• Indiana just banned abortion if the fetus has Down syndrome
    198 replies, posted
[QUOTE=butre;50008747]at what arbitrary point does it become a person?[/QUOTE] When its born and stamped "a person", not when some inept politician claims it is (Don't take this as a serious answer)
[QUOTE=butre;50008747]at what arbitrary point does it become a person?[/QUOTE] Once it has developed a consciousness. Before it develops a consciousness, it's just a lump of flesh and bones. Just like a tree, it has no self-awareness, no opinions, no likes or dislikes. It doesn't feel, it has no emotions. As far as I'm aware, they only really start on this pretty late in the pregnancy, thus why late abortions are generally frowned upon or even illegal. I've said this before, but as someone who is themselves disabled, I think abortion is the most ethical thing to do if you know for a fact that your child is going to be disabled. Growing up and living with a disability is not fun, and besides the disabled person themselves, it puts a huge strain on the family as well. It's a challenge far beyond raising any other child, and almost no family is ever truly ready for it. Banning abortion specifically of disabled children is probably the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a long time. I just don't understand the thought process that would lead to this.
This is ridiculous, Pence can fuck off. As a brother of someone with severe mental disabilities, growing up in a house where my mom only got at best 5 hours of sleep a night because my brother would simply not sleep for a week straight, screaming all night, who had to give up on her goals in life in order to take care of him full time. It's not something you would ever want a person to be forced to go through. I firmly believe you should be able to abort your pregnancy for any reason, let alone if you are told that your child is malformed or disabled. It's not a life you would ever wish on a parent, or the child themselves. My state can be so backwards some times.
2/3s of the distant family on my mom's side (her cousins etc) all have children that have major Down Syndrome; very mentally challenged. Me and my brothers got lucky enough to escape that gene. Seeing my distant cousins and distant family take care of them is stressful. Knowing how stressed they must feel can be unmeasurable. Yes, they have a lot of patience when it comes to it (I don't, I just.. Can't) but its still a nightmare and I've still caught Paula (the mother of my cousin Tyler and aunt of my cousin Nick) because she just broke down from how difficult it was after all these years. I've never seen her do that because she's the most patient woman I know. Even those who have been dealing with that sort of thing can't take it.. Little less someone who KNOWS they won't be able to deal with it. It shouldn't be the State's decision for that, at all. They may think they're trying to save a life but they're possibly ruining another one.
The most worthwhile solution would be for the people to abort this governor's term.
[QUOTE=elowin;50009768]Once it has developed a consciousness.[/QUOTE] So like a year after birth? That's the argument renowned animal rights advocate and Princeton professor Peter Singer advocates for for that very reason. Or how about Michael Tooley who got a book published by the Oxford press that argues for a justification of infanticide ([URL]http://www.jstor.org/stable/2264919?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents[/URL]) Here's an article written in the British Journal of Medical Ethics on the topic: [URL]http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full[/URL] [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] So let's not pretend that there's some easy to recognize line between abortion after, say, 22-24 weeks (the earliest that a baby can be viable outside of the womb), and a post-birth baby.
[QUOTE=sgman91;50010640]So like a year after birth? That's the argument renowned animal rights advocate and Princeton professor Peter Singer advocates for for that very reason. Or how about Michael Tooley who got a book published by the Oxford press that argues for a justification of infanticide ([URL]http://www.jstor.org/stable/2264919?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents[/URL]) Here's an article written in the British Journal of Medical Ethics on the topic: [URL]http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full[/URL] [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] So let's not pretend that there's some easy to recognize line between abortion after, say, 22-24 weeks (the earliest that a baby can be viable outside of the womb), and a post-birth baby.[/QUOTE] If it could be unequivocally proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that a child is not conscious at all until a year after birth then a year after birth is the logical point when you could no longer "abort" your child The thing is, this is unprovable But if the child were truly not conscious yet, then they were not truly a human yet.
[QUOTE=phygon;50010913]If it could be unequivocally proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that a child is not conscious at all until a year after birth then a year after birth is the logical point when you could no longer "abort" your child The thing is, this is unprovable But if the child were truly not conscious yet, then they were not truly a human yet.[/QUOTE] That's fine if you want to make that argument. I just find it silly (not referring to you) when people pretend that actually leaving the womb is a meaningful difference that should change whether a baby is considered a person or not, even though that seems to be the most commonly held belief by pro-choice people. [editline]26th March 2016[/editline] The only non-arbirary positions to have, as far as I can see, are: 1) Personhood begins at conception. 2) Personhood begins somewhere around 20 weeks when the fetus gains the ability to develop into a fully developed human outside of the womb. (this would change as our medical ability to keep the fetus alive and developing increases) 3) Personhood begins somewhere around 1 year of age when the baby starts to gain some form of recognizable consciousness.
[QUOTE=Ajacks;50009770]This is ridiculous, Pence can fuck off. As a brother of someone with severe mental disabilities, growing up in a house where my mom only got at best 5 hours of sleep a night because my brother would simply not sleep for a week straight, screaming all night, who had to give up on her goals in life in order to take care of him full time. It's not something you would ever want a person to be forced to go through. I firmly believe you should be able to abort your pregnancy for any reason, let alone if you are told that your child is malformed or disabled. It's not a life you would ever wish on a parent, or the child themselves. My state can be so backwards some times.[/QUOTE]One of my best friend's brother is autistic. He's got it pretty bad; I remember once when we were younger (his brother was like 15 or something at the time, we were around 10) and going to Tennessee on a trip to the Aquarium, he got upset at some point in the car and was just literally screaming for the longest time. My friend wanted to get out of the house as much as possible, and I wasn't too fond of going over there. We didn't even pick on him but you could just say one wrong thing and he'd go off. Anyways enough stories and to the main point, I remember when he was younger his parents actually seemed to do what they could for him and care for him. Eventually they divorced, and at this point it basically became a fight to not have the kid. They both just want nothing to do with him anymore because he causes so much trouble - I remember more recently he got mad and stomped a hole in the floor. So all in all he causes a lot of trouble for those around him, and no one close to him enjoys his presence. No one wins here. He will never be able to live a normal life, the parents had to go through hell raising him, and on top of it all no one even loves him anymore. He will probably pass with no friends and no one really caring.
[QUOTE=Hervey;50012550]One of my best friend's brother is autistic. He's got it pretty bad; I remember once when we were younger (his brother was like 15 or something at the time, we were around 10) and going to Tennessee on a trip to the Aquarium, he got upset at some point in the car and was just literally screaming for the longest time. My friend wanted to get out of the house as much as possible, and I wasn't too fond of going over there. We didn't even pick on him but you could just say one wrong thing and he'd go off. Anyways enough stories and to the main point, I remember when he was younger his parents actually seemed to do what they could for him and care for him. Eventually they divorced, and at this point it basically became a fight to not have the kid. They both just want nothing to do with him anymore because he causes so much trouble - I remember more recently he got mad and stomped a hole in the floor. So all in all he causes a lot of trouble for those around him, and no one close to him enjoys his presence. No one wins here. He will never be able to live a normal life, the parents had to go through hell raising him, and on top of it all no one even loves him anymore. He will probably pass with no friends and no one really caring.[/QUOTE] My mom was in a similar situation, but in order for her to go back to school and finish her education we put him in a full time assisted living situation where he's got careproviders 24/7 and lives in a local apartment with two other autistic room mates. My mother thought he would have a hard time, