Posted on 10/18/2005 3:12:23 AM PDT by Quaker
... Whenever I am out with Margaret, I'm conscious that she represents a group whose ranks are shrinking because of the wide availability of prenatal testing and abortion. I don't know how many pregnancies are terminated because of prenatal diagnoses of Down syndrome, but some studies estimate 80 to 90 percent.
Imagine. As Margaret bounces through life, especially out here in the land of the perfect body, I see the way people look at her: curious, surprised, sometimes wary, occasionally disapproving or alarmed. I know that most women of childbearing age that we may encounter have judged her and her cohort, and have found their lives to be not worth living.
To them, Margaret falls into the category of avoidable human suffering. At best, a tragic mistake. At worst, a living embodiment of the pro-life movement. Less than human. A drain on society. That someone I love is regarded this way is unspeakably painful to me.
This view is probably particularly pronounced here in blue-state California, but I keep finding it everywhere, from academia on down. At a dinner party not long ago, I was seated next to the director of an Ivy League ethics program. In answer to another guest's question, he said he believes that prospective parents have a moral obligation to undergo prenatal testing and to terminate their pregnancy to avoid bringing forth a child with a disability, because it was immoral to subject a child to the kind of suffering he or she would have to endure. (When I started to pipe up about our family's experience, he smiled politely and turned to the lady on his left.)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Thanks for posting this... and then you have the cases like the Deacon at our Church. Ten years ago, they told him and his wife that their baby had Down syndrome and strongly recommended the need to have an abortion. Ten years later, the doctor was wrong on both counts.
Abortionists are the ultimate evolutionists. They believe we can cull those with traits we don't like and create an eventual superrace. Sounds like nazi-ism to me!
>>>>>>he said he believes that prospective parents have a moral obligation to undergo prenatal testing and to terminate their pregnancy to avoid bringing forth a child with a disability, because....\
He doesn't want to have to pay to help take care of it and provide it special Ed classes.
Neither do I.
I have no problem with parents bringing forth retarded and damaged children whose entire future welfare they can support, and with full knowledge that the child will outlive them and need financial and possibly caretaker support long after their death, and who plan accordingly.
But merely bringing forth damaged children and dumping them on the backs of people whose backs are already breaking with the burden of their own families, in the absolute expectation that other people must be forced to carry one's own burden, is not only irresponsible but unconscionable.
God may have provided YOU a burden for your back for a reason, but I don't believe He directs you to dump that burden on the community at large in the expectation that they will willingly pick it up.
Do not set out to war without counting the cost and reckoning whether you can afford to carry it through. Jesus was certainly right about that.
That may be true, but please spare me the guilt trip about how the poor little dear will suffer if it isn't snuffed first.
So many able liberals out there, acting like retards, doing drugs, while keeping a good job they botch through in total incompetence....and then they go after Downs kids....hypocrites
I tell you what, the stupid liberal wants power because with power and its ghoulish "unplug TerriSchiavo" lack of consciousness associates, they do not need to be smart, to have the very consciousness.
So they go after anyone who lacks power, like Downs kids ...but also after the hard working, competent, conscious, loving, thinking and whoever fits the bill as being smart.
God made Downs kids to judge people like liberals. Either one is intelligent and loves, or one has power and needs neither. They attack Downs kids for their lack of power...and for their relative wits despite their lack of mind powers, an example which would shame 3/4th of a justice system on the public dole, corrupt Greer types..
People should have a choice in these matters. Not have it forced on them and ultimately society.
The Abortion Debate No One Wants to Have
Selective and aborted pregnancies are all too common. Children with disabilities are considered an unneeded weight by the liberal iconoclasts.
My grand daughter was tested and the diagnosis was that the baby would be a Downs Syndrome baby. When my great grand son was born a couple of weeks ago he did NOT have Downs Syndrome.
I have a perfectly healthy perfectly normal brand new great grand son now. (My first)
It has a similitude to the Teutonic paganism of Adolph Hitler (whose idolatry was the idea of a "master race"). In effect these genocides were/are a mass human sacrifice to those pagan idols. The abortionists, like the National Socialists, incinerate the remains of their victims.
Abortion is performed only for the reasons of vanity and conceit in all cases...
Yep. Abortion is the modern euphamism for Hitler's Final Solution. And NOW we even allow court directed retroactive abortions, e.g. Terri Shiavo.
They aren't "its"
Abortion is performed only for the reasons of vanity and conceit in all cases...
Contemplate the religious fervor associated with the pro-abortion advocacy. The societal practice of abortion is ritual mass murder upon the altars of conceit dedicated to idolatrous vanities, a collective human sacrifice before pagan idols.
It has a similitude to the Teutonic paganism of Adolph Hitler (whose idolatry was the idea of a "master race"). In effect these genocides were/are a mass human sacrifice to those pagan idols. The abortionists, like the National Socialists, incinerate the remains of their victims.
Perhaps we should call capital punishment "post-natal abortion" and identify abortion as a "pre-natal death sentence" or "pre-natal summary execution." This idolatry of "reproductive freedom" is my economic, environmental and social tyranny.
But since we are all properly obeying * the modern interpretation * of the First Amendment... Good or bad isn’t the question. Good, bad, right, wrong, evil, moral: all of these are purely religious. Morality and all of its associated concepts are based on the belief that some higher power is defining the correctness of human behavior.
* The First Amendment says that Government must exorcise all traces of religion and theism from itself. * (The "modern interpretation.") Therefore, the Government should never consider issues of morality and of right and wrong. Excuse the sarcasm...
Therefore, it becomes a question of benefits versus costs, not a question of right and wrong. Fetus killing has its benefits to society, especially if you like to sleep late on Saturday. However, it also has its costs as well. Society (by which I mean whoever manages to seize power) needs to evaluate these costs and decide accordingly.
The most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control indicate that while 56 percent of all women who obtained legal abortions were white, the abortion rate (the number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 per year) for black women was 2.9 times that of white women. For every thousand black women, 32 have abortions, as compared with 11 for every thousand white women.
Likewise with numbers of abortions per 1,000 births: The abortions/births ratio for white women was 184 abortions per 1,000 live births; for black women, it was 543 abortions per 1,000 births. This means that abortion ratios for black women were 2.8 times greater than for white women. Sadly, black women were also more likely to obtain riskier abortions late in their pregnancies, while white women were significantly more likely than black women to obtain abortions before 16 weeks.
While these data most likely reflect inequality in access to health care, data also indicates that the racial disparities in abortion rates have increased steadily since 1989. In some localities, including Mississippi, Louisiana, Maryland, and Georgia, more than half of all abortions are performed on black women. Black women in New York City and in the entire state of New Jersey receive more than 47 percent of all abortions performed there. (Racist Hitlerian eugenics?)
Comparisons by race are not allowed in California, because the state – unlike any other state – refuses to comply with requirements to report statistics on abortion.
[Pagan gods of secrecy and silence? Egyptians worshipped Harpocrates, the god of silence; for which reason he is always pictured holding a finger on his mouth. Athenians had a statue of brass, which they bowed to; a figure made without a tongue, to declare secrecy thereby. The Romans had a goddess of silence called Angerona, which is pictured like Harpocrates, holding her finger on her mouth, in token of secrecy.]
California reporting requirements, enacted in 1967, is part of a larger abortion law entitled as the Therapeutic Abortion Act. Yet, even with the threat of losing federal funds, California has consistently refused to report its abortion data. Michael Quinn, once chief of California’s office for health information, recently quoted in a Catholic newspaper account says, "California does not actively collect abortion statistics because they are highly sensitive and highly political." Why the resistance to Ward Connerly's California Racial Privacy Initiative, Proposition 54, which prohibits racial profiling by the state?
This topic is applicable to homosexuality, both the male and female variety, as well as to sexual crimes. The choice to engage in any type of sexual activity is an individual’s, provided of course, he or she is not victim of a sexual assault. It is absurd to claim the rapist or molester has no control over his actions, and it is equally ridiculous to say a homosexual does not have a choice not to involve him or herself with another. The same is true for heterosexual females - - being a woman is not an excuse for making poor choices.
The idea that "the choice to have an abortion should be left up to a woman" does not take into account the lack of a choice to pay for such services rendered. The general public is forced to pay massive subsidies for other people's sex lives. Emotive claims that the decision to have an abortion is a private one are refuted by the demands of those same people who want public funding for their private choices and/or mistakes. A cash cow, a Golden Calf.
So, do you advocate death camps for welfare recipients? Or is that going too far?
Congratulations. Would it have made a difference if he had been born with DS?
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.