05-07-2007, 02:14 AM
Thank you for the kind words...but I'm a 'she' 
~jabeen
~jabeen
05-07-2007, 09:07 AM
It's an interesting point regarding vision defects as up until age 21, I had almost perfect vision. Almost overnight it seemed, my vision deteriorated to the point where I've had to wear glasses ever since. Upon asking a few questions, I found that this condition (late short-sightedness) affected females in my dad's side of the family. My sister also developed it at about 16, but more mildly.
Getting glasses didn't worry me (although I understand that in earlier generations, women disliked wearing glasses as they believed they made them less attractive to males - perhaps the glasses available back then were fairly clunky looking) and I think the vision impairment is a nuisance more than anything else.
It seems strange that a man would reject a potential partner simply because her vision was less than perfect.
On the wider subject of abortion for possible disabilities, I think it is dangerous to encourage it because the criteria for deciding "perfection" will get narrower and narrower and babies with relatively minor/easily correctible conditions will get caught up.
Where it is has been found likely through prenatal testing that a baby will have a more serious condition such as Downs Syndrome, few doctors seem to paint anything but a negative picture of how life will be like bringing up such a child. I realise they need to be realistic and point out that there will be some challenges, such as higher than usual chance of heart defects, but I think the general tone of pessimism would influence many parents not to proceed with the pregnancy.
I even noticed this negative tone when I was pregnant with my first child but her father was no longer with me. I was told it would not be difficult for me to request an abortion, simply on the grounds that I had a history of depression and that I would have difficulty in coping with a child on my own.
Getting glasses didn't worry me (although I understand that in earlier generations, women disliked wearing glasses as they believed they made them less attractive to males - perhaps the glasses available back then were fairly clunky looking) and I think the vision impairment is a nuisance more than anything else.
It seems strange that a man would reject a potential partner simply because her vision was less than perfect.
On the wider subject of abortion for possible disabilities, I think it is dangerous to encourage it because the criteria for deciding "perfection" will get narrower and narrower and babies with relatively minor/easily correctible conditions will get caught up.
Where it is has been found likely through prenatal testing that a baby will have a more serious condition such as Downs Syndrome, few doctors seem to paint anything but a negative picture of how life will be like bringing up such a child. I realise they need to be realistic and point out that there will be some challenges, such as higher than usual chance of heart defects, but I think the general tone of pessimism would influence many parents not to proceed with the pregnancy.
I even noticed this negative tone when I was pregnant with my first child but her father was no longer with me. I was told it would not be difficult for me to request an abortion, simply on the grounds that I had a history of depression and that I would have difficulty in coping with a child on my own.
05-07-2007, 12:33 PM
chamoisee Wrote:
I am against eugenics but pro choice.
So, you think it's bad to kill babies for "medical" reasons but perfectly acceptable to kill babies for any other whim.
05-08-2007, 02:34 PM
Thats a refreshing mental consistency, Chamoisee.
05-15-2007, 12:37 PM
Ziyaret Wrote:
Well DogBrain, you've got an agenda. You're clearly disinterested in any sort of scientific facts; since you seem to think that a Zygote-not to mention a Blastula, constistutes a baby.
If I have an "agenda" it is to oppose the unstable lunatics who blithely indulge in doublethink. If abortion is acceptable for mere inconvenience, then it is even more acceptable for eugenic purposes. Denying the latter while accepting the former is worthy of a resident of Airstrip One.
05-15-2007, 01:04 PM
Pages: 1 2