Mainly concerning Downs Syndrome though.
I was inspired by the Washington Post's
The Abortion Debate No One Wants to Have and provoked by other pupils comments saying that it was something wrong, malfunctional and good to get rid off. So I went for pro-life and against the pro-choicers. I felt I got alot of good points across, like:
• One can't compare the value of people's life
• Healthcare for people with Downs have improved significantly in the later years and there's a higher life-expectancy.
• It's doubtfull to let the media's stigma against a condition decide the fate of a child.
My last comment was also the last of all comments before the teacher decided to stop the discussion "It's not a disease, it's a way of being" which I strongly believe but that is not the only thing I would have liked to have said afterwards:
"I do not like that a group of people that are being loved for who they are shall just disappear".
I would like to second that congratulation! (As long as you try to be nice about it... but I do myself get a bit testy about things that rub me wrong.)
It's great that you stood up to them.
Just one thing I wanted to point out - The "pro-life" vs "pro-choice" debate is entirely separate to the "designer babies" debate.
It's entirely possible to be pro-choice and still not agree with abortion being based on who the child is going to become. I see it as being against pre-natal testing, rather than against legalised abortion.
The whole abortion debate comes down to a discussion of when a body should be awarded human rights. Since I don't consider early embryos worthy of human rights, I don't see anything wrong with abortion per se, as long as it's early. Having committed to this view, I don't see a coherent way to oppose abortion based on such testing.
Would I (or rather, had I been a woman) want to abort a disabled child, though, is quite another discussion. I don't subscribe to the view that any and all disabled people, whether it be down's or something else, should be removed from future generations.
Anyway, standing up for your own opinions is a good thing.
I think God wants us to care, and we wouldn't have to if we were all perfect were we? When we see one that needs our care, we have a choice, care or reject. Reject is Satan's idea.
The whole abortion debate comes down to a discussion of when a body should be awarded human rights. Since I don't consider early embryos worthy of human rights, I don't see anything wrong with abortion per se, as long as it's early. Having committed to this view, I don't see a coherent way to oppose abortion based on such testing.
Would I (or rather, had I been a woman) want to abort a disabled child, though, is quite another discussion. I don't subscribe to the view that any and all disabled people, whether it be down's or something else, should be removed from future generations.
Anyway, standing up for your own opinions is a good thing.
Not to me, to me it comes down to the survival of a group of people. I'd say I am against most if not every kind of eugenetics.
Just one thing I wanted to point out - The "pro-life" vs "pro-choice" debate is entirely separate to the "designer babies" debate.
It's entirely possible to be pro-choice and still not agree with abortion being based on who the child is going to become. I see it as being against pre-natal testing, rather than against legalised abortion.
I have to agree that it sounds more sensible to be against prenetal testing rather than abortion alltogether.
I would like to second that congratulation! (As long as you try to be nice about it... but I do myself get a bit testy about things that rub me wrong.)
And I would like to 3rd it. We had a discussion on abortion at work and it had to be stopped because people got really upset. It was interesting that the two single mothers in the group were the ones most upset about the debate but I was disappointed at how many old fallacies about abortion were trotted out.
One of the single mums said her boyfriend broke up with her because she wouldn't have an abortion and the other one (me) said much the same but I didn't have threats made against me (apart from withdrawal of emotional support). An older lady was also against abortion because two of her grandchildren to be were lost through abortion.
I have a child who is under...eh..testings.
Its seems like the diagnose is unsurten,-they say they dont know yet,it takes futher testing,but its leading towards pervaisive development disorder/HFA(i think thats what its called,in norwegian uspesifisert gjennomgripende utviklingsforstyrrelse),but time might change it.
I love my kid over everything in the world and it has unike qualities,like everyone else.
There is nothing in the world that could ever change my opinion on this!
Zakkie, I agree this complicates and polarizes the discussion of anti-abortion* v. pro-choice. The anti-abortion people use this to manipulate the discussion into support for outlawing all abortions.
* I refuse to use the term 'pro-life" since so many people who oppose abortion really don't give a damn what happens to children after they are born, and they are so often in favor of anti-life practices like war, eliminating or restricting help for the sick and elderly, and capital punishment.
Another complication is this: do we want mothers to have neuro-diverse children when those mothers would have preferred to abort them?
"If i'd known you were going to be like this, I would have aborted you."
"Gee, Mom, I love you, too!"
What some Jewish religious communities do is this: each single seeks a marriage partner gets tested for a gene of a specific trait (in reality it is Tay Sachs) and they are given a code. When they want to date someone (with the intention to marry, not supposed to be premarital sex either), they call in the other person's code and the match is analyzed to determine the risk of having a baby with the genetic disorder. They get back a report (confidentiality is maintained) and decide whether to date or not. No abortion necessary.
This is not possible yet with autism but it could also be used for autistic people seeking to marry each other and have autistic children by choice.
What do you think?
I think God wants us to care, and we wouldn't have to if we were all perfect were we? When we see one that needs our care, we have a choice, care or reject. Reject is Satan's idea.
And I think that religion is a joke, but that's a different topic altogether.
I'm pro-choice, that doesn't mean that I'm pro-abortion, truthfully, I'm anti-abortion, but I don't think it should be up to anyone except for the pregnant woman to decide if she can have it or not.