Board index › General Discussion › Autism Politics, Activism, and Media Representation

Autism Abortion

Page 3 of 7 [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 12:09 pm

Volodja wrote:
Who are you to decide what is and isn't a "legit reason"? If a woman wants to end her pregnancy (within reason, obviously not at 8 months) then she should be able to, regardless of her reasons. No one should be in a position to force a woman through a pregnancy and childbirth against her will


Why should you be able to get rid of a child just because it's got a disability? People with disabilities are people too. It's just as bad as being able to abort babies based on if they're gay or not.

A legit reason would be if the woman was raped or something, then obviously an abortion should be allowed. But if you want a kid you shouldn't then decide the one you're going to give birth to isn't good enough because of a disability, that's where the issue comes in.

Delirium wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Abortions should be allowed for legit reasons. Deciding your baby isn't good enough because it has a disability isn't one of them. There's such a thing as going too far. The Nazis wanted a "perfect" race of people, and this is the same attitude.


Right, because voluntary abortion is the same as killing 12 million people. There is not a :roll: big enough for your comment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum


Prenatal tests kill off many people, yes. And in this case, they'd kill off a whole group of people, which is the definition of genocide.



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 12:14 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Why should you be able to get rid of a child just because it's got a disability? People with disabilities are people too.


People who were conceived during rape are people too. So why would you allow them to be aborted but not an autistic fetus? You can't pick and choose like that based on what YOU want. It's not your body, therefore you should have no control over it



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 12:20 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Why should you be able to get rid of a child just because it's got a disability? People with disabilities are people too.


People who were conceived during rape are people too. So why would you allow them to be aborted but not an autistic fetus? You can't pick and choose like that based on what YOU want. It's not your body, therefore you should have no control over it


The issue of aborting because of a prenatal test has nothing to do with the woman's body. At that point, they've chosen to have a child. For this reason, it's an entirely different issue to the woman being raped - in that case, the woman has not chosen to have a child, and the choice is not being made because the child isn't good enough.

So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 12:21 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?


Because the woman doesn't want it. it's as simple as that



Delirium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,573
Location: not here

15 Dec 2010, 12:24 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Abortions should be allowed for legit reasons. Deciding your baby isn't good enough because it has a disability isn't one of them. There's such a thing as going too far. The Nazis wanted a "perfect" race of people, and this is the same attitude.


Right, because voluntary abortion is the same as killing 12 million people. There is not a :roll: big enough for your comment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum


Prenatal tests kill off many people, yes. And in this case, they'd kill off a whole group of people, which is the definition of genocide.


Voluntary abortion is not the same as genocide. Genocide involves killing fully conscious human beings who are able to survive outside the womb. Abortion is getting rid of an unwanted fetus. The fetus is not fully conscious and cannot survive outside the womb.

Also, not everybody is financially or emotionally able to care for a child with special needs. Even if the kid ended up being put up for adoption, it would most likely not get adopted. Most people want healthy babies.

And before you say "WELL IF YOU CAN'T HAVE A DISABLED KID DON'T HAVE A KID", the only way you can even tell if your kid will be disabled is if you do a prenatal test. It's better to know ahead of time so you can decide what to do rather than finding out later and having no idea how to care for a child with special needs.


_________________
I don't post here anymore. If you want to talk to me, go to the WP Facebook group or my Last.fm account.


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 12:36 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?


Because the woman doesn't want it. it's as simple as that


Deciding you don't want your child because of a disability is horrible. It shouldn't be allowed. It's as simple as that.

Delirium wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Abortions should be allowed for legit reasons. Deciding your baby isn't good enough because it has a disability isn't one of them. There's such a thing as going too far. The Nazis wanted a "perfect" race of people, and this is the same attitude.


Right, because voluntary abortion is the same as killing 12 million people. There is not a :roll: big enough for your comment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum


Prenatal tests kill off many people, yes. And in this case, they'd kill off a whole group of people, which is the definition of genocide.


Voluntary abortion is not the same as genocide. Genocide involves killing fully conscious human beings who are able to survive outside the womb. Abortion is getting rid of an unwanted fetus. The fetus is not fully conscious and cannot survive outside the womb.

