Skip to comments.
Weeding Out the "Unfit" Unborn - New Threats From an Old Ideology
Zenit News Agency ^
| November 12, 2005
Posted on 11/12/2005 2:36:59 PM PST by NYer
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-93 last
To: KateatRFM
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.
See you obviously have not taken your solution far enough. You just need to get your college roommate to put her parents out of societies misery. You should also sterilize yourself since you have no empathy so any children you raise would be unlikely to have any either. After all empathy is in the best interest of society. Besides you probably have some small genetic defect that may cause a birth defect somewhere down the line. Might as well nip it in the bud now.
To: seppel
"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?"
In this particular case, the Nazis were very supportive of eugenics policies, and took it to a logical end. That is what makes them very pertinent to this discussion. In fact, they pointed to the eugenics movement in the US as justification for their actions.
To: 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? What if one of those "worthless damaged" babies if given the chance to live would have been the one who found the cure for cystic fibrosis? Think of all the money we could have saved.
83
posted on
11/13/2005 7:26:49 AM PST
by
Aquamarine
(Colossians 1:27)
To: 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."
I am convinced that there is a contingent of self-styled elites who, given the opportunity, would be more than happy to implement the philosophies Singer espouses. The fact that Princeton appoints the guy as a 'bioethicist' should give one pause.
To: MadIvan; seppel
Congrats, Ivan...Godwin in 4.
85
posted on
11/13/2005 8:42:06 AM PST
by
Gondring
(I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
To: Blurblogger
""There'll be large pressure on parents to have perfect babies where what counts as a perfect baby is determined by majority opinion,""
HA! They think imperfect humans can produce perfect babies!?!? This is another episode of 'How Low Can You Go' in your moral convictions! These scientist have no conscience.
To: Alberta's Child
How ironic is it that the Germans lost World War II, but the Nazis actually won? Same thing applies to communism. Communism isn't dead, but it lives in the heart of the Liberals who enjoy disunity, chaos, and despair so the proletariat would come running to them asking for help.
To: MadIvan
exactly what i was thinking
88
posted on
11/13/2005 4:00:53 PM PST
by
lawgirl
(Sure I believe in intelligent design. The best accident we've come up with is Mary in grilled cheese)
To: Victoria Delsoul
Great post. You're absolutely right.
To: Tench_Coxe
This is why my list of who's been naughty and who's been nice consists mainly of academics and legal types. Go for the source of the very bad and murderous ideas that are being normalized. The nice list is a very, very short one. The other list would keep any one individual busy for years.
90
posted on
11/13/2005 9:14:08 PM PST
by
Noumenon
(Activist judges - out of touch, out of tune, but not out of reach.)
To: merry10
Thanks! I get angry with people - many of whom have never been parents - who say they have "no problem" aborting "damaged" children. My wife is a successful member of society, gave birth to a beautiful (and normal! Imagine that!) daughter who is now a soldier in the US Army, and we have been married for 25 years. But I guess some people would have viewed her as "damaged" and therefore with no right to exist.
91
posted on
11/14/2005 4:24:28 AM PST
by
COBOL2Java
(The Katrina Media never gets anything right, so why should I believe them?)
To: NYer
Gay Gene Testing to follow shortly?
92
posted on
11/14/2005 4:28:34 AM PST
by
stocksthatgoup
(Polls = Proof that when the MSM want your opinion it will give it to you.)
To: KateatRFM
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.
Amazing! No doubt the chairman of the ethics department at our local university.
93
posted on
11/14/2005 4:33:27 AM PST
by
stocksthatgoup
(Polls = Proof that when the MSM want your opinion it will give it to you.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-93 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson