There is a discovery of 100 newborn babyremains in a villa in Britain. The children are supposed to be victims of infanticide due to their mothers being prostitutes.The explaination is that "there was no safe and effective means of contraception at the time...it was common to not believe that a child had a soul until it had cut it's first tooth or was even two years old" -Professor Simon Mays
What is amazing is that contraception is cited as the element that is lacking, not kindness, decency, human rights, women's rights, dignity of the human person, dignity of women in sexuality, etc. The site was first excavated in the 1920s (picture at right) and just now are the bones able to be analyzed and the reason for them being
together surmised. I wonder if the reporting on the reasoning would have been significantly different in the 1920s. At that time, artificial birth control was illegal and condemned by all Christian religions. Would the reporting suggest that prostitution was the outrage? What about men having no responsibility for their "accidental issue" because they were just there for a good time? What about the horror of exterminating girl babies?
Could the difference in perspective be because we currentlyexterminate millions of babies for convenience, to allow women to be used as objects, and to relieve men of responsibility for their children TODAY! Couching this infanticide grave site in understanding and cultural tolerance is disgusting.
