Recently I read an article that proposed this idea for the medical future- If a woman has given birth to a baby with severe crippling or other conditions such as Cerebral Palsy, the woman should have the right to chose to have the child's life ended. This would be after the baby's birth, therefore no longer considered an abortion. What do you think?
Discuss.
Oct-02-2007 02:16
Ted Promo
NWO WOLFPACK INSANE
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Can this be my goal??!
Nah. The line for appropriate abortions is already too blurred.
Besides, it'd never get passed.
Oct-02-2007 02:18
jupiterone
housin' guide
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: los angeles
Who cares about the terminology? You're still ending a humans life one way or another.
Solution: Don't have babies.
Oct-02-2007 02:19
jonSun
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago CTA #77
Only if the baby is killed by microwave then eaten.
___________________
. . .. . .. . . . .. . .
Oct-02-2007 02:21
Ted Promo
NWO WOLFPACK INSANE
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Can this be my goal??!
From a purely Darwinian aspect, yes, that would be beneficial to the human species. Though rooting out genetic defects to produce a perfect human species (Hitleresque sounding now) would be more than a quixotic adventure.
Suffice it to say, cripples can live fulfilling lives. They could even get computers to make them masturtron. How neat it that?
Oct-02-2007 02:21
Omega_M
Nostalgia
Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Ether
for every illness we don't have a cure right now, science is working hard to find one. the child has a right to live and get a treatment for his illness.
Originally posted by twilightki : It feels like something you'd listen to at 4 in the morning, or listen to in your car while you're going in a tunnel.
Oct-02-2007 02:27
MrJiveBoJingles
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: U.S.
Re: Is it ok?
quote:
Originally posted by Enigmatik
Recently I read an article that proposed this idea for the medical future- If a woman has given birth to a baby with severe crippling or other conditions such as Cerebral Palsy, the woman should have the right to chose to have the child's life ended. This would be after the baby's birth, therefore no longer considered an abortion. What do you think?
Cerebral palsy is not a disorder I would call "severely crippling." Those who have it are not usually retarded (about 30% -- and the retardation is comorbid, not actually caused by the palsy), and in fact I knew a guy with CP who was extremely smart. It does reduce movement, but I would not put it in the same category as things like Lesch-Nyhan syndrome or cystic fibrosis, and I certainly would not support terminating an infant or even a late term fetus due to a child having CP.
Oct-02-2007 02:36
Frenchie
life in technocolor
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Intergalactic Planetary
inb4Theresa
Oct-02-2007 02:52
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ
Registered: May 2002
Location:
Re: Is it ok?
I don't have a problem with it, but strikes me as being on philosophically weaker ground than abortion itself, so what's the point?