Current Events > Iceland approaches 100% abortion rate for down syndrome

(+) Yeah! (+)

Kaname_Madoka posted...

TheMarthKoopa posted...

Could you walk up to a person with down syndrome and tell them they'd be better off dead?

---

CountessRolab posted...

Sad_Face posted...

Is it going to be unethical to not have a designer baby then?

Yes, absolutely. If the technology is available, you are a fool not to use it.

The big concern here is that the usage of designer baby might lead to homogeneity. It's because of our individual differences that force us to be creative to keep up with one another.
---

mustachedmystic posted...

Kaname_Madoka posted...

TheMarthKoopa posted...

Could you walk up to a person with down syndrome and tell them they'd be better off dead?

I mean, would you ever walk up to literally anyone and say that? Not really the best argument, woman get abortions for any number of reasons from financial to just plain not wanting a baby.
---

I'm strong in the camp that if you know for certain that your child is going to be disabled and you don't abort it, you're a selfish monster.
---

TheMarthKoopa posted...

Could you walk up to a person with down syndrome and tell them they'd be better off dead?

This

It's not like it's the exact same person next time except non-down-syndrome'd
---

You cannot have abortion be a "right", then declare it's not when you don't like the reason why.

If it really is a right, then "i don't want a girl" or "the child will be disabled" is just as valid a reason as "I'm not ready to be a parent", "it'll make my ass fat", or "it's Tuesday."

I see nothing wrong with this. People are allowed to have abortions for any reason and I'd say wanting to spare your child a difficult life is a pretty good one

I don't see anything wrong with aborting a baby with mental disabilities. It's not about getting perfection, it's about not letting the child live through life with mental disabilities. It's 10x the amount of work for parents and the child suffers for most of his life.

A few years ago, I saw a mom in her 50s, completely miserable pushing her mentally disabled son who is in his 20s down the street on wheelbarrow...a wheelbarrow. I can never get that image out of my mind. I wouldn't want to see someone suffer like that.
---

Its ethical dilemmas like this that makes me not want to have kids.
---

I wouldn't want my child to have that, from what I have seen it is quite hard to raise someone with it.
---

Yea, I would abort. I remember the down syndrome kids from school... I wouldn't want that sort of existence for myself or my child.
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

CountessRolab posted...

To be fair, I also think it is unethical to have a child if you are low-income.

Well how do you define low-income?

I mean, I wouldn't consider people making $150k low-income, but I doubt they will be able to afford a designer baby regardless.

I am talking more about being able to pay for your kid's education.
---

No, but I'd put him or her up for adoption if it meant he or she could receive better care.
---

Good.
---

As bad as that is, forcing someone to raise a vulnerable person is far worse.

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

That's just a weird argument...

"He won't have a leg" hmm how many people are in wheelchairs or use prosthetics that do have happy lives? It's not perfect but it's something.

Or some disabilities like deafness? There's a whole culture around it. Same for blindness.

What about learning disabilities? "Can't read straight, it shouldn't live that way" is sooo monstrous.

Or worst case probably Down's syndrome? Yeah that's tougher but Downs kids are doing well having families making friends doing art and stuff they have fun. They don't even know they're different if nobody bullies them and they have a lot of fun I've volunteered at events for them and they love life more than mentally abled people lol.


So if you can't handle it or it's too hard on you, admit it, don't act like it's some sentence to a life of misery just because you don't think you can handle it lol
---

LittleRoyal posted...

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

That's just a weird argument...

"He won't have a leg" hmm how many people are in wheelchairs or use prosthetics that do have happy lives? It's not perfect but it's something.

Or some disabilities like deafness? There's a whole culture around it. Same for blindness.

What about learning disabilities? "Can't read straight, it shouldn't live that way" is sooo monstrous.

Or worst case probably Down's syndrome? Yeah that's tougher but Downs kids are doing well having families making friends doing art and stuff they have fun. They don't even know they're different if nobody bullies them and they have a lot of fun I've volunteered at events for them and they love life more than mentally abled people lol.


