Aspies For Freedom

Yes sterilization was used a long time here in Sweden, to some extent untill the 80's.

If this new knowledge would result in being able to remove the bad parts in autism and Asperger's but still keep the good things, then sure. However, abortion because you can trace genetic markers linked with autism, IS NOT an option. Because that's getting dangerously close to genocide.

Personally I wouldn't mind not being mind-blind... But I like who I am and I wouldn't want to be anyone else.

From my view the word holocaust should not be used. It would upset a lot of people and  might give some people reasons to put AFF down.

A lot of people over here would protest the use of the word, even being right with the definition of it. But as a lot of people in Germany are overcritical to belongings of Nazi-Germany and terms that were used.

In my eyes it should be a political decision not to use the word.

Sorry, I can't explain the reasons very good in English, but I miss the political vocabulary.

Sibylle

I have to say that the use of the word '***' is a deeply sexist and in fact misogynistic term and should never be used under any circumstances!

As to the argument that opposing abortion in some cases but not in others are hypocrites, well, that's actually true! Which is why I believe that if individual women, for whatever reason, can't cope with the idea of having a disabled or autistic child, that is a matter for their conscience. The issue is that institutionalised abortion of certain kinds of people i.e women being told to have an abortion  by the medical/ scientific/ whatever establishment, could lead to near extinction of spectrumites, not the free choice of individual women.

I think that by going on about abortion all the time we are a little in danger of missing the point - even if we prevented this from happening we'd have a whole host of new problems due to lack of support for autistic people and parents, the frequent use of abusive treatments and, most importantly, the ideologies that underpin all this - the kind of negativity put about by NAAR and others. I believe any protest should focus on what they are saying about us, because that is the heart of the problem. Let's not confuse the symptoms with the cause.

They must be giving out prizes now for the most obnoxious opinions and James Watson is the one who should go, and not us.  :mad:  :evil: What a pile of excrementitious matter his opinions on AS are!

I think both my parents showed signs of mild autism and one of my brothers too, plus an uncle on my dad's side. Mum thinks some of her father's relatives had something too.

I note in another conversation that in the UK, parents can have Downs syndrome babies aborted at any stage.   :twisted: This to me is utterly disgusting, but if this is allowed, how do we know that it won't be allowed for other conditions, such as autism. I don't think taxpayer's money should be wasted on funding elective abortions at all.

I think somebody can be against abortion without being religious. I've read up about it and the methods that are used are very cruel and it is already scientifically proven that fetuses feel pain.

I think there is too much public funding for people to have abortions and not enough on educating young people about being responsible for themselves.

I also think that prenatal testing should only be allowed under limited circumstances eg. there is a family history of something such as haemophilia.

JN, I had an unplanned pregnancy back in 1985 and can assure you I am not one of these S's you talk about and think it is a very objectionable to term to use against women who have unplanned pregnancies. The father wanted me not to have the baby but I said I am not going to endanger my health and mental state just so life can be more convenient for you! So he said, "right, you're on your own". It was not known then that I had AS and even if it was, I still would have gone through with the pregnancy.

This baby is now a beautiful, intelligent, young lady who has just turned 19 (10th June) and it just goes to show that women shouldn't let themselves get pressured into an abortion just because somebody else says so. They are usually just out for themselves, even if they are a medical practitioner.

JN, I think you're quite correct in saying that males have co-opted the feminist agenda for their own ends in many ways. It kind of annoys me when I see all these articles in women's magazines about women "juggling" housework, childcare and work.

You don't see comparable articles about men too often, if at all. So a lot of women now have to spend more time doing things than they ever do.It's a wonder that women don't wake up to how much they've lost in the name of "liberation". I know there's been gains too, but it has been a very poisoned chalice in some ways.

As for abortion and contraception, it is still usually seen as the woman's responsibility, despite the fact it takes two people to make a baby.  :smile:

JN, thanks for your congratulations. I am lucky though that my daughter's father wasn't a violent person. I have read some really chilling stories about men whose partners wouldn't have an abortion who either went on to murder the woman or cause her to have a miscarriage/stillbirth.  :cry:    :shock:

Amy, these people must have high energy levels, or something.

I personally like to visit places that are a bit untidy and not so perfect so then I don't feel so bad about my house being untidy. I work full time and have my younger daughter staying with me about half of the time.

By the time I get home at night, I'm too tired to do much. Trying to work out what to have for dinner is always hard. If it's just me, I'm happy to have some baked beans and cheese on toast or TV dinners or similar but my daughter turns up her nose at such things.

Shopping and planning for meals often defeats me and it was worse when I was with my daughter's father as he used to criticise a lot. He thought if his mum could keep an immaculate house, why couldn't I. I kept on saying "I'm not your mum" but I could tell it wasn't getting heard.

This is a very complicated thing to talk about and I'm still not sure what my opinion is  :roll:

One should take into consideration that our medical system can keep babies alive that would not survive, if we did not have high tech medicine. No doubt, this is good on one hand, as ethically we can't let any baby die. But on the other hand, seeing the evolutional and biological point (and only that - I don't want anybody to let children die because they have some "defects") it does no good for the "human race", if watching it as only one species on our planet that has to compete for resources. It is not always the first child, a women gives life to, that's the fittest/intelligentest/best conditioned. And going back to the "rules" life (in general) has to follow, only the fittest are to survive.

That does not mean in any way, that I propose genetic testing - for no human is wise enough to see, which genes the human race will benefit from. We have dissociated from the roots of being natural long ago.

On the other hand we live in a very competitive world - in ways, human are not fit for. We (humans) suffer from stress-related deseases, little exercise, false or too much food and, not for least, insufficent and inadequate social behavior (which does not mean AS - it's more that the NT society goes/pushes that way, but I don't know, if a pure AS society would be better).

We interfere with our instincts (using anti-baby-pill changes our natural ability to find a sexual partner who fits the immune system best) and we mess up our environment. And in my opinion we live too close together (which could be the AS in me, but I don't think that it is only this).

Maybe it is partly the environments fault that a lot more people show AS or autistic traits then it seemed before. Learning that autistic genes belong to our human race inheritance and that by now nobody can say, how it comes, some ppl seem to get more autistic than others (please correct me, if I'm wrong), makes me think about what else could be responsible that autism seems to be a problem now, but was not in early times (at least it seemed not to be as big as a problem).

For me, I would not want to raise a child with Down Syndrome or one that has brain defects in a way that I could not hope it once will have an independent life - but on the other hand, I don't think I could abort any child nor give it away for adoption. Another thought: I don't know much about Down Syndrome and maybe I would change my mind if I knew someone with it.

Anyway, I don't think that someone can be the conscience for anybody else. I would be very upset if someone came along and told me to keep or abort a child of mine - for what reason ever! But I think it wise to regulate the period in which such an decision can be made - it is pure cruelty to abort a child that could live, if born premature.

There is much more to say and to consider which I just have problems to express in English, I'm sorry. And of course I have changed my point of view quite a lot of times in my life, so maybe finding out some new facts or having new thoughts might change my mind again.

I like a saying (sorry, for my poor translation): Only boobies/fools don't change their mind.

puzzled
Sibylle

Lili Marlene, if a woman doesn't want a particular man to be the father of her child, wouldn't it be better to take precautions so a pregnancy is less likely to occur? You can tell a lot about a man by the way he treats his mother and his sisters. Male chauvinists are best kept away from.

And if the father doesn't want to know, why should the unborn child be penalised? I think abortion should only be available in very limited circumstances and done in a proper hospital. I don't agree with any of my taxes going to fund abortion on demand.

Even a lot of kids who were initially very much wanted get mistreated later on - the parents may have unreal expectations of them, they may fall upon hard times and so on.

I also don't think there is such thing as a truly unwanted child - witness the high numbers of people who wish to adopt and get turned away because there aren't enough children to adopt.

But there are many people in Western countries desperate to have children who would adopt these kids if it were made a bit easier. Despite the current hardships and expense, a number of people do adopt from overseas every year.

I am not suggesting open slather on overseas adoptions but children who are "unwanted" in one society could be very much "wanted" in another.

I just hope his ridiculous ideas don't become widely accepted. There are enough threats to us already and we don't need more pressure for things such as prenatal testing.