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.
Dave, how many defective human already-born babies have you adopted?
None? Didn't think so.
You never did answer my question about your "military service". What branch did you serve, when did you join, where was your bootcamp, how long we're you in, what was your MOS & rank, where were you stationed?
I'll answer your question. My ex-wife and I only had one child together and I could barely afford to support her, but I never missed a child support payment and sent what extra money I could afford. She's now going to turn 21 in August and is in college. My expenses hasn't improved since child support ended because of my wife's medical bills due to her spinal condition. She is medically unable to care for children anymore. She was a professional nanny. One of her previous employers was former US Congressman Chris John (D) of Louisiana. My second cousin has a lovely daughter who has a severe case of autism. If you think she should have been aborted then please come to their home to abort her. You'd have to fight her daddy who is 6' 3" tall and a little more than 300 lbs and has plenty of weapons used for hunting.
How does Dave's decision to adopt or not adopt a disabled child make a disabled child less deserving of his or her God-given right to life?
Yes, who decides what is "defective" or not defective?
I knew a woman whose Downs syndrome daughter was living in a group home, the mother said her daughter was very happy with her life, a happy, very sweet woman. She said that she was very proud of her daughter, a daughter that understood what life is really about - and that it's better to have a "retarded" child that is happy with life than a nuclear physicist child that is miserable.
How much worse it would be to have a brilliant child or even average child that ends up committing suicide. Sometimes we can't predict "defective".
I'm still not sure what you are upset about. Of all the reasons to abort having a serious genetic defect or other health reasons is right up there and most people are ok with that. I guess the question is what you find so offensive about that? Besides being anti abortion to begin with I mean. It does nothing to better the human race, society or even the family if they aren't up to handling the situation.
First they start justifying aborting the genetically diseased. Then as we can identify other genes we can abort the autistics, gays, and anyone with the slightest increase in risk of developing a disease down the road.
One wonders if it is found that a minority group is found to be genetically predispositioned to be less intelligent or less productive, could that become a justification for mandated abortion? Wouldn't it be beneficial for society to weed out the less desirable?
As our knowledge of genetics increases, it raises serious morality issues.
A woman has the right to whatever reproductive choices she desires.
Be that abortion, it's none of your business.
It's up to the woman and her doctor.
You don't get to push your "morality" on others.
The doctor lady who said this surely must be different in thinking than many of us who are not crazy about abortion for any reason. It appears to me that she really believes, as many liberals do, that humans have a right to play God when they feel the need. She doesn't work for Fox News so she has a right to believe like that but I question where they will stop at determining what fetuses are fair game. First I see that there is a possibility that some people are aborting fetuses according to sex and then that some doctors think it is scientific to abort certain others.
Nancy Snyderman, the chief medical editor of NBC’s Today Show, “explained to viewers that it’s just good science to abort an unborn child that may have a genetic disorder, explaining that testing for such conditions, ‘gives parents a chance to decide whether they’re going to continue that pregnancy or not. This is the science of today.’”
First of all abortion is between a woman and her medical professional. As long as she is paying for it, it is simply NOYFB what she chooses to do with her own fetus. Secondly, it is damn hard enough to raise NORMAL kids in the day and age. And expensive too. Nobody in their right mind is going to carry an abnormal fetus to term and "hope for the best". Having known a very dear friend that was forced to make this decision because the test showed a deformed heart that, even if the baby survived for a year, would require constant medical care, hospitalization and, after a year, a transplant, I have been there. I have seen the tears, the hurt and the agnoy. If you think it is an "easy" decision to make, you have not been there. And who is going to pay all these medical bills? The Republicans that hate abortion but would rather give a billionaire a tax cut than pay for a baby heart transplant? I don't friggin gawd dam think so!
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.
