Colin Brewer, who disgustingly called for the infanticide of disabled infants some time ago, is apparently under police investigation for those comments.
A councillor who compared disabled children with deformed lambs that are dealt with at birth by “smashing them against a wall” is being investigated by police over his comments, it emerged. Brewer also claimed in an interview there were good arguments for killing some disabled babies with high support needs because of the cost of providing them with services…
He added: “We are just animals. He obviously has got a point – you can’t have lambs running around with five legs and two heads. It would be put down, smashed against the wall and be dealt with.” When asked if he believed there was not much difference between putting down a lamb and a child with two heads, he said: ‘I think the cost has got to be evaluated. It is not something I would like to do but there is only so much in the bucket.”
Despicable. But let me be clear: I oppose criminalizing loathsome speech such as Brewer’s. It’s the First Amendment in this American’s blood, and moreover, I think it best to see these guys coming.
But I have to wonder: Is it just the crude way in which Brewer expressed his support for infanticide that brings in the authorites? I mean it can’t be advocacy for killing disabled babies itself that matters–otherwise the Oxford publishers and authors of the infamous “after-birth” pro-infanticide article in the Journal of Medical Ethics would also be threatened with the dock. They shouldn’t be, of course. But I guess it isn’t what you say and advocate that matters regarding infanticide advocacy, but how you say it.
Oh, and this is disturbing. Brewer was recently reelected, despite–or perhaps, because of?–his odious comments.
LifeNews.com Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture and a bioethics attorney who blogs at Secondhand Smoke.
by Wesley J. Smith | London, England