So if you can't handle it or it's too hard on you, admit it, don't act like it's some sentence to a life of misery just because you don't think you can handle it lol

Your basis for comparison are people who both already exist and have had to sink-or-swim (so to speak) with their disabilities. Also, it's nonsense putting in learning disabilities with much more serious inflictions like down's syndrome.

You're basically saying "Lol other people dealt with it so will you". That's selfish. It's ludicrous to think that just because they can deal with it that they should just because you want them to. If somebody shot you in the leg and then said 'lol other people have been shot in the leg you'll deal with it', you'd be fucking pissed.

The end of the line is that you're inflicting a life sentence on children simply because you're too afraid to question your morality.
---

It depends. I don't think I'm strong enough to raise a child with such a disability.
---

When it comes to stuff like this, I always put myself in the situation.

In this instance, would I rather be born with downs syndrome, or not live life at all? I would rather not exist than suffer through this life, and change the lives of everyone around me because of it.

In nature, when an animal has babies and there is something wrong with one, they reject it from the nest, or from the litter, and it inevitably dies. Instincts tell them that the infant isn't fit to survive on it's own and is therefore tossed aside.

As cruel as it sounds, I respect any parent's decision in this scenario. I generally lean more toward pro-life but this is an exception to that.

Sorry if that makes me a shitty person.
---

Yaridovich posted...

LittleRoyal posted...

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

That's just a weird argument...

"He won't have a leg" hmm how many people are in wheelchairs or use prosthetics that do have happy lives? It's not perfect but it's something.

Or some disabilities like deafness? There's a whole culture around it. Same for blindness.

What about learning disabilities? "Can't read straight, it shouldn't live that way" is sooo monstrous.

Or worst case probably Down's syndrome? Yeah that's tougher but Downs kids are doing well having families making friends doing art and stuff they have fun. They don't even know they're different if nobody bullies them and they have a lot of fun I've volunteered at events for them and they love life more than mentally abled people lol.


So if you can't handle it or it's too hard on you, admit it, don't act like it's some sentence to a life of misery just because you don't think you can handle it lol

Your basis for comparison are people who both already exist and have had to sink-or-swim (so to speak) with their disabilities. Also, it's nonsense putting in learning disabilities with much more serious inflictions like down's syndrome.

You're basically saying "Lol other people dealt with it so will you". That's selfish. It's ludicrous to think that just because they can deal with it that they should just because you want them to. If somebody shot you in the leg and then said 'lol other people have been shot in the leg you'll deal with it', you'd be fucking pissed.

The end of the line is that you're inflicting a life sentence on children simply because you're too afraid to question your morality.

They just said "disabilities" so I tried to cover all the bases.

And I'm selfish for wanting to give people a chance?
You're attributing their happiness to desperation? Maybe chalk it up to humanity? Should people stop existing because females get raped and beaten all the time, so being female and being safe is almost impossible?

I'm not saying "get over it" that came from you. I'm saying "they can make it work. They deserve a chance to try"
---

LittleRoyal posted...

You're attributing their happiness to desperation? Maybe chalk it up to humanity? Should people stop existing because females get raped and beaten all the time, so being female and being safe is almost impossible?

This isn't an apt analogy, though, because being born female doesn't guarantee being raped.

Being born with down's syndrome guarantees hardship. And stop saying you're 'giving people a chance', because that implies that they're sitting and waiting, conscious and already sentient, for you to pull them out of the abyss--which is untrue. They don't exist until you make them exist and to do so with the promise of them having an objectively harder time of it--simply because YOU thought it better--is ridiculously selfish and borderline evil if not fully so.
---

Yaridovich posted...

LittleRoyal posted...

You're attributing their happiness to desperation? Maybe chalk it up to humanity? Should people stop existing because females get raped and beaten all the time, so being female and being safe is almost impossible?

This isn't an apt analogy, though, because being born female doesn't guarantee being raped.

Being born with down's syndrome guarantees hardship. And stop saying you're 'giving people a chance', because that implies that they're sitting and waiting, conscious and already sentient, for you to pull them out of the abyss--which is untrue. They don't exist until you make them exist and to do so with the promise of them having an objectively harder time of it--simply because YOU thought it better--is ridiculously selfish and borderline evil if not fully so.

You don't understand it.
They have fun. They have friends and families and they dream of things. They can go to events and do things that make them happy. And they are quick to be scared or hurt as some other people. They're more innocent a lot if times too. You looking down in them and pitying people is your fault not mine or theirs and it doesn't make me evil.

you're saying "it doesn't deserve a chance to be happy because it isnt my definition of perfect"

I'm saying "it is just as likely to be happy as me even if it has a different life"


And that makes me evil because...you want me to abort downs shndromes kids? I don't understand your argument at all here because you're literally just saying that because you perceive their life one way, they shouldn't ever have been given life.

"Life is hard on everyone so you shouldn't be so quick to say these people shouldn't live, their parents are evil."
Idk that's pretty monstrous of a mindset. I think everyone deserves a shot no matter what they look like or act like or even how they think. I disagree with you but I don't think you're evil I just think you have some ideas that are very very disturbing
---

If you asked somebody with a major disability if they'd want to get rid of said disability, how do you think they'd answer? You look at people who find happiness despite their conditions, and that's great, it really is, but you can't just look at the good and ignore the bad because of it.

I'm not talking about how I perceive their life to be, I'm talking about how they will be. I understand that you know people with disabilities that live rich lives, and that's fine, but that's your only basis for comparison. You can't see how they would be without their handicaps. You can't grasp nonexistence.

If somebody put a gun to your head and made you live in concrete box for the rest of your life, you'd be upset. You'd hate it. But eventually, you'd make the best of it. Maybe even find happiness in your box. That doesn't mean that you should have been put in there. And that's something that happened to you as a cognitive, aware, sentient person.

So, why is it right to put children into that box, who have no means to object otherwise? It's wrong.
---

No, I would leave that up to the women, but I most certainly advise against it.
---

Yaridovich posted...

If you asked somebody with a major disability if they'd want to get rid of said disability, how do you think they'd answer? You look at people who find happiness despite their conditions, and that's great, it really is, but you can't just look at the good and ignore the bad because of it.

I'm not talking about how I perceive their life to be, I'm talking about how they will be. I understand that you know people with disabilities that live rich lives, and that's fine, but that's your only basis for comparison. You can't see how they would be without their handicaps. You can't grasp nonexistence.

If somebody put a gun to your head and made you live in concrete box for the rest of your life, you'd be upset. You'd hate it. But eventually, you'd make the best of it. Maybe even find happiness in your box. That doesn't mean that you should have been put in there. And that's something that happened to you as a cognitive, aware, sentient person.

So, why is it right to put children into that box, who have no means to object otherwise? It's wrong.

Because they aren't in a box! They have all of America to be in and around. I didn't say they are their best selves but they have something they're allowed that much.

You're saying they shouldn't ever have a chance because it wont be perfect. That's just not good enough for me.


I don't deny it will be hard; the disabled are one of many minority groups who have struggles including women and non rights.

I don't think anyone should be forced into anything just because we're minority.

I think Down's syndrome on average may have it worst. That doesn't mean they CANT have it good and I believe in giving people a chance.

When you see homeless people do you say "your life sucks, want me to erase you? Do you wish you never existed?" Or do you give them a few dollars and/or leave them be? Leave them to make the best out of what they can.


Somebody phsyicslly kidnappinf me and shoving me in a box after I've had the whole world is much different than someone naturally who is born in a wheelchair or with down syndrome. I'm not taking anything from these people I am giving them a chance (to be happy and make others happy), at the cost of nothing to them.
---

Capn Circus posted...

I'm not sure when it comes to Down-Syndrome. I've met a few people with Down-Syndrome who have personalities, preferences, opinions, and even a sense of humor. Many of them work, have purpose and lead happy lives. Certainly there are many challenges, but it can definitely be argued it is not the worst disability to be born with.

