the decision to kill ill or disabled babies should be governed by “a new moral duty,” namely, “the duty prevent suffering, especially futile suffering.” Holt writes: "To keep alive an infant whose short life expectancy will be dominated by pain — pain that it can neither bear nor comprehend — is, it might be argued, to do that infant a continuous injury."
I know I should ground my arguments in secular terms, but for people of a religion whose symbol is their God nailed to a cross, the idea that we can determine what is "futile suffering" is repugnant.
This, I think is the biggest disconnect between American culture and the Gospel of Life -- American culture makes no room for the Cross, not room for the sactifying power of suffering. If the path ahead leads to suffering, we buy our way out of it. If that means destroying some embryos that's fine, so long as they're not developed enough to suffer.
Out culture is built not around maximizing joy and happiness but around minimizing human suffering. We think we can get to Easter Sunday without Good Friday.
We haven't been effective in witnessing to it, maybe because we don't completely believe it.