Support NeoGAF

[mcarlie]

Ugh, someone on the internet is wrong, and it's you, mcarlie. I can't imagine the stress of being forced to carry a child with down syndrome to term.

Is this one of your arguments? You can't imagine the difficulty therefore the mother has the right to terminate the child? I can't imagine how difficult it would be to take care of a paraplegic, does that mean that I should be for killing them?

One, it would mean a life long of going above and beyond in providing a level of care that none of us can imagine (except those with a sibling or child with downs).

So would taking care of a full grown child, are we allowed to kill them as well?

Two, hell, I'm an intelligent man and I have very little faith I'll be able to sustain myself, my girlfriend and manage to scrape together some kind of pension in this fucked up 21st century, how the fuck is someone with down syndrome supposed to do that when I'm no longer around?

You can kill people because they may have a difficult time in the future?

 

[mcarlie]

Bodily autonomy is an argument, you just don't agree with it.

Autonomy in general is an argument. You haven't yet justified why one type of autonomy is more important than the other. Just merely asserted that it is.

 

[Budi]

I thought the same, then this video kinda toyed with my opinion on the matter:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pMsMPON4Sxo

Thanks for sharing this. I grew up with my uncle in the family who has down syndrome. He is truly a delightful person, always friendly and polite. Everyone he meets ends up loving him. He was always doing chores at home, always had the energy and the desire. But ofcourse he also needed help in many situations and had to be looked after. My mother has said that it was hard on her sometimes, but she wouldn't change it. Also one of my sisters has milder intellectual disabilities, she has lived alone for a long time and worked at a nursing home much longer than I've been able to keep a job. Everything that I said about my uncle fits to her too. They are both better persons than me. And it pains me to this day that I used to be ashamed of them. Because of how people see them, the nasty remarks. I was afraid that I'd get bullied because of them. Now I'd want all of you to meet them. And I absolutely hate to see the word retard thrown so casually here in GAF. And nobody says anything to it. Please stand up people like you do with so many other social issues.

It hurts to read about these so called miserable lives and suffering. Have you people lived with someone who has down syndrome? They enjoy life just like you do, they bring joy and comfort to people just like you do. Many of them can even have a supported job, they can bring their contribution to society.

I'm not saying this to be against abortions. Since I do support the right for the woman to choose. It's just the language used that gets to me, since it doesn't match with my own experiences at all.

 

[Pau]

Autonomy in general is an argument. You haven't yet justified why one type of autonomy is more important than the other. Just merely asserted that it is.

A fetus growing in a woman's womb that is not viable by definition has no autonomy.

 

[Airola]

this seems incredibly tone deaf.

That could be true.

Conservative ideology usually stems from religion where it's not the actual life of the child that matters but the very fact that God gave life to the child. When the child is born, they got their life and now they are on their own. You see that in conservative politicians' call for gutting aid for the mentally and physically disabled. In more religious circles, a child born with a disability is seen as God punishing the family. Some people still believe that medical illnesses are the work of the devil. The concept of life is considered pure but as soon as that life is 'defective' in some way it's treated with a stigma.

All true.

And the healthcare thing is something I just can't understand in American conservatives. I live in Finland and here even the most right wing politicians seem to agree on universal health care at least to some extent. And most would be for the help of the disabled.


What you said about the "work of the devil" and the cutting of health care for disabled, it still doesn't take away what I originally said about the certain situation of letting the disabled to live. At least to me, there is the world of difference between someone who advocates that everyone should be let to be born and someone who advocates for the immorality of letting a disabled child to be born.

I'm not saying this is THE liberal stand though.

Hitler did what he did out of the belief in the purity of an aryan race. I understand this article has a strange celebratory tone to it but I think most posters here aren't for arguing the abortion of a child to eliminate a genetic defect to keep society pure a la Hitler. A lot of these posts are out of compassion and understanding for the mother and her right to her own body. That's a far cry from what you're describing. Obviously there are exceptions because political leanings aren't a monolith but what you're saying has very little basis in reality.