It can definitely be more severe in some. My mom works with developmentally disabled people and some will have jobs and live pretty much like a normal adult.

Some are 40 years old who still wet themselves and can barely feed themselves.
---

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

i was born hemiplegic, my sister was born retarded, my oldest brother has had all sorts of diseases, and another brother of mine was born with internal bleeding in the eyes and has terrible eyesight
i don't think any of us would be better off dead, so fuck off

Illuminoius posted...

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

i was born hemiplegic, my sister was born retarded, my oldest brother has had all sorts of diseases, and another brother of mine was born with internal bleeding in the eyes and has terrible eyesight
i don't think any of us would be better off dead, so fuck off

This is sweet. I'm sorry for how some users in this topic are treating you all
---

No point in having inferior humans tbh.

Which is what they are. People just let emotion rather than common sense dictate.
---

yes, I would want to abort assuming my wife would be ok with it. being born with down syndrome is basically hard mode for both you and the kid
---

Yes, its ethical and humane.

Ideally adoption should be much more popular.
---

I wouldn't do it myself, but I'm not gonna tell anyone else that they shouldn't. Raising a mentally handicapped kid is a lot of work.
---

PokemonHunter69 posted...

Ideally adoption should be much more popular.

This too, though.
---

Yes

if you're not prepared to have a child that is flawed, you're not prepared to be a parent and shouldn't be having kids. this applies to everyone who voted yes itt. you would all be absolute terrible parents.
---

Logically, yes, emotionally, no.

But I could only give a definite answer if this actually happened to me.

It's honestly horrifying to see people rationalising this up and down, as if people with down syndrome are some inferior class incapable of having fulfilling lives. Just step back a second and realise what you're doing --- justifying why people who aren't mentally or physically "good enough" shouldn't exist. Existence shouldn't be predicated on whether or not you're an economic burden. People with disabilities need more support. Getting rid of them because you personally can't be bothered is ridiculous.

Questionmarktarius posted...

You cannot have abortion be a "right", then declare it's not when you don't like the reason why.

If it really is a right, then "i don't want a girl" or "the child will be disabled" is just as valid a reason as "I'm not ready to be a parent", "it'll make my ass fat", or "it's Tuesday."

Well put.
---

I'm surprised that Yes is the majority vote.

...And I admit, I am one of the people who voted Yes.

Of course, I wouldn't consider it solely my decision. I would advise against it, but if the mother wants it, I wouldn't stop her. Though in that case I would want to put them up for adoption. I'll only take the challenge if the mother is truly that stubborn.

That's the entire thing. It's a challenge. I'm selfish, I don't want to spend my entire life taking care of someone who can possibly end up not being self-sufficient. Yes, yes, I've seen Down Syndrome people, I've seen the sheer joy they have for just being alive, I've seen the success stories. I've also seen the struggles the parents had to go through, I've seen the emotional hardship Downs children experience, particularly when they are aware just what effect they have on other people, and I've heard the horror stories, particularly for the more severely disabled people who have to go to group homes and get abused. And ultimately, these children will not be the ones to take care of ailing parents, and it stresses out siblings of normal functioning.

The challenges put me so off that any perceived joy that could be experienced from having such a life is not enough to convince me.

People who take care of severely mentally handicapped people have my respect. I don't have that strength of character.
---

It's not about deeming a person "good enough". It's also fucking NOT telling people that they should be dead. It's about providing a child the best possible life and creating them with a severe disability goes against that.

It also amazes me how many people can't separate existence from non-existence and the meaning behind both of them. When a child is aborted, miscarried--whatever, the whole notion of their existence becomes this nebulous what-if space when the reality is there is nothing there, just like there wasn't beforehand. If I wasn't ever born, or was aborted or whatever, then you'd never see this post, my family wouldn't know about me, I WOULDN'T FUCKING EXIST and you CANNOT compare existence to that and expect anything meaningful to come of it.

It's like when people say "Well, what if Edison was aborted? Then we wouldn't have the light bulb!". Well--if he was aborted, then we wouldn't fucking know about him at all and the light bulb would trickle on down to be invented somewhere else (or not at all, who knows that's all just speculation). There's zero point in laboring over what could have been. In this linear existence all that we know is what IS.

Sure, there are a lot of people that live happily with their disabilities, and yay for them, really. But they're not what I'm talking about and what really the discussion at hand shouldn't even be looking at. The real question here is if you know--without a shade of doubt--that your child is going to be disabled in a significant way and within the time frame that abortion is allowed, would you abort it?

To me, knowing full well that a child is going to be born with a disability and carrying it through to term is inherently disgusting. This child cannot provide any consent, knowns nothing but the existence you provide it and has to sustain off the world which you create for it. Having children is incredibly selfish that way--and so to make it so a child is already burdened by no fault of its own, simply so you can reap the emotional benefits of childbirth, is in my opinion, borderline evil if not already so. THAT'S what I'm saying. I'm not saying that I wish people already born to be dead, that's fucking stupid. Nor am I advocating hierarchical standards--I'm strictly thinking about the child.

If somebody forced you to now to live in a way that crippled you physically and emotionally, you'd be against it. Sure--given enough time you'd be able to adjust to it, that's what humans do, but the very concept of being given a sub-optimal condition of living against your will is morally wrong...so why is it okay to create life in the same way?

I just hate the idea of creating life that is inherently harmed simply for the moral fulfillment of the parents. If that's not 'playing god', then I don't know what it.
---

Yaridovich posted...

It's not about deeming a person "good enough". It's also fucking NOT telling people that they should be dead. It's about providing a child the best possible life and creating them with a severe disability goes against that.

People with down syndrome are absolutely capable of having meaningful and fulfilling lives as much as you or I. This is about economic convenience. If it really was about the life and welfare of children, you would be arguing their support and non-discrimination from individuals, communities, and governments, rather than advocating their non-existent.

It also amazes me how many people can't separate existence from non-existence and the meaning behind both of them. When a child is aborted, miscarried--whatever, the whole notion of their existence becomes this nebulous what-if space when the reality is there is nothing there, just like there wasn't beforehand. If I wasn't ever born, or was aborted or whatever, then you'd never see this post, my family wouldn't know about me, I WOULDN'T FUCKING EXIST and you CANNOT compare existence to that and expect anything meaningful to come of it.

No idea what your point is here. Even if you aren't pro-life, a foetus is unquestionably a potential human, and aborting that foetus is aborting at least a potential human. It is accurate to say you are denying that hypothetical person an existence.

It's like when people say "Well, what if Edison was aborted? Then we wouldn't have the light bulb!". Well--if he was aborted, then we wouldn't fucking know about him at all and the light bulb would trickle on down to be invented somewhere else (or not at all, who knows that's all just speculation). There's zero point in laboring over what could have been. In this linear existence all that we know is what IS.

Completely bizarre. It is meaningful to talk about hypotheticals and what-ifs, including the hypothetical life of an aborted down syndrome foetus --- a potential human who could have lived as happily as someone without down syndrome.

Sure, there are a lot of people that live happily with their disabilities, and yay for them, really. But they're not what I'm talking about and what really the discussion at hand shouldn't even be looking at. The real question here is if you know--without a shade of doubt--that your child is going to be disabled in a significant way and within the time frame that abortion is allowed, would you abort it?

The article and topic are about people and foetuses with down syndrome. People with down syndrome, despite their, are absolutely capable of meaningful and fulfilling lives.

To me, knowing full well that a child is going to be born with a disability and carrying it through to term is inherently disgusting.

Denying life to a person because it has down syndrome is disgusting.

This child cannot provide any consent,

Worthless point, nobody consents to their existence.
---

knowns nothing but the existence you provide it and has to sustain off the world which you create for it.

Is there any reason that world has to be bad? People with down syndrome need support and non-discrimination, not non-existence.

Having children is incredibly selfish that way--and so to make it so a child is already burdened by no fault of its own, simply so you can reap the emotional benefits of childbirth, is in my opinion, borderline evil if not already so.

Casting childbirth as some selfish act is incredibly revealing of your self-centred position. It is incredibly cruel and immoral to abort a foetus because you think people with down syndrome are incapable of having meaningful lives, or because you can't personally be bothered securing their welfare.

THAT'S what I'm saying. I'm not saying that I wish people already born to be dead, that's fucking stupid. Nor am I advocating hierarchical standards--I'm strictly thinking about the child.

If you were thinking about the child, you would rather we spent more of our resources as individuals, communities, and governments looking after people who need it, rather than aborting them.

If somebody forced you to now to live in a way that crippled you physically and emotionally, you'd be against it. Sure--given enough time you'd be able to adjust to it, that's what humans do, but the very concept of being given a sub-optimal condition of living against your will is morally wrong...so why is it okay to create life in the same way?

First of all, people with down syndrome are not physically or emotionally crippled, and it is hilariously offensive to say otherwise.

Second, the comparison is off. Nobody chooses to conceive a baby with down syndrome. There is a clear difference between giving someone previously undisabled a disability, and aborting someone who would have been carried to term were it not for their condition. The latter was never not disabled.

I just hate the idea of creating life that is inherently harmed simply for the moral fulfillment of the parents. If that's not 'playing god', then I don't know what it.

People shouldn't be denied existence because they aren't physically or mentally perfect, or born into economically uncertain circumstances.
---

mustachedmystic posted...

Kaname_Madoka posted...

TheMarthKoopa posted...

Could you walk up to a person with down syndrome and tell them they'd be better off dead?

Can't be dead if you were never born to begin with, stop making emotional arguments

Sinroth posted...

People with down syndrome are absolutely capable of having meaningful and fulfilling lives as much as you or I. This is about economic convenience. If it really was about the life and welfare of children, you would be arguing their support and non-discrimination from individuals, communities, and governments, rather than advocating their non-existent.

And who's saying I don't? If the child is born, of course you support it and give it the best life possible, but also it would be perhaps a kinder thing to simply abort it. You're too involved in the whole morality of abortion. Not every child has to be born.

Sinroth posted...

No idea what your point is here. Even if you aren't pro-life, a foetus is unquestionably a potential human, and aborting that foetus is aborting at least a potential human. It is accurate to say you are denying that hypothetical person an existence.

Potential this, potential that, fact of the matter is nobody knows and nobody would ever know. You get so hung up over what could be you lose sight of what is. If a person is aborted there's literally nothing there. There's no denying anything. Life doesn't work like programming code, where you just cite in a new example to see how things could have been.

Sinroth posted...

Completely bizarre. It is meaningful to talk about hypotheticals and what-ifs, including the hypothetical life of an aborted down syndrome foetus --- a potential human who could have lived as happily as someone without down syndrome.

But instead they don't exist and you don't know any the better. It's all about emotions, right? The morals that you sling around at the mere notion of something happening and it's because of that you can't seem to understand that there's no use in talking about potentials. If it's born, yes, support it to the ends of the earth, love it, pray for its happy life but if its not then what the fuck do you even know about it?

Sinroth posted...

The article and topic are about people and foetuses with down syndrome. People with down syndrome, despite their, are absolutely capable of meaningful and fulfilling lives.

No fucking SHIT. I feel like every time you say this you get farther from the point.

Sinroth posted...

Denying life to a person because it has down syndrome is disgusting.

I think the big problem here is that my philosophy is of course a person can exist happily with down's syndrome, but why should they have to? whereas yours is Everybody should exist without question. To me, the square ends of life are non-existence, a state in which nobody can comprehend. I feel it is better to simply leave a life in such a state rather than give it an existence I know would be hindered, DESPITE the happiness they could find in it. It's all or nothing with creating life, there is no excuse for in-betweens.

Sinroth posted...

Worthless point, nobody consents to their existence.

Not worthless, because those that exist determine when and how those that don't do (what a cluttered sentence). The onus of life rests on our shoulders and it's irresponsible and as I've been saying, borderline evil to simply mandate that everybody is to be born despite what they may be born with.
---

yes without a doubt
---

Sinroth posted...

Is there any reason that world has to be bad? People with down syndrome need support and non-discrimination, not non-existence.

I feel like I've covered this point already.

Sinroth posted...

Casting childbirth as some selfish act is incredibly revealing of your self-centred position. It is incredibly cruel and immoral to abort a foetus because you think people with down syndrome are incapable of having meaningful lives, or because you can't personally be bothered securing their welfare.

How is it not selfish? As discussed before, there is no allowance of consent and the whole of it relies on those creating. Also, I am in no way saying that people with down's (or is it just down?) syndrome can't live meaningful, happy lives.

Sinroth posted...

If you were thinking about the child, you would rather we spent more of our resources as individuals, communities, and governments looking after people who need it, rather than aborting them.

Again, non-existence, etc. etc. I already discussed ths. Of course we support everything and everybody and strive for the best possible lives, but that also includes looking at simply NOT creating life when the situation calls for it.

Sinroth posted...

First of all, people with down syndrome are not physically or emotionally crippled, and it is hilariously offensive to say otherwise.

Second, the comparison is off. Nobody chooses to conceive a baby with down syndrome. There is a clear difference between giving someone previously undisabled a disability, and aborting someone who would have been carried to term were it not for their condition. The latter was never not disabled.

I didn't say they were, it was just an hypothetical situation. I want to be very clear in saying I am not trying to insult, downplay or disparage people with handicaps in any way. This discussion isn't about that.

Second, of course nobody chooses and the point of this whole conversation is that IF YOU KNEW your child was going to be afflicted, would you abort it.

Sinroth posted...

People shouldn't be denied existence because they aren't physically or mentally perfect, or born into economically uncertain circumstances.

Quit talking about denying existence like it's denying them a meal. They don't know otherwise. Think back to before you were born. What do you know of it? Nothing. What would you know if you weren't born. Nothing.
---

I voted no. I have a strong belief that every human being deserves to live, no matter how disabled they are. And yes, I do understand that disabilities cause quite a bit of stress and other difficulties for then and their families. But from the people with disabilities who I know, they are happy, have a good life, and their families love them and enjoy having them around. And at least where I live, there are organizations and support groups that families can take advantage of to help them with their loved one.

And for the record, I was actually aborted early at 32 weeks (although we don't know why my biological mother did that) and have a disability myself. I can honestly say that I am happy I survived and I have a wonderful adoptive family who loves me very much. Even if I had never learned to walk, talk or even do anything except drool (which the doctors thought would be my fate), my family adopted me fully accepting that reality.

My point is that even if the biological family is unable or unwilling to care for a disabled child, there is almost certainly someone out there who would love the child and make them a part of their family. Of course I know that it's not always possible to find such a family, but I still don't think a child should be aborted just because they have a disability.
---

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

Speak for yourself. I am disabled. Don't project your opinions on to others. I am personally disturbed that so many people are in favor of killing a baby just cause of a defect

Zikten posted...

CountessRolab posted...

Personally, I think it is unethical to let a child be born disabled. Nobody should be forced to live like that.

Speak for yourself. I am disabled. Don't project your opinions on to others. I am personally disturbed that so many people are in favor of killing a baby just cause of a defect

No one is in favor of that.

We are in favor of the right for parents to choose to have abortions because the developing fetus has a birth defect.
---

clearaflagrantj posted...

mustachedmystic posted...

Kaname_Madoka posted...

TheMarthKoopa posted...

Could you walk up to a person with down syndrome and tell them they'd be better off dead?

Can't be dead if you were never born to begin with, stop making emotional arguments

having a child with a serious disability is one of my greatest fears in life.

not really sure what i'd do honestly. from where i stand now id say that i wouldnt terminate the pregnancy unless it was a situation where the baby's life would be REALLY fucked up (like severe deformities), but it's a lot easier to make that call when you're not dealing with the issue. im kind of against abortion in general but i can understand why someone would abort in this case
---