Defective Children?

[ordos45]

I was reading an article from a UK newspaper...and apparently some government advisor is causing quite a stir with his latest abortion comments.

[Scrinlord]

That is abhorant.  Completely wrong in every sense of the word.  That is totally like something from 1984 or something like that. 

That completely pisses me off.  Destroyin innocent children just because they have some "defects" is about as immoral as you can get.  On the other hand, killing that asshole because he has proven himself incapable of human decency sounds like the right thing to do.

[DLAGhost]

On the other hand, killing that asshole because he has proven himself incapable of human decency sounds like the right thing to do.

You got it right there! When I read the post I thought maybe he was misunderstood, maybe what he meant to say came out wrong, maybe he was implying that abortion on 40 month fetus was wrong.  I followed the link and found Hitler's long lost son. 

[thomas]

Hmmm sounds like 1984 and Brave New World to me

[Egeides]

It's all the question about "what a human brings to society is what counts" versus "human is what counts since it is what exists". Or looked at a different angle: "wealth exists only to the extent that it serves humans" versus "humans should produce wealth for society and if they can't do that well it means we can't force anyone to support them".

[Andrew]

Nothing new about that. The Romans did it...

[Edric O]

1984? Brave New World? Why look to fiction when reality can be much more gruesome and frightening?

Killing "defective babies" is only the latest expression of a murderous idea that has raised its ugly head many times before in human history. You only need to look at Nazi Germany to see what this barbaric principle can do. And what principle am I talking about? A very simple one, really: The principle of INEQUALITY. The idea that "Some people are better than others."

Human beings are different, of course, but you can't compare them in terms of "superiority" and "inferiority" any more than you can compare complex numbers. The claim that "Some people are better than others" is a pseudo-religious dogma that has always been used by the rulers to justify their privileged position over their subjects. Inequality is only brought up by those who consider themselves "superior".

"Superior" men have waged holy wars against the "inferior" infidels. "Superior" Europeans have slaughtered tens of millions of "inferior" native populations on 4 continents, and enslaved the survivors for hundreds of years. "Superior" people have massacred those whose skin colour made them "inferior". "Superior" aryans have sent millions of "inferior" Jews to death camps and gas chambers.

And now, "superior" health scientists wish to murder "inferior" babies.

[Scrinlord]

Exactly.

Difference is not the same as inferiority, and treating it as such is completely horrible.  I know that it has been done many times before, but that still does not change the fact that it is wrong. 

[TMA_1]

this is sad, and something similar happened to my sis. She was born with a bunch of handicaps. I dont talk about it a lot because I cant stand it when people constantly use a sibling or relative who is handicapped in order to stir arguments. This though is kinda personal. When she was born she was horribly deformed, she had a trake (spelling) in her throat, they had to put it in to help breathing. It was hard to put it in though because her trakia was fused, the cartilage was fixed together so she couldnt really move her neck. They had to also open up her skull and put in a drain tube to take out excess brain fluid. She also had a fused skull so that the brain couldnt grow as a normal child's brain can. Most kids skulls arent fused at birth. The fluid and fused skull caused a syndrome called "shaibot anomaly" where the brain grows out of theopen spots like parts of the forehead and temples, it is called shaibot because the word means three leaf clover in some language, and it looks like that on a child with the problem.

it was so bad that many doctors, and even one of my grandparents said that we should give her up to the state. It was horrible, and we never did such a thing. The doctors didnt know she was like that in the womb, but if they would have they would have opted for abortion.

If my sis was given up to the state, or was aborted, she wouldnt be with us now. She is the best sis in the world, and on top of that doctors said she would be mentally retarded.

well she has a 168 I.Q. She is brilliant, and by the 2nd grade she read at a highschool reading level. I couldnt even read at the time. she is amazing, and I dare say, getting rid of these so called "defective children" could be horrible, what kind of people are we getting rid of? geniuses who come up with the next wave of technological advancements? The new presidents and prime ministers? the next humanitarian who saves millions?

it is indeed horrible.

[Edric O]

The real life example of TMA's sister speaks more than a million words.

There are no such things as "defective" people, and there is no way to judge the worth of a human being. No one has the right to decide who lives and who dies. Not the state (as fascists would have it), nor the "free" market (as Ayn Rand and her followers would have it), nor anyone or anything else.

[Acriku]

What about the children who are doomed because of their genetic deviations (assuming that gene alignments that do not kill us are the norm)? Physicians can detect some fatal deviations before the baby is born, based on the genetic information in the placenta. So, if they only lived another day or two after being born, would it be immoral to go ahead and stop the baby from being born (killing the fetus)? Would it also be immoral to do it we had evidence to suggest that the baby suffers from pain or extreme uncomfort during the day or two after being born?

[Edric O]

Acriku, we weren't talking about abortion - we were talking about the monstrous idea of killing children after they are born.

Abortion remains an open issue, and while I agree with you on the matter of aborting fetuses who wouldn't survive after birth anyway, I strongly disagree on the matter of fetuses who would "suffer from pain or extreme uncomfort". Who are you to decide when a life is or isn't worth living? What if that person would say that it's a hell of a lot better to feel some pain than not to live at all? That is certainly what I would say.

[SurlyPIG]

I don't even think that ABORTING a fetus because it is handicapped is justifiable, let alone killing a baby after it is born.  The whole reason I'm pro-choice is because I think it's the mother's decision whether or not to give up her body for another, IMO it has nothing to do with whether or not she wants to keep the baby, and aborting it simply because it has genetic disorders I find to be selfish and twisted.

But this!  This just blows me away...

If the baby is going to die in a couple months anyway, and up to then it's going to suffer, euthenasia is then acceptable ONLY if the parents allow it.  But killing babies who have disabilities for no more reason than that is...words cannot describe it.

[Acriku]

Acriku, we weren't talking about abortion - we were talking about the monstrous idea of killing children after they are born.

Keep in mind I'm only playing Devil's Advocate. Now, what's the difference between 1 minute before birth and 1 minute after birth?

Abortion remains an open issue, and while I agree with you on the matter of aborting fetuses who wouldn't survive after birth anyway, I strongly disagree on the matter of fetuses who would "suffer from pain or extreme uncomfort". Who are you to decide when a life is or isn't worth living? What if that person would say that it's a hell of a lot better to feel some pain than not to live at all? That is certainly what I would say.

All of this is moot because a baby can't comprehend the question, nor have any chance to understand what you're asking. I should be the one to decide because the baby cannot decide for him/herself and if it stops the suffering she is going through due to some deviation, then so be it. I'd have to be the parent though, who has the next responsibility for the baby besides the baby him/herself.

ACE, I'm not including handicapped babies/feti, only fatally defected babies who won't survive past a few days. Killing off a baby because he might be autistic is monstrous, of course.

[TMA_1]

I agree with many hebrew theologens on this issue. Abortion is needed in certain cases, and in the end it is a mother's choice, but you are killing a potential human, you are killing off the future. This is God's area of judicating. in the end we have a free will to do what we will, but we pay for the mistakes we make.

I dont think a fetus or a baby at any stage in the womb is a human, because again I agree with many hebrew theologens that the breath of lives (soul and spirit) enter a baby at birth. Still though you are killing potential life.

[Acriku]

So now you're saying we should have sex only for procreation? Otherwise, we'd be killing a potential life. Or to extend it further, whenever you release sperm. You might object and say that it is possible that sperm may never reach the ovum, and thus not really killing a potential life, but then again it is possible that the fetus may never come out of the mother alive through natural means.

[TMA_1]

there is a difference between sperm and egg, and when an egg is fertilized by sperm. No, sex is not only for procreation but for bonding and enjoyment betwen couples. Why did God make the clitorus and penis the way they are?lol sorry for being so frank but that is an obvious duh.hehe

when the sperm reaches the egg, and the egg is fertilized, that is the keystone to the beginning of a human being. That is when the potential life starts, as it starts a chain reaction to create a human life.

In the bible it talks about miscarried babies, what you should do with them. You would think that they would bury a baby that didnt make it to term, but no. They threw it in a wood pile and burned it. It isnt a human being, not until the breath of lives are breathed into it. This is why many of the jewish faith dont really have a problem with short term or even at times late term abortion, because the baby isnt yet human. That is the key though, it isnt a human yet but will be. This is why abortion isnt murder, but a killing of potential human life. so it shouldnt be taken lightly. the jewish faith largely see's it as something that should be avoided, but if it is neccisary, then you should do it. Not simply because a baby is deformed, or something childish and immature for am other to do. Only in a case of rape or the mother's health at risk.

so when a baby dies in miscarriage, this means that the baby never recieved the breath of lives and was never a human being, it is just a growth of fleshy material. If God allowed it to grow and it was given the breath of lives at birth, then it would be a human.

this is just my opinion.

[Inoculator9]

Absolutely disgusting. These people see the future of humanity as genetic perfection, rather than the "moral perfection" (whatever that is) that we should be ever striving for.

[DukeLeto]

Even giving my liberal attitude towards abortion, this is appalling.  Aborting a fetus before it is born is one thing; killing a live baby is another.  Inexcusable.

[Acriku]

I'm curious Duke Leto, why? Is there a change in the baby that is 5 minutes from birth and the same baby 5 minutes after birth?

[GUNWOUNDS]

I'm curious Duke Leto, why? Is there a change in the baby that is 5 minutes from birth and the same baby 5 minutes after birth?

yes it takes in a breath of air and its cord is cut.

[Dante]

What difference does that make? It's heart began beating months ago, it's brain started working as well. It won't have a developed personality for years yet and it is about as sentient as any other animal. Just because it's surviving on it's own doesn't mean it's drastically altered.

[Acriku]

Exactly Dust Scout, which is why I'm wondering why it's monstrous to kill it after it is born, and not before it is born.

[TMA_1]

for once, gunwounds said something profound.

the baby takes a breath of air and the cord is cut.

Do you see anything wrong with murdering a human being acriku? and what makes a baby any different from any other human being? once it is out of the womb it lives independantly from it's mother. You are no longer killing a "parasite" that depends on the mother.

Are you trying to go against the grain? it seems a tad egotistical acriku.lol I wouldnt say this if you actually explained why you are saying this, but I think you are saying it because nobody else is, so you feel it isimportant to be different. kinda silly?

[Acriku]

I wish people would pay attention the first time I say that I am playing devil's advocate. Then they wouldn't make a fool of themselves.

Do you see anything wrong with murdering a human being acriku? and what makes a baby any different from any other human being? once it is out of the womb it lives independantly from it's mother. You are no longer killing a "parasite" that depends on the mother.

This isn't an abortion topic, this is a topic that involves defective children. Now,  let me rephrase my question - what is the difference between a fetus that will die in a week, and a baby that will die in a week? Parents have the right to end their baby's life if it is terminally ill or fatally "defected."