Also, not everybody is financially or emotionally able to care for a child with special needs. Even if the kid ended up being put up for adoption, it would most likely not get adopted. Most people want healthy babies.

And before you say "WELL IF YOU CAN'T HAVE A DISABLED KID DON'T HAVE A KID", the only way you can even tell if your kid will be disabled is if you do a prenatal test. It's better to know ahead of time so you can decide what to do rather than finding out later and having no idea how to care for a child with special needs.


As I mentioned before, once a prenatal test for something comes out, very few people with that disability are born. So you are pretty much killing off that group of people in the next generation.

Genocide is wiping out a group of people, not specifically killing people who can live outside the womb.

It does not matter whether or not you can tell the kid will be disabled before it's born as far as actually having the kid is concerned. If you have no idea how to care for a child with special needs, it's your job as a parent to find out. Parenthood in general, no matter what disabilities your kid has, isn't predicable anyway.



ci
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,546
Location: Humboldt County, California

15 Dec 2010, 12:43 pm

All forms of this politic to prevent prenatal testing and or selective abortions are of and related to abortion politics in reasons. No fancy words, no political spins and no other nonsense will to re-define the obvious.

You would have to change abortion laws not just for autism but for other disabilities. You cannot say autism is superior to Down Syndrome people otherwise you would be guilty of the same thing.

My stance is I follow the law as it is written. If others want to change the law by policy I have to accept they want to change the law but I can have no part in changing the law nor morally oblige the current law or proposed changes to the law.



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 12:47 pm

ci wrote:
You would have to change abortion laws not just for autism but for other disabilities. You cannot say autism is superior to Down Syndrome people otherwise you would be guilty of the same thing.


I agree entirely. Abortions because of a disability should not be allowed fullstop. This isn't exclusive to autism.



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 12:49 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Deciding you don't want your child because of a disability is horrible. It shouldn't be allowed. It's as simple as that.


Some people think abortion in general is "horrible." What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs and why should you be able to force that opinion on everyone else?



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 12:51 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Deciding you don't want your child because of a disability is horrible. It shouldn't be allowed. It's as simple as that.


Some people think abortion in general is "horrible." What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs and why should you be able to force that opinion on everyone else?


I've already explained my reasoning many times.



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 12:53 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Deciding you don't want your child because of a disability is horrible. It shouldn't be allowed. It's as simple as that.


Some people think abortion in general is "horrible." What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs and why should you be able to force that opinion on everyone else?


I've already explained my reasoning many times.


What? YOU think it's "horrible" therefore everyone else has to play along with your rules? That's hardly reasoning



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 12:55 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Deciding you don't want your child because of a disability is horrible. It shouldn't be allowed. It's as simple as that.


Some people think abortion in general is "horrible." What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs and why should you be able to force that opinion on everyone else?


I've already explained my reasoning many times.


What? YOU think it's "horrible" therefore everyone else has to play along with your rules? That's hardly reasoning


My reasoning, as you seem to ignore entirely in this post, is simple: people with disabilities are still people. So to abort them solely because of they have a disability is wrong for the same reason racism is.



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 1:24 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
My reasoning, as you seem to ignore entirely in this post, is simple: people with disabilities are still people. So to abort them solely because of they have a disability is wrong for the same reason racism is.


And people conceived by rape are still people. But that's ok? Who are you to decide which abortions are ok and which aren't?



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 1:27 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
My reasoning, as you seem to ignore entirely in this post, is simple: people with disabilities are still people. So to abort them solely because of they have a disability is wrong for the same reason racism is.


And people conceived by rape are still people. But that's ok? Who are you to decide which abortions are ok and which aren't?


As I already said, there is a difference. In fact, I'm just gonna go right ahead and quote my old post addressing the issue which you've straight out ignored:

Asp-Z wrote:
The issue of aborting because of a prenatal test has nothing to do with the woman's body. At that point, they've chosen to have a child. For this reason, it's an entirely different issue to the woman being raped - in that case, the woman has not chosen to have a child, and the choice is not being made because the child isn't good enough.

So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?



ci
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,546
Location: Humboldt County, California

15 Dec 2010, 1:32 pm

Some people like freckles and some people hate freckles.



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 1:34 pm

ci wrote:
Some people like freckles and some people hate freckles.


So let's start aborting kids just because they have freckles :roll: