• Indiana just banned abortion if the fetus has Down syndrome
    198 replies, posted
Remember: If you can't handle a child, you can handle a child with a disability. [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Johnny Joe;50006992]It seems like everyone here demands a perfect child or else it gets terminated, why not hold yourself to the same standard.[/QUOTE] If we could prevent children from ever being born with medical disorders it would be a miracle. The difference between me and a first trimester fetus is that I'm actually concious
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50006480]See, here's where you get into the very sticky topic of where the rights of the mother end and the rights of the fetus begin. And that's a minefield where nobody comes out with legs.[/QUOTE] Would it survive if it was born now? If no, it has no rights, if yes it does. Simple. Logical. It's not a human being until it's developed enough that it would survive birth. Until it has reached that point it's just a parasite.
[QUOTE=TestECull;50007660]Simple. Logical. It's not a human being until it's developed enough that it would survive birth. Until it has reached that point it's just a parasite.[/QUOTE] Tis a weird thing to think about if one were to move from being a parasite to a human being in the space of a short period of time.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50007666]Tis a weird thing to think about if one were to move from being a parasite to a human being in the space of a short period of time.[/QUOTE] I mean, most people do that by getting a job and moving out of their parent's basement.
[QUOTE=gufu;50007670]I mean, most people do that by getting a job and moving out of their parent's basement.[/QUOTE] Huh, maybe we should abort basement dwellers in that instance then.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50007676]Huh, maybe we should abort basement dwellers in that instance then.[/QUOTE] Ah, but they are sentient. That's where the difference lies.
[QUOTE=gufu;50007692]Ah, but they are sentient. That's where the difference lies.[/QUOTE] Nonsense, there's some subreddits wholly lacking in any form of sentient life.
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;50006468]People should also not be able to terminate a person because they're differently abled.[/QUOTE] I am sorry, I am not yet a parent and do not plan to have a child next 8 years or so. But fuck having a child coming with a severe disability from birth. You know from the start that the child would: 1) Not have a fully normal life, which will depress me the fuck out before it even begins 2) Will require a fuckload of more care just to be able to function somehow. 3) Among other things, no help in the elder stages of my life. Nope. Never having a baby with disabilities, I'd rather have no baby at all and take a child from adoption.
Great idea having to make an expectant mother flee to another state just to abort a downs kid. That's not inconvenient in the slightest.
There's signs all over my town trying to get Mike Pence to resign over this, he has done nothing but fuck this state since he came in, which is pretty impressive seeing as 90% of it is comprised of corn.
Indiana facepunch meet up when
When Mitch Daniels is governor again
[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;50006486]A fetus isn't a person.[/QUOTE] at what arbitrary point does it become a person?
[QUOTE=butre;50008747]at what arbitrary point does it become a person?[/QUOTE] As someone else pointed out, when it can survive birth.
[QUOTE=butre;50008747]at what arbitrary point does it become a person?[/QUOTE] When it can exist by itself The exact point would be when it has higher brain function but that's kind of hard to pinpoint
so is someone on life support not a person? [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] say Terri Schiavo, was she not human anymore? she needed life support and couldn't survive on her own and had extensive enough brain damage to cause a loss of "higher function"
[QUOTE=butre;50008786]so is someone on life support not a person? [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] say Terri Schiavo, was she not human anymore? she needed life support and couldn't survive on her own and had extensive enough brain damage to cause a loss of "higher function"[/QUOTE] What kind of bullshit non-sequitur is that I mean it's less retarded than the jew analogy the other guy pulled out of his ass a few pages ago but wow that's still pretty fucking stupid
[QUOTE=butre;50008786]so is someone on life support not a person? [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] say Terri Schiavo, was she not human anymore? she needed life support and couldn't survive on her own and had extensive enough brain damage to cause a loss of "higher function"[/QUOTE] Well your argument kinda falls flat, as they ended up removing the feeding tube. Either way, she was (probably) more of a person than a fetus (well this covers everything from 9 weeks to birth, but you know what I mean) that literally can't think.
[QUOTE=butre;50008786]so is someone on life support not a person?[/QUOTE] The transition from cell-clump to person is one way. Being born makes you a person, going on life support doesn't reverse that process
[QUOTE=butre;50008786]so is someone on life support not a person? [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] say Terri Schiavo, was she not human anymore? she needed life support and couldn't survive on her own and had extensive enough brain damage to cause a loss of "higher function"[/QUOTE] The "before they are able to survive on their own" has nothing to do with whether or not they are able to physically survive or not on their own and everything to do with the fact that if they can't survive on their own then then don't have the required brain development to do so making them not conscious making them not people
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;50006468]People should also not be able to terminate a person because they're differently abled.[/QUOTE] Why not? And it's not "differently abled" what are you saying? It's called being disabled. We can enable disabled people as a society, at a cost, yes. If we so choose, and see value in it. But still, why not?
[QUOTE=Duck M.;50006488]At first I thought this said India and wasn't surprised at all When your social policies are on the same level as something India would put forward maybe you should step back and reconsider what you're doing[/QUOTE] India is actually not that repressive to terminations. The thing that's banned is telling the parents the gender of the child for a significant period. Due to a female termination epidemic a while back.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;50009119]India is actually not that repressive to terminations. The thing that's banned is telling the parents the gender of the child for a significant period. Due to a female termination epidemic a while back.[/QUOTE] Huh, interesting. Thanks for sharing!
[QUOTE=butre;50008786]so is someone on life support not a person? [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] say Terri Schiavo, was she not human anymore? she needed life support and couldn't survive on her own and had extensive enough brain damage to cause a loss of "higher function"[/QUOTE] once someone becomes a person, they're a person until death no matter their current status
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50009248]once someone becomes a person, they're a person until death no matter their current status[/QUOTE] What if they become a vegetable though?
[QUOTE=Matrix374;50009257]What if they become a vegetable though?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50009248]they're a person until death no matter their current status[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Matrix374;50009257]What if they become a vegetable though?[/QUOTE] if they've gone through brain death they are kept on life support at the will of the family, although i would have considered them dead at that point if the family doesn't want to give up hope that is their decision.
[QUOTE=butre;50008747]at what arbitrary point does it become a person?[/QUOTE] I've always personally seen it as the point where the brain becomes more complex than the animals we slaughter for food. I know it's not a very scientific definition, but that's when it gets a bit morally uncomfortable for me.
[QUOTE=axelord157;50006425][URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/03/24/indiana-just-banned-abortion-if-the-fetus-has-down-syndrome/?tid=hybrid_collaborative_1_na"]SOURCE[/URL] [quote]Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) signed a controversial abortion bill Thursday that, among other things, would ban the procedure if it is sought because the fetus was diagnosed with a disability or defect such as Down syndrome.[/quote][/QUOTE] gotta safeguard that next generation of republican voters lmao
[QUOTE=wraithcat;50009119]India is actually not that repressive to terminations. The thing that's banned is telling the parents the gender of the child for a significant period. Due to a female termination epidemic a while back.[/QUOTE] I should mention that while true, it's illegal to tell the parents the gender of their child period. by definition the law states: [quote=Pre-conception and Pre-natal diagnostic techniques act, 1994]The Act provides for the prohibition of sex selection, before or after conception. It regulates the use of pre-natal diagnostic techniques, like ultrasound and amniocentesis by allowing them their use only to detect : 1) genetic abnormalities 2) metabolic disorders 3) chromosomal abnormalities 4) certain congenital malformations 5) haemoglobinopathies 6) sex linked disorders. No laboratory or centre or clinic will conduct any test including ultrasonography for the purpose of determining the sex of the foetus. No person, including the one who is conducting the procedure as per the law, will communicate the sex of the foetus to the pregnant woman or her relatives by words, signs or any other method. Any person who puts an advertisement for pre-natal and pre-conception sex determination facilities in the form of a notice, circular, label, wrapper or any document, or advertises through interior or other media in electronic or print form or engages in any visible representation made by means of hoarding, wall painting, signal, light, sound, smoke or gas, can be imprisoned for up to three years and fined Rs. 10,000.[/quote]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.