But I'm not here saying all liberals say this or that even this thread has many who are saying things like that. I was only replying to a post that was a reply to a certain post.

I might be tone deaf here but I still think my point was accurate. If anyone feels it's an attack against their political ideals, then that's a completely different issue.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Is this one of your arguments? You can't imagine the difficulty therefore the mother has the right to terminate the child? I can't imagine how difficult it would be to take care of a paraplegic, does that mean that I should be for killing them?

And yet, I did not mention a paraplegic because it's not even remotely the same thing. Try again.

 

[Ryzaki009]

Yes the child's life is worth less? If that's what you are saying then I am disgusted.

Worth less than the woman's carrying it if she chooses not to have it yes. And you can be as disgusted as you like I don't care about pleasing you but about women having control of their bodies. One of those beings can live without the other and it sure isn't the fetus.

 

[mcarlie]

A fetus growing in a woman's womb that is not viable by definition has no autonomy.

See post 328 for an argument I provided against this argument (that you finally made)

 

[CountAntonius]

Though I won't celebrate it nor condemn it The option and choice should be provided. Being close to a few people with family members with downs I can't imagine them not existing making the world a better place for those who love them.

It hurts to read about these so called miserable lives and suffering. Have you people lived with someone who has down syndrome? They enjoy life just like you do, they bring joy and comfort to people just like you do. Many of them can even have a job, they can bring their contribution to society.

Honestly pretty repulsive to read some of the replies in here. Not about abortions which I am fine with under any circumstances but how they view the lives of people with down syndrome.

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

Yes the child's life is worth less? If that's what you are saying then I am disgusted.

Here's a cookie for when you get over your disgust. We are absolutely weighing conflicting interests and deciding that one should not be forced to share their body with another for the latter's continued/potential existence. It is very analogous to forced organ donation.

If this is unsettling to you, don't get an abortion or don't get pregnant.

 

[Eye for an Eye]

Let the parents decide for themselves if they decide they want and can take care of a child with Down Syndrome, and whatever their choice, it's theirs.

In this case, I think it's a good thing that these tests are available.
I have an adoptive brother who is 24 years old. But he has the mental capacity of a 2 or 3 year old. My parents did not 'sign up' for a special needs child, but they got one 'on accident'.
My brother does not have Down Syndrome, but he lives in a home with others who all have it.

If you ever feel unloved, go to a home where people with Down Syndrome live.
Every time I visit my brother, I'm getting at least a dozen hugs by each of them. Mental disability is called 'limited' here.
I see them dancing along the music with all their love and enthusiasm and not a shred of worry about how they might look.
And I'm awkwardly standing to the side line having serious doubts about who is the real 'limited' one in the room.
Every year on my brother's birthday, they each write a speech to tell him what they like about him, and how much they love him.
Some write it down, some try to memorize it, some just wing it. But it's all heartfelt in a way that I wish I could express myself.

That are some of the upsides of Down.

It's possible for someone with the Down Syndrome to have a normal to high IQ, but this is rare. Most of them are not able to live independently.
For their entire lives, they will need help. My brother and some of the people he lives with have simple jobs. Spikes in boxes. Wrapping things up. Simple farm work. Simple householding and cleaning.
My brother loves his packing job because the trucks come pick up all the boxes when the work is done and he loves trucks. He'll never be able to drive one.

There's always a caretaker in the house. They need help with medicine, bathing, dressing and getting ready for going to work if they can do any.
They are in their mid-twenties and none of them can go out unsupervised, because they do not have the mental capability to stay out of harms way in traffic, and to make it back home.
Some of them can read and write a bit and some can count a bit, but sorting out taxes? Never.

Their immune system isn't as strong as 'normal' people's.
Back in spring, one of the girls was so ill they thought she wouldn't live to see Summer. She miraculously recovered and seems to be doing well. For now.
Nearly half of people with Down Syndrome have heart defects and need multiple surgeries in their life. Thyroid gland related issues are common.
They are all motivated to exercise as much as possible, and treats are kept to a minimum because they put on weight easily.

People with down syndrome do not live as long as people without it. And when they get old, they have a high risk to develop dementia.

Homes aren't perfect. You can search the world for the best one and place your child there. It still won't be up to your standards.
I've seen my parents try. First just for the weekends. Since a few years, permanently.
There's been incidents. People gotten hurt. Things went missing. Innocents accused.
A friend of the family went through a lot to get their daughter in a home. But it didn't work out, and she couldn't stay there. She's in her mid 30s and is living with her parents again. Her parents are getting old and their daughter needs a lot of care.
Sometimes, both need to work on the same day, and there is no other choice but locking up their daughter in a padded playroom and hoping she'll be fine for the hours they're gone.

In contrast with my brother, I was the smartest kid in my class. Teachers told my parents "She's gonna make it far in life!"
When I was around 16, I applied for a school abroad. It was a school held in high regard and I was accepted.
Overjoyed, I showed my mother. "But that's too far away. If you study there, you'll want to live there. Then who will take care of your brother when we are too old?"

My brother brags about me a lot to his housemates. Because I can read and write and because I can drive a car. Even though I barely reach 5 feet and he's much taller than me, he looks up to me.
He comes back from his work and he gives me a music box wrapped in toilet paper, something he has stolen but he doesn't understand that it's wrong.
At times when I visit, he says to me, in his very limited vocabulary, that he missed me, those are the times I think "It's okay, it's fine. It's worth it that I gave up my dreams to take care of you because you can't help how you are."

But a selfish part of myself can't help to think how my life could have been. If.

I too have an older "little" brother like this. But I did go on and now I live on the other side of the country. My if's are wondering how to bring him here. Are the group homes any better out here? Are the medical teams any better? Will he have more people to help him? Will he understand moving clear across the country (he's non-verbal)? My mother is in a home herself, does he miss her? Does anyone visit him? I want to take care of him, but I've never been in a financially stable place in my life to take it on. I know I cannot take care of his daily needs or have him live at home. There is no choice but to leave him in a facility to look after his daily needs. I just don't know where the best place is. One of my biggest fears is finding out he died and I've never been able to do anything for him. He's currently a ward of the state.

There is joy and happiness for those with Downs because they're completely unaware or unable to understand the bigger world around them. The parents and family are the ones that suffer. They're the ones that see the divide.

 

[mcarlie]

And yet, I did not mention a paraplegic because it's not even remotely the same thing. Try again.

I know you didn't I did. Feels like you're coming up with arbitrary reasons for ignoring my response, like the fact that some concept in an analogy that I came up with was not mentioned by you first. Do both parties need to have mentioned every concept or object in an analogy for the analogy to provide some insight to the discussion or present an argument?

 

[Abilidebob]

Thanks for sharing this. I grew up with my uncle in the family who has down syndrome. He is truly a delightful person, always friendly and potile. Everyone he meets ends up loving him. He was always doing chores at home, always had the energy and the desire. But ofcourse he also needed help in many situations and had to be looked after. My mother has said that it was hard on her sometimes, but she wouldn't change it. Also one of my sisters has milder intellectual disabilities. But everything that I said about my uncle fits to her too. They are both better persons than me. And it pains me to this day that I used to be ashamed of them. Because of how people see them, the nasty remarks. I was afraid that I'd get bullied because of them. And I absolutely hate to see the word retard thrown so casually here in GAF. And nobody says anything to it. Please stand up people like you do with so many other social issues.

It hurts to read about these so called miserable lives and suffering. Have you people lived with someone who has down syndrome? They enjoy life just like you do, they bring joy and comfort to people just like you do. Many of them can even have a job, they can bring their contribution to society.

I'm not saying this to be against abortions. Since I do support the right for the woman to choose. It's just the language used that gets to me, since it doesn't match with my own experiences at all.

Exactly. For how progressive Gaf is it's fucking disgusting to see the word "retard" being thrown around so damn much here.

If a woman wants to abort her child that's her decision. But people in this thread acting like you SHOULD abort a fetus if you discover it has Downs Syndrome, and that it's "immoral" to keep it or that a woman is a "monster" because she decided to keep it are honestly disgusting human beings that I sincerely hope have their worst nightmares come true.

 

[mcarlie]

Worth less than the woman's carrying it if she chooses not to have it yes. And you can be as disgusted as you like I don't care about pleasing you but about women having control of their bodies. One of those beings can live without the other and it sure isn't the fetus.

Why does it matter whether or not the fetus can survive on it's own?

 

[Ryzaki009]

Why does it matter whether or not the fetus can survive on it's own?

Because that's my reasoning.

Since it can't live outside the mother's body she has every right to abort it if she doesn't desire to carry it for whatever reason.

 

[Eye for an Eye]

Thanks for sharing this. I grew up with my uncle in the family who has down syndrome. He is truly a delightful person, always friendly and polite. Everyone he meets ends up loving him. He was always doing chores at home, always had the energy and the desire. But ofcourse he also needed help in many situations and had to be looked after. My mother has said that it was hard on her sometimes, but she wouldn't change it. Also one of my sisters has milder intellectual disabilities. But everything that I said about my uncle fits to her too. They are both better persons than me. And it pains me to this day that I used to be ashamed of them. Because of how people see them, the nasty remarks. I was afraid that I'd get bullied because of them. Now I'd want all of you to meet them. And I absolutely hate to see the word retard thrown so casually here in GAF. And nobody says anything to it. Please stand up people like you do with so many other social issues.

It hurts to read about these so called miserable lives and suffering. Have you people lived with someone who has down syndrome? They enjoy life just like you do, they bring joy and comfort to people just like you do. Many of them can even have a supported job, they can bring their contribution to society.

I'm not saying this to be against abortions. Since I do support the right for the woman to choose. It's just the language used that gets to me, since it doesn't match with my own experiences at all.

I too was very oblivious to the needs of a handicap person until I became an adult and realized how hard it is when you are normal. I love my brother and he'll always be my brother, but I wouldn't wish his condition on anyone, and I feel it's extremely unfair for him to live with that condition. I can't change my mother's decision, but I can make my own for my life and what I feel is best. That's exactly what I have done.

 

[Pau]

See post 328 for an argument I provided against this argument (that you finally made)

Sorry for assuming that you knew the definitions of words commonly used in this discussion. I was clearly wrong to expect that much from you.

Your argument about self consciousness has nothing to do with autonomy of the body. Even if the fetus had a mind of a self-conscious, 35-year-old genius with the cure for cancer, if it needed to live within the mother to survive, she should have the right to terminate it's life.

 

[mcarlie]

Because that's my reasoning.

This isn't an argument. Do you by any chance see my point of view a little at least? Millions of abortions occur every year and the only arguments that I'm presented with are repetitions of mantras and "that's just my reasoning" types of arguments.

Since it can't live outside the mother's body she has every right to abort it if she doesn't desire to carry it for whatever reason.

You're just repeating what you said earlier, while still not providing any further justification.

 

[Fallout-NL]

I know you didn't I did. Feels like you're coming up with arbitrary reasons for ignoring my response, like the fact that some concept in an analogy that I came up with was not mentioned by you first. Do both parties need to have mentioned every concept or object in an analogy for the analogy to provide some insight to the discussion or present an argument?

There could have been something to that if your analogy had been a little more like an analogy and a little less like a ridiculous straw man, implying that I would rather kill someone that has become paralyzed than care for them. That's fundamentally different from terminating a collection of cells that barely resemble life. Life that, given the choice, would probably also prefer not to have down syndrome.

But whatever, guy like you has to be trolling. And if you're not: can't stop progress.

 

[mcarlie]

Sorry for assuming that you knew the definitions of words commonly used in this discussion. I was clearly wrong to expect that much from you.

Your argument about self consciousness has nothing to do with autonomy of the body. Even if the fetus had a mind of a self-conscious, 35-year-old genius with the cure for cancer, if it needed to live within the mother to survive, she should have the right to terminate it's life.

W.H.Y.?

 

[Nia]

I have many friends with Downs Syndrome and other special needs. Their parents chose to have them, and there's no denying it was difficult, but the result of their choice is that they impacted their lives and the lives of others in such meaningful ways, myself included. The years I spent getting to know them and helping them are some of the best in my life. I know the issue is multifaceted, and in the end the choice lies with the mother, but some of these comments are really disturbing, almost soulless.

 

[mcarlie]

There could have been something to that if your analogy had been a little more like an analogy and a little less like a ridiculous straw man, implying that I would rather kill someone that has become paralyzed than care for them. That's fundamentally different from terminating a collection of cells that barely resemble life. Life that, given the choice, would probably also prefer not to have down syndrome.

You suggested that the difficulty involved in taking care of someone diminishes the value if their life and would allow you to kill them, so I provided an analogy to see if you're views would apply in that situation as well.

 

[Aiustis]

It's extremely ableist to say people with disabilities being better off aborted and to treat their existence is a travesty and a burden.

Abortion should always be about choice.

 

[Pau]

This isn't an argument. Do you by any chance see my point of view a little at least? Millions of abortions occur every year and the only arguments that I'm presented with are repetitions of mantras and "that's just my reasoning" types of arguments.

You know what drives down those abortion numbers? Sexual education and access to birth control.

You know what doesn't drive down those numbers? Making abortion illegal.

Look, we're clearly arguing in circles. Like I said before, luckily, you don't have to get an abortion if you don't want to. If you really care about abortions and prenatal care, I recommend that you put your effort into the stuff that actually lowers the occurrence of abortions and increases women's access to prenatal care. And if you are already doing that, great.

 

[Fulminator]

W.H.Y.?

Why not?

 

[Eye for an Eye]

I have many friends with Downs Syndrome and other special needs. Their parents chose to have them, and there's no denying it was difficult, but the result of their choice is that they impacted their lives and the lives of others in such meaningful ways, myself included. The years I spent getting to know them and helping them are some of the best in my life. I know the issue is multifaceted, and in the end the choice lies with the mother, but some of these comments are really disturbing, almost soulless.

Because people would rather shut out the women who have terminated for medical reasons, rather than include them in the discussion. Or even begin to inderstand their choice for what they have done.

Downs and other genetic issues are always going to be there, whether its a fluke or inherited, because for now women have a choice. That's the bottom line. A woman's life and body should not be in the hands of government regulations, but in her own hands with the assistance of her doctors.

 

[Christhor]

I'm okay with this.

 

[Fallout-NL]

You suggested that the difficulty involved in taking care of someone diminishes the value if their life and would allow you to kill them, so I provided an analogy to see if you're views would apply in that situation as well.

Trouble is that you're equating abortion with murder. So what you see as a valid analogy, I see as patently ridiculous. It's disheartening, seeing there's still people that hold those antiquated views. Also means there's little point in continuing a discussion.

 

[Ryzaki009]

This isn't an argument. Do you by any chance see my point of view a little at least? Millions of abortions occur every year and the only arguments that I'm presented with are repetitions of mantras and "that's just my reasoning" types of arguments.



You're just repeating what you said earlier, while still not providing any further justification.

No I don't. You want to lower abortion rates increase sex education, access to birth control and child services for those that choose to have them. Otherwise it's meaningless what you want vs the reality of what people choose for their health and futures. The right to choose is just that a choice if you don't like that choice don't make it but attempting to make that choice for other people is pointless. There's a wide berth of justifications that you may or may not agree with and that's fine but that doesn't stop it from being their decision not yours.

