RE: Dawkins sparks outrage for saying Down Syndrome babies should be aborted
August 22, 2014 at 12:49 pm
(August 22, 2014 at 12:27 pm)Blackout Wrote: I would be more careful with words if I were you. Just because someone chooses to not abort a down syndrome child, that doesn't mean they want to impose the 'sanctity of life' idea (and btw, according to the declaration of human rights life is indeed precious)
The thing you seem to miss is that the foetuses we're talking about don't qualify for human rights. Moot point.
Quote:It's a decision and that's it, no need to say 'someone should do it' or 'someone shouldn't do it', it's none of your fucking business, I could have 10 children with down syndrome if I wanted to.
Eh, I disagree. I'm sure you'd have something to say if people in incestual relationships bred disfigured offspring over and over. People suddenly change their tune then. Y'see, it's not just your choice. It's not just your life the decision affects. People should absolutely be advised against bringing in more dependant offspring into the world when they are capable of having healthier children. That's not immoral and there's nothing wrong with not wanting a disabled child, in fact, IMHO it should be encouraged by health professionals. The key thing is that the decision gets made before the foetus turns into a baby.
Nobody is pro-abortion. Nobody wants to say "abortion is a thing to be done". But sometimes it is the best thing. That's the reality that you don't like to accept, you'd much rather bring a disabled child into the world when the parents could simply try again and have a healthy foetus the second time round. I don't understand the logic. We're not talking about murdering babies. This is why abortion is such a dirty topic. The waters are always muddied by people who insist on thinking of foetuses as actual children.
