RE: Dawkins sparks outrage for saying Down Syndrome babies should be aborted
August 25, 2014 at 5:12 am
(This post was last modified: August 25, 2014 at 5:19 am by Cato.)
(August 24, 2014 at 6:53 pm)Aractus Wrote:(August 24, 2014 at 10:58 am)Cato Wrote: Now you're getting it. Who buys a severely damaged brand new car?No you're not getting it. My point is that judging others for their congestive ability, or generally just for being "not normal" is not healthy for society.
Bullshit, I got your meaning. You just didn't like my use of your analogy to demonstrate a fault in your reasoning.
Now you're on to claiming it's not good for society, but you haven't supported this claim nor have you given any indication of what you mean by 'good for society'. What is a more healthy society? One where people with DS make up 100% of the population, or one where people with DS make up 0% of the population? Somewhere in between? Who decides?
(August 24, 2014 at 10:09 pm)Aractus Wrote: Women have chosen to abort their foetuses for no other reason than that it was mixed-race.
Doesn't make it right.
We're not discussing this are we? Why invoke abortion of mixed race babies to argue that aborting a fetus with DS is wrong? Are you claiming that being mixed race is the same as having DS?
I'm not saying that in the history of abortion that there isn't perhaps an instance of a woman aborting a child because it was of mixed race, but the reasoning seems faulty and I'll assume exceedingly rare. My meaning here is that I would have a hard time believing this to be the reason since the woman seemingly had no problem having sex with a man of another race. Doesn't make sense, unless you're now going to argue into your hypothetical some type of pregnancy buyer's remorse.
