Ohio bans doctors from performing Down Syndrome abortions

[c172]

https://apnews.com/6b1fed3f62f045a8a26a6..._medium=AP

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio is prohibiting doctors from performing abortions based on a diagnosis of Down syndrome, joining other states with similarly strict legislation.
Republican Gov. John Kasich signed the legislation into law on Friday. Lawmakers had sent the bill to him earlier this month, in one of their last acts of the year.
The legislation, which cleared the GOP-led Legislature with some Republican opposition, makes it a crime for a doctor to terminate a pregnancy based on knowledge of Down syndrome, a genetic abnormality that causes developmental delays and medical conditions such as heart defects and respiratory and hearing problems.

As a disabled person (spina bifida), for the most part, at least on quality-of-life issues, I would not have ever wanted to be aborted. However, I accasionally do think of the enormous amount of money spent dealing with medical conditions. On the third hand, where exactly as a society do we draw the line? Plus, if we didn't spend so much money on defense, maybe we could assure a better quality of life for the disabled. 

Anybody? I know this hits home on here.

[Catholic_Lady]

Way to go Ohio. No, we should not kill babies who have down syndrome. Or spina bifida.

[A Theist]

Way to go Ohio. No, we should not kill babies who have down syndrome. Or spina bifida.

Yes. Definitely. Good for Ohio.

[Pat Mustard]

Way to go Ohio. No, we should not kill babies who have down syndrome. Or spina bifida.

But abortions don't kill babies. They terminate foetuses, something that happens naturally to about 60% of pregnancies.

[LadyForCamus]

I have to say, if a couple is trying to conceive, then they assume all the risks that come along with a pregnancy, including all the non-modifiable risks. It is my personal opinion that it’s morally wrong to abort a baby that you actively, and knowingly conceived, because it didn’t develop in an ideal fashion. Creating new life is not like ordering something off of amazon. This is just my personal opinion, ofc.

[RoadRunner79]

Way to go Ohio. No, we should not kill babies who have down syndrome. Or spina bifida.

But abortions don't kill babies. They terminate foetuses, something that happens naturally to about 60% of pregnancies.

Most people die... does your reasoning follow there as well?

[Amarok]

Once again limiting bodily autonomy . And pushing women into the back alley . While honestly not saving anyone  .

[AFTT47]

Oh, boy. Of all the moral conundrums, I find the issue of abortion to be one of the most agonizing.

The first point to address is that of baby vs. fetus. The OP doesn't mention gestation and I don't know if the Ohio law does or not. I don't care what man's law says here - only about scientific knowledge. We can't say for certain when consciousness begins but we sure can say beyond reasonable doubt that if the higher brain has yet to develop, there is no consciousness. If the fetus has no more awareness that it even exists than a brick does, it has nothing to lose. It is NOT a baby and it is ridiculous to claim it is such. In that case, it doesn't matter what infirmity it has or doesn't have. It has no rights because it is not a conscience being and has never been conscience.

If the fetus is past the point where it even MIGHT be conscience, I am much less comfortable with abortion. I am aware of pro-abortion arguments even at this stage. I do not personally believe it would be moral (not going to address whether or not it should be legal) to abort at this stage.

Addressing Down's Syndrome specifically: Oh, boy. One might argue that it is an affront to human dignity to live that way. But my personal observations have been that people so stricken tend to be very joyful. I used to be a SCUBA instructor and boat captain and know of one adult male who was taught to scuba dive (not by me). He always wanted to drive the boat out to the dive site and I (as Captain) let him do it several times. He did it safely and competently under my supervision. In one case, he handled a 40' boat which had particularly bad steering issues. It tended to wallow back and forth and pull particularly hard to the right. He compensated for the issue. This was a male in his thirties or so who was definitely compromised - perhaps with the mind of an 8-year-old.

Some of us (me included) highly value the lives of lower animals with even lesser intelligence than that of the typical Down's patient. Sometimes, we love them like people. I am particularly aware of this now as we just lost an elderly cat this December and it hurts.

In the end, my opinion is to treat a Down's fetus as any other. If they are prior to the stage of higher brain development, they have no more to lose than a brick has to being pulverized. Neither has any awareness and therefor no life to lose.

If a Down's fetus is at the gestation point where it MIGHT be conscious, I would consider it no more moral to abort than a fetus without any issues.

[vorlon13]

Equating unensouled tissue with ensouled living human beings is clearly heresy.

Is this an issue worth sacrificing the Biblical imprimatur of authority for all other religious/moral topics ?


I'll concede strong feelings on the topic exist, but demonstrable Error compromises not only one's Salvation, but also that individual's ability to lead others to Salvation.


So, I'll ask again, is this the Error everyone wants make accepting as consequences burning in the fiery lake for all eternity ?

[Losty]

I believe a woman should be able to abort for any reason she chooses and her reason is no one’s business but her own.