WHO, besides the Anti-Choicers in here ever suggested killing adults? NO one. Killing a person is murder. Didn't you and the other Anti-Choicers KNOW that!!! What!!??? A fetus isn't a "person" If you have no clue that one has to be BORN to have rights I will try to help you ......see, one has to be BORN to have rights....a fetus has NO rights . NO, that idea came only and directly from Anti-Choicers, .....seems like quite a murderous group !!!![/QUOTE]
That is YOU who supports this policy and even tried to justify it with You sure can in those pictures but then you were assigning how they feel with NOTHING to back it up so that you can justify the extermination.
Definition of person 1: human, individual —sometimes used in combination especially by those who prefer to avoid man in compounds applicable to both sexes A unique individual human, a person, but then the justification for the extermination of people that they were not persons predates this discussion.
Have you ever had a real conversation with someone with DS? It doesnt sound like it. You really should stop presuming that everyone is arguing to ban abortion or trying to change laws or trying to undermine women's right to choose. I mentioned none of those things. Im merely suggesting that anyone considering engaging in eugenics like this look at it from someone with DS's point of view for perspective- would they prefer to be alive, or would they prefer to never have had the chance at life? Im not proposing to ban abortion, restrict womens choice, or alter any laws. What about that makes you so defensive?
To the pro-abortion side the woman's right to kill her baby trumps everything, she must be allowed to do so over all else and if using abortion can exterminate the afflicted and disabled that seems to be an acceptable policy now.
Have you noticed the style of some posters who have no answers but just keep repeating "I answered that already" as a cover for the fact that they NEVER answered the question? These posters also insist that their questions be answered.........and when they are deny they were....very dishonest but all they can do when they have no point....
So here's another of your flamebaiting accusations that you have no proof of. That's another of your lies, I never said I wanted to exterminate those people...that was YOU. And, OF COURSE, you will NEVER show proof that I said that but insist "But I did , I did" even though you never have....your dishonesty is legendary.
Why not ask EVERYONE """ would they prefer to be alive, or would they prefer to never have had the chance at life?""" It has NO connection to abortion.......UNLESS Anti-Choicers want to use this to ban abortion. WHAT other reason would they have for bringing it into the abortion issue/forum????? ...and people with Downs have all different levels of intelligence
I DID 'ask everyone' when I commented to no one in particular: "If having downs is so terrible that death is preferable, how come theres still adults with downs syndrome? If they were better off dead, wouldnt they all commit suicide? Im sure they would all prefer to not have downs, but killing them in the womb is the same as saying they're better off dead, which Im guessing almost all of them still living would disagree with." YOU replied to that comment with defensive accustions of me of trying to limit a womans right to choose. 'Eugenic Abortion' is the technical/clinical term for the subject of the OP. It has everything to do with it. Scholarly and journalistic articles abound on the ethics of 'discriminating' against the disabled by aborting them, citing precisely the same philosophical debate that I am. I'd be happy to link some if you're actually interested in reading them. The point is to provide a counterpoint to the notion that aborting a fetus with a disability is the more humane option. People with DS are no less capable of living rich, full, happy lives and contributing to society in a positive manner than anyone else, if the Peoples with Disabilities Advocacy groups are to be believed. Im not trying to stop abortion by banning it. I hope to persude people to CHOOSE alternatives on their own by providing perspectives they may not have considered. Then why did you question their ability to contemplate their own existence?
They should be taken care of....if they need it. Like anyone else. Just like they are helped now. Your argument is running thin. It seems you really resent having to give free healthcare to the disabled.
I did NOT mean posters , I meant everyone on earth.... They may disagree as may ANYONE but they, like anyone else, did not have the option. The woman they were in had the say and no one else which is as it should be. It's silly and ridiculous to ask them NOW that they are born and can "think" about it , of course most people would opt for life.. ..the comparison is absurd. NO, the "point" seems to be saying that if one is Pro-Choice one wishes born people to be murdered. An asinine "point".....made by people who will not distinguish between born (people with rights) and Unborn ( those without rights) So what? It is soley the woman's decision......why bring it up if it isn't to restrict women's right\s ?? Here we go again with the "women are helpless stupid little creatures who need your guidance""....crap. Gee, why don't you consider that some of those with Downs wouldn't have preferred to be born with Downs, or born at all....but they do NOT have the mental capacity to think that deeply....or they wouldn't be Downs disabled. Ask them if they would've rather be born "normal" and ask others if they would trade places. See above. The FACT that you and the OP can't accept that many fetuses are aborted out of kindness. Yes, some people will SELFISHLY bring children into the world knowing they will suffer but these people don't care as long as THEY feel all warm and fuzzy... There are two sides and neither lead to wholesale massacre of people with red hair as Anti-Choicers here insist...
Bottom line....Anti-Choicers hate the idea of women having the power over life and/or nonexistence.....they hate the thought that women would have any power at all. Bottom line: women are free to have abortions for any reason they choose .....and Anti-Choicers just can't get over it
That's a rather ridiculous conclusion simply because she asked a question you couldn't answer: Bowerbird said: ↑ No you dodged Should they have free health care since they have so many health problems?
Agreed. But there goes the theory that the aborted are better off that way than they would be in a life of poverty, disability or neglect, at least 'most' of the time. The next logical question: if abortion is not benefitting the aborted, then who does it benefit and how?
Why? I said "most" I didn't say everyone. . Well obviously women. It benefits women by them not having a kid they don't want (which also benefits the unwanted kid)....and there's nothing wrong with that. Here's a question: Abortion , who does it affect besides the women who have them? Answer: No one.
So you DON'T support what Iceland is doing? One? And yes you can tell peoples feelings fornoictures and videos. You are just making them up to try and support the policy of extermination.
