Weeding Out the "Unfit" Unborn - New Threats From an Old Ideology

Zenit News Agency ^ | November 12, 2005

[Aquamarine]

I can't see the problem with deciding whether or not to give birth to a damaged child, except that if you decide knowingly to do so, you ought not to get insurance or welfare or otherwise be allowed to drain the public purse to support that choice. If you choose to bear a damaged child and you can take care of it yourself, God bless you for it and more power to you and your family. I really don't see the problem otherwise.

It is believed that Chopin suffered and died of cystic fibrosis Death and Funeral

[bukkdems]

I understand FR is not a "Republican" website, but us "SchaivoNuts" are currently the only saving hope for the Republican party. If it weren't for us, you could kiss the last two Presidantial elections, and any justices that might at least attempt to give a damn about the constitution.

Your presence is very welcome, even though it makes us the butt of so many jokes. I find myself defending you all the time, and prefer your company to the alternative. You keep me safe from the Jihadists.

[right-wingin_It]

...You keep me safe from the Jihadists

True...I will only blast you with words :)

[Reddy]

"I can't see the problem with deciding whether or not to give birth to a damaged child, except that if you decide knowingly to do so, you ought not to get insurance or welfare or otherwise be allowed to drain the public purse to support that choice."

Are you for real?

If YOU ever become "damaged", be sure that you do not use insurance or welfare or otherwise drain the public purse to support your choice to go on living.

[grey_whiskers]

His ideas have ranged from the normalization of sex with pets to the termination of the recently born up to 28 days of age.

I have never figured out why he is at Princeton instead of San Francisco.

[VxH]

Remember, this unpleasant fellow believed in "genetic screening" too -

 

Nothing new, he was merely standing on the shoulders of giants in the U.S.A...

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=Cold+Spring+Harbor+%22margaret+sanger

[VxH]

Many in the Transhumanist crowd believe that homosexuals are a "new species".

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=Transhumanism+homosexuals

 

Kind of like the asexual worker bees in a bee hive.

 

Hence, Michael Eisner's bragging that 40% of Disney's employees are gay.

 

A worker bee caste member, without the burden of children, is more amenable to working 80 hours a week.

 

Only the elites should be allowed to reproduce. All the rest should be content in their slavery.

[Elsie]

I can't see the problem with deciding whether or not to give birth to a damaged child, except that if you decide knowingly to do so, you ought not to get insurance or welfare or otherwise be allowed to drain the public purse to support that choice.

Translation: (Even CLEARER thinking)

"You can keep your brainless pet; but the rest of us would have offed the little bugger!"

[Elsie]

I have never figured out why he is at Princeton instead of San Francisco.

Simple....

SF is full up, and Princeton's quota is not up to snuff yet.

[Aquamarine]

"Chopin was a genius of universal appeal. His music conquers the most diverse audiences. When the first notes of Chopin sound through the concert hall there is a happy sigh of recognition. All over the world men and women know his music. They love it. They are moved by it. Yet it is not "Romantic music" in the Byronic sense. It does not tell stories or paint pictures. It is expressive and personal, but still a pure art. Even in this abstract atomic age, where emotion is not fashionable, Chopin endures. His music is the universal language of human communication. When I play Chopin I know I speak directly to the hearts of people!"

Click on the pic

Just a little background music as we stop to consider who these "damaged" people are that we may be killing.

[SuziQ]

This is the main reason I don't give any money to the March of Dimes. They have reduced the 'problem' of birth defects by encouraging the use of amniocentisis to discover whether or not a child has problems. If it is found that a child has birth defects, the parents are encouraged NOT to put themselves through the heartache of raising a 'defective' child.

[VxH]

If you choose to bear a damaged child and you can take care of it yourself

 

Define "Damaged"?

 

How are we ever to attain the GATTACAn utopia if those pesky degenerates and invalids, keep breeding? /sarc

[Alberta's Child]

Now, you must realize that this is done according to Sanger, "for the betterment of the family and the race.”

How ironic is it that the Germans lost World War II, but the Nazis actually won?

[Alouette]

What about Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot, or Idi Amin and Saddam. Stalin and Mao killed far more people than the Nazis. Why are they not considered more evil?

Stalin, Mao, et. al. were not into eugenics, therefore their mass murders are not germane to the subject under discussion.

[Alouette]

I can't see the problem with deciding whether or not to give birth to a damaged child, except that if you decide knowingly to do so, you ought not to get insurance or welfare or otherwise

Do you have a problem with killing off the elderly and the unemployed or anyone else who doesn't meet your economic criteria?

[Noumenon]

The fact that Singer is at Princeton means that his ideas are being taken seriously. That's what should alarm us all. His sort of thinking is the precursor to slaughter and mass murder. History is my witness.

[Marie]

I can't see the problem with deciding whether or not to give birth to a damaged child, except that if you decide knowingly to do so, you ought not to get insurance or welfare or otherwise be allowed to drain the public purse to support that choice.

If you choose to bear a damaged child and you can take care of it yourself, God bless you for it and more power to you and your family.

Here's the way I see it: As a society, we make a moral judgment to value and protect life. This is a good thing, as it protects the individual. Part of valuing life is valuing the most vulnerable. We say that every human being has the ability to contribute something, even if they can only do so through their very existence. If we, as a group, say that we will not protect, comfort and nourish the weak, we devalue human life.

Once we devalue the unborn, we devalue the handicapped, then we devalue the old, finally the very young and those who are simply stupid.

Saying that only those handicapped who's families can afford to care for them are worthy of life devalues life and devalues us all.

The problem comes when we extend our protection to those who are NOT weak. We encourage weakness in those who would be strong.

[KateatRFM]

So you think the "public purse" is a big pot of money available to anyone who wants to dip in (provided you personally approve of the expense), and that nobody has the right or duty to make decisions on how his or her money ought to be spent?

Isn't that, like, communism?

[KateatRFM]

I have a big problem with the idea that the "public purse" is made up of all the money available in the country, and that people are free to dip into it without putting anything in -- and that people assume that the pot magically gets refilled no matter who or what removes how much money from it.

The fact is that private property must be extorted from workers to fill that pot, and demanding that the workers shovel in even more of their private funds because other people demand the "right" to avoid making the hard choices (including the undeniable choice that a child who will never be able to work and contribute to the contents of the money pot will have to be supported for at least 75 years at what may be a very high financial price that Mom and Daddy will have to pay if the public purse won't stretch that far) is unreasonable. Hiding behind sentimental words won't feed the pot or keep it boiling. My college roommate and her husband are supporting elderly parents that are both frail and suffering from Alzeimers Disease; to ask them to take on the extra financial burden of the damaged child or children you voluntarily decide to bear would be unconscionable.

[stopem]

Designer babies another word for abortion.