Unless of course you're the one carrying, birthing and raising said child.

 

[mcarlie]

You know what drives down those abortion numbers? Sexual education and access to birth control.

I agree.

You know what doesn't drive down those numbers? Making abortion illegal.

That may depend on the circumstances. Any potential increase may have to do with what you mentioned above regarding education and birth control not being provided in addition to abortion being illegal, which I agree is a bad combination.

Look, we're clearly arguing in circles. Like I said before, luckily, you don't have to get an abortion if you don't want to.

I'm not concerned about myself at all.

 

[SummitAve]

Because people would rather shut out the women who have terminated for medical reasons, rather than include them in the discussion. Or even begin to inderstand their choice for what they have done.

Downs and other genetic issues are always going to be there, whether its a fluke or inherited, because for now women have a choice. That's the bottom line. A woman's life and body should not be in the hands of government regulations, but in her own hands with the assistance of her doctors.

No government regulations regarding choice in abortions is not something any side really argues though. Even pro-choice. It's always been a debate over how much choice, even some of the staunchest supporters of pro-life will admit there are circumstances where they are ok with abortion. I think it should be in the hands of the government to some extent, and I don't think women should have unlimited choice.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I don't understand this argument. The ability to choose is always more important than whether or not the action is moral? If I choose to steal something that I'm within my right to do so because I otherwise wouldn't be able to make a choice?

Abortion choice. Bodily autonomy choice.

 

[Dynasty]

Made a comment on the first page I'll expand it because I think it is the one of the only few reasonable Pro-life posistion.
Morally abortion is wrong, it is murder but in todays world I view it as a neccessary evil. Outlawing abortions will not stop abortions, it will result in the return of back street abortions, which is much more dangerous, due to it being unregulated. Pro-life people should instead be combating abortions through, sex-ed, fighting back against abstinence-only education, pushing goverments to make contraceptions more easily and freely available, investing in the foster care system to make it better etc. The only time I would say abortion is not a morally wrong thing to do is if the mother's life is in danger.

 

[mcarlie]

Trouble is that you're equating abortion with murder. So what you see as a valid analogy, I see as patently ridiculous. It's disheartening, seeing there's still people that hold those antiquated views. Also means there's little point in continuing a discussion.

The age of a view has nothing to do with it's truth value. I'm not equating it with murder per se. I wouldn't call someone who has had an abortion a murderer in the the same sense, considering that the person probably was influenced by people on your side into thinking that the act does not have immoral qualities.

 

[Ondor]

That could be true.



All true.

And the healthcare thing is something I just can't understand in American conservatives. I live in Finland and here even the most right wing politicians seem to agree on universal health care at least to some extent. And most would be for the help of the disabled.


What you said about the "work of the devil" and the cutting of health care for disabled, it still doesn't take away what I originally said about the certain situation of letting the disabled to live. At least to me, there is the world of difference between someone who advocates that everyone should be let to be born and someone who advocates for the immorality of letting a disabled child to be born.

I'm not saying this is THE liberal stand though.



But I'm not here saying all liberals say this or that even this thread has many who are saying things like that. I was only replying to a post that was a reply to a certain post.

I might be tone deaf here but I still think my point was accurate. If anyone feels it's an attack against their political ideals, then that's a completely different issue.

I brought up 'the work of the devil' and gutting health care to contrast the beliefs between left and right ideologies. Right-wing beliefs are letting the child be born on principle and then abandoning them because they're usually seen as a burden on society. Left-wing ideology nearly universally wants the child to be protected and cared for which is the polar opposite to what Hitler did.

I understand you're not painting all of socialism as Nazis and I do think there is a legitimate point to be made in regards to genetic selection and manipulation. That being said, comparisons to Hitler probably weren't the best way to try and make that point especially in a world where political divide becomes more prominent. I know you're Finnish but a lot of posters here are American and drawing parallels to left ideology with Hitler days after someone is murdered by a right-wing neo-nazi is bound to only inflame people's opinions and stifle any meaningful discusiion in regards to this topic.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You haven't given an argument for this assertion which makes it difficult to give any kind of response since there is nothing to respond to.



Same goes for you.

Umm that was my argument. We don't even force dead people to donate organs. We don't force blood donations. We don't force people to do anything that requires giving up their bodily autonomy for another... but all that goes out the window when abortion is raised

 

[mcarlie]

No I don't. You want to lower abortion rates increase sex education, access to birth control and child services for those that choose to have them.

Is this a question? Yes, I want all of these things.

Otherwise it's meaningless what you want vs the reality of what people choose for their health and futures. The right to choose is just that a choice if you don't like that choice don't make it but attempting to make that choice for other people is pointless. There's a wide berth of justifications that you may or may not agree with and that's fine but that doesn't stop it from being their decision not yours.

Unless of course you're the one carrying, birthing and raising said child.

Again, it's just this repetition of it being a choice, without actually identifying the particular qualities of the situation that make the choice of the mother more important than the life.

 

[Ryzaki009]

Is this a question? Yes, I want all of these things.



Again, it's just this repetition of it being a choice, without actually identifying the particular qualities of the situation that make the choice of the mother more important than the life.

That's great. Now support those things and the numbers of abortions will naturally go down as a result. Nothing else needed. Isn't that swell.

I already said what made it more important the fact that of the two she's the one sacrificing her body and health for the other to live and said life can't exist without her paying that price. It's not complicated. The fetus has no right to the woman's body without her consent. Much like if you invited me in your house and I outstayed my welcome. You have every right to evict me at that point.

You come up with a way a fetus can be separated from a woman and live on its own and then sure I'll be anti-abortion because it's not necessary failing that I'm going with the choice that puts the woman's bodily anatomy above that of something that cannot live without her hosting it.

 

[mcarlie]

Umm that was my argument. We don't even force dead people to donate organs. We don't force blood donations. We don't force people to do anything that requires giving up their bodily autonomy for another... but all that goes out the window when abortion is raised

The person in question is already in the situation where they need to provide for the unborn child. Forcing blood donations or organ donations would force a person into a situation that they are not already involved in and had no part in bringing about.

You have to remember that in the cases mentioned here the mother very likely causes the situation that brought about the development of the child.

 

[excelsiorlef]

The person in question is already in the situation where they need to provide for the unborn child. Forcing blood donations or organ donations would force a person into a situation that they are not already involved in and had no part in bringing about.

You have to remember that in the cases mentioned here the mother very likely causes the situation that brought about the development of the child.

I go back to organ donations after death. We don't force that even if it means more will die. A corpse has the right to deny another person life.

Irrelevant. I could invite you into my car accidentally crash it and not be forced to give you part of my liver to save your life.

 

[mcarlie]

That's great. Now support those things and the numbers of abortions will naturally go down as a result. Nothing else needed. Isn't that swell.

I would rather support things that actually get rid of abortions as much as possible rather than merely diminish them relatively slightly. I especially am against the moral trivialisation of the act that the pro-choice side has brought about and that has clearly influenced a lot of people here.

I already said what made it more important the fact that of the two she 's the one sacrificing her body and health for the other to live and said life can't exist without her paying that price. It's not complicated. The fetus has no right to the mother's body without her consent.

That would make some sense if the mother didn't start the process in the first place.

 

[mcarlie]

Irrelevant. I could invite you into my car accidentally crash it and not be forced to give you part of my liver to save your life.

If you intended to do it or were driving unreasonably dangerously you could very well be both legally and morally responsible.

 

[excelsiorlef]

If you intended to do it or were driving unreasonably dangerously you could very well be both legally and morally responsible.

