Thinking about the world can be pretty depressing. You may want to avoid it.

Ignorance is bliss.

Further to the well crafted post by Scott,

You bluffed and were called on it. I was ready to accept there was something by Singer I was unfamiliar with. Which is why I gave you the opportunity to clarify something that contradicted my impression of Singer.

It is because you have tried this same tactic so many times in the past I give you the moniker I do. I keep hoping that you might learn that you should know what you are posting but you never seem to get the hint.

The greatest gift men like Singer give the world isn’t some argument on abortion or rationing health care. It is the ability to pose questions that make us think. And how to think is the greatest gift my favorite teachers gave me. Your mileage may differ.

So, what you are saying is that because you chose links that failed to make your point to someone who is not already of like mind with you, you refuse to actually attempt to make points from now going forward?

Might I suggest you just quit blogging then?

Generally, you will not convince people who are not already open to your opinions no matter what you do. The fun is in trying and in spreading better information. Maybe at least you will sew doubt in the minds of those who disagree with you. Maybe not.

The best you can do is continue to try.

Barring that, there is no point to your continuing to pollute this blog with your lame ideas.

Gee, I’m being condescending …

Perhaps it’s because on this thread you attempted to make Peter Singer seem as if he’s barbecuing babies in his backyard when in fact he is attempting to reduce human suffering while you are trying to increase it.

Maybe you already knew this. Maybe this is why you refused to post a link that you find damning to your own point when people read it in its entirety. Maybe you just don’t have the attention span to read more than the header to the section in the book. Maybe you never even read that but just read some other asshole’s ill-informed opinion on some other blog.

All I really know is that you apparently attempted and failed to make a point in the past so have now resorted to just posting total bullshit in hopes that someone will actually believe you know what you’re talking about. Perhaps someone will, but not someone well-read and intelligent … like Mr. Fusion.

That’s ordinarily true, but Fusion’s past history of demanding links has shown an inability to comprehend things, and to continue to deny what is in the links, so I didn’t bother.

I read Peter Singer’s views on euthanasia for babies who have no hope of a life without suffering and for whom the parents would rather put the child out of his/her misery.

Exactly how do you see such an action as worse than putting any other terminally ill patient out of their misery?

I think your statement made it sound as if Peter Singer supports arbitrary infanticide when in fact he is merely discussing a highly controversial issue of how to deal with the wishes of parents in extremely difficult situations.

What would you do when a parent says that their child is in obvious pain and is obviously suffering in such a way that the parent believes that they themselves would not want to experience such suffering?

Would you force people of any age to suffer needlessly? If so, I call you the monster, not Peter Singer.

Oh, and for those of us who wish to read the viewpoint in full, here is an actual link to a segment of Peter Singer’s 1993 book. I hope that most of us will be smart enough, unlike MikeN, to recognize that the man is not advocating killing healthy infants.

http://tinyurl.com/kr4b38

Next time you want to claim someone to be a monster Mike, search for your own damn URL.

For my part, I will state that you either have never seen anyone in a seriously bad state of suffering, or, you are a monster who would torture one’s own friends and family by needlessly prolonging their suffering.

So in other words, you can’t present anything that states Singer is in favor of killing babies. I understand you must have read all his books and articles and know all of his speeches by heart. So please, point out the book and the page so I too will know if he is a baby killer.

I believe a link was requested. I do not see one in your post. When you want to make a point, it helps to make it easy for the reader to get to exactly what you are talking about without having to wade through thousands of search results. From my own blog, I can tell you that most people won’t even click the link if you post it.

No one is going to do your searches for you.

JUSTIFYING INFANTICIDE AND NON-VOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA

You’ve got some excellent points there. We should also try to remember that the number one cause of death is birth. Birth literally causes 100% of all deaths in the U.S. and abroad.

An old comedian whose routine I’ve only heard second-hand said something like:

Sometimes I think it would be better never to have been born. But, who among us is so lucky? One in a million, perhaps.

It’s antithetical to their profession. It’s like those psychologists who aided in torturing people in Guantanamo. Or it’s like librarians who actively censor books.

Should chiropractors be breaking people’s backs? Should epidemiologists be spreading anthrax? Should priests be morally corrupting people? (OK, that happens but it’s wrong.)

There are some things doctors should not do — and killing is at the top of the list.

Eff word! I followed Lyin’ Mike’s spelling. It is Professor Singer. My mistake.

Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singe, who supports killing babies, on health-care reform.

I’ve read a bit about Dr. Singe and have yet to come across anything where he advocates or supports “killing babies”. Maybe you could enlighten us to some documentation to support your slander.