Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure they can. In fact, most persons with Downs are happier than the average person. I have nothing against people with Downs. The problem is that someone is going to have to take care of them. Many parents biggest fear is who is going to take care of them after the parent is gone. It should be the mother's decision. Your hitler reference was a little odd and grossly inaccurate. Hitler would have said that it is not the mother's decision but the decision of the state...his decision.
How about it being the taxpayers decision to have welfare recipients who wish to continue being taken care of by the taxpayers provided sterilization? That is -- in order to go on collecting welfare after a certain limited time, the welfare recipient can choose to be sterilized or stop being taken care of.
Downs syndrome people actually sometimes work and hold down jobs, support themselves. It would be far better to have welfare recipients sterilized as they prove to be unable to take care of themselves and sterilization doesn't kill a human being.
This is intentionally inflammatory. Down's or Trisomy-21, is associated with increased maternal age- nothing is being corrected at all. It may give parents the private decision to abort- but the incidence remains the same and while there may be less children with Down's born it doesn't mean all will be aborted.
This is one of the most private decisions a family can make.
Why stop with Downs? If there is a genetic link to homosexuality or autism, or anything whatsoever the parents believe isn't a perfect condition, should the parents be allowed to screen for homosexuality or autism?
why stop with downs? If there is a genetic link to homosexuality or autism, or anything whatsoever the parents believe isn't a perfect condition, should the parents be allowed to screen for homosexuality or autism?
Why stop with Downs? If there is a genetic link to homosexuality or autism, or anything whatsoever the parents believe isn't a perfect condition, should the parents be allowed to screen for homosexuality or autism?
Yes, though equating sexual orientation with neurodevelopmental disorders is a bit disingenuous.
How about it being the taxpayers decision to have welfare recipients who wish to continue being taken care of by the taxpayers provided sterilization? That is -- in order to go on collecting welfare after a certain limited time, the welfare recipient can choose to be sterilized or stop being taken care of.
Downs syndrome people actually sometimes work and hold down jobs, support themselves. It would be far better to have welfare recipients sterilized as they prove to be unable to take care of themselves and sterilization doesn't kill a human being.
OK, I'm not giving an opinion one way or the other regarding abortion, but your last paragraph is a bit overdone. Most Down Syndrome people are in fact, not self supporting, even if they are working.
How about it being the taxpayers decision to have welfare recipients who wish to continue being taken care of by the taxpayers provided sterilization? That is -- in order to go on collecting welfare after a certain limited time, the welfare recipient can choose to be sterilized or stop being taken care of.
Downs syndrome people actually sometimes work and hold down jobs, support themselves. It would be far better to have welfare recipients sterilized as they prove to be unable to take care of themselves and sterilization doesn't kill a human being.
You understand that sterilization is a form of Eugenics right? So it would seem that you are in favor of Eugenics but just not abortion. It would have been far simpler just to state that from the beginning instead of making a losing argument. Also, in relation to your previous Hitler analogy forced sterilization by the state was part of the ideas to the "ultimate solution".
You understand that sterilization is a form of Eugenics right? So it would seem that you are in favor of Eugenics but just not abortion. It would have been far simpler just to state that from the beginning instead of making a losing argument.
You don't really have to worry about sterilization with Down's. A kid homozygous for trisomy-21 would likely not make it to viability. As for progeny of Down's vs. non-Down's, I have no idea what the moral or legal ramifications of that union would be.
Godwin's law is not applicable here since the discussion is eugenics which was one of the policies carried out by Nazi Germany to eliminate the undesirables from their population including the mentally ill. I pointed out the hair and eye color as a slippery slope such practices could lead to and used Nazi Germany as an example because the very same thing happened there. Learn the lessons of history cause you're on the path to repeating their mistakes.
Are you the parent of a child who has a disability so severe that they will never be able to care for themselves? One that will land them in an institution when you are no longer able to care for them, where they can receive all forms of abuse and torture from staff members?
If not, spare us the history lessons, please. Terminating a pregnancy due to a severe disability is the most compassionate act an expectant mother can commit. Allowing the child to be born serves no purpose other than to inflict cruel and inhuman punishment on the baby, and the parents.
That's not to say something like we should "exterminate" the ones already here or anything like that. They need our care and compassion. However, if we can prevent it, then we must do what is right, and not what some warped age old book written by a band of sickos looking to control the population tells us we should do.
Are you the parent of a child who has a disability so severe that they will never be able to care for themselves? One that will land them in an institution when you are no longer able to care for them, where they can receive all forms of abuse and torture from staff members?
If not, spare us the history lessons, please. Terminating a pregnancy due to a severe disability is the most compassionate act an expectant mother can commit. Allowing the child to be born serves no purpose other than to inflict cruel and inhuman punishment on the baby, and the parents.
That's not to say something like we should "exterminate" the ones already here or anything like that. They need our care and compassion. However, if we can prevent it, then we must do what is right, and not what some warped age old book written by a band of sickos looking to control the population tells us we should do.
Today such a decision is perfectly legal and I can see the parents agonize over the choice. My cousin's youngest daughter has a severe form of autism. Though they love their daughter (now nearly an adult), there are times they wish she wasn't around because she is the sole reason why they are still together. Their oldest daughter helps out but it's just not enough.
I'm saying this is a slippery slope and we should proceed with caution.
I am the parent of a severely disabled child. My feelings are mixed on this issue. No tests like these should ever be required. Requiring them for any reason and having the government having a say in what happens is what would make it nazi-ish. The tests are legal, the abortions are legal and it is all a parents choice. That said, these aren't 100% accurate and have been wrong again and again. If you have the abortion there is a chance you are eliminating a child that doesn't have a condition at all. I could never make such a blanket statement as to say that all fetus's tested and found to have this disability should be eliminated and to say that is the right thing. Please spare me your speeches about how this is compassionate, because that is BS.
The argument about how they are at risk for abuse is a lame one. Who here doesn't walk out the door every day and have a risk of something happening to them? And disabled people do not have to end up in a horrible institution if the correct planning is done by their parents. Please don't make comments and assumptions about things you know nothing about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