But still not have to give up your body.

I mean unless you want to argue we should put women who have abortions in jail.

I gave you a benign example because unwanted pregnancy is much more like a no fault accident than any illegal accident.

 

[Geist-]

From what I understand of the disease, there is no solution. Downs randomly occurs, so even if every fetus with downs was aborted and no one had it in the population, it would still work its way back in.

It doesn't matter if the gene is still there as long as fetuses are still tested regularly.

 

[Ryzaki009]

I would rather support things that actually get rid of abortions as much as possible rather than merely diminish them relatively slightly. I especially am against the moral trivialisation of the act that the pro-choice side has brought about and that has clearly influenced a lot of people here.

That would make some sense if the mother didn't start the process in the first place.

So you think banning abortions merely diminishes them compared to birth control and sex ed? So instead of using birth control you'd rather get women doing things like dumping babies in toilets, using coat hangers, throwing themselves down stairs, having someone beat them, buying medicine from out of the country that's clearly not been properly vetted, and so on. Then that's not even going into the other effects of women giving birth that are clearly not ready, willing or equipped for it. But if you think that's a trivialization on how women who did not want to give birth would dump their children like garbage assuming they didn't go to some back alley hack and end dying as a result while wealthier women took abortion trips to other countries and come back fine by all means.

That said I love how it's moral trivialization to realize that people have different circumstances and to know I know less about their situation than they do. That's rich.

Yes she did and she decided that she no longer wanted to host the child therefore her rights trump that of the fetus that is dependent on her body to live.

 

[StoneFox]

That would make some sense if the mother didn't start the process in the first place.

Are you implying that preventative measures are 100% effective? Because they aren't. The dude could have been wearing a condom and she could have been taking birth control at the same time and there is still a chance of pregnancy. Are you saying in that case she shouldn't be allowed to abort because she dared to have consensual, relatively safe sex?

 

[Noobcraft]

It doesn't matter if the gene is still there as long as fetuses are still tested regularly.

Downs isn't a gene (or related to any one gene). It happens when a sperm or an egg has a chromosomal abnormality - an entire (or parts of an) extra chromosome (21 in this case) is present in the gamete. This happens randomly, and the older a woman is, the higher the chance is of having a down syndrome pregnancy.

Trisomy 14,18, and 21 are (afaik) the only trisomies that can be carried to term. Other trisomies interfere with embryogenesis too much and are typically spontaneously aborted during pregnancy (I think this usually occurs before the woman knows she's pregnant).

Down Syndrome can have a fairly large spectrum of effects, and some people with Down Syndrome can be pretty functional as adults (to the point of living independently), while others can have debilitating effects/life ending complications.

 

[Ondor]

It doesn't matter if the gene is still there as long as fetuses are still tested regularly.

That's not a solution then. That's nothing like what vaccines did to polio.

 

[mcarlie]

But still not have to give up your body.

I mean unless you want to argue we should put women who have abortions in jail.

I gave you a benign example because unwanted pregnancy is much more like a no fault accident than any illegal accident.

An unwanted pregnancy requires a prior act that is known to lead to it. No I don't think that they should be put in jail.

In your example the person's body isn't a necessary requirement for the person's life. Even if we exclude the legal dimension, I don't think you can escape from the moral one, unless you are willing to admit that the action is immoral yet still want to argue for it's legality.

 

[bitbydeath]

Down syndrome presents with a wide range of medical issues including cardiovascular, neurological (including early-onset Alzheimer's at the age of 40), infectious, hearing, vision, thyroid and other endocrine problems.

These people require help for their entire life, but that doesn't change the outcome or prognosis of their disease, and their quality of life is vastly inferior to the rest of the population.

There is NOTHING nice about it.

If it is possible to eliminate such syndromes from society, then that would surely be great.

That pretty much sums it all up, it is not something you should knowingly inflict upon someone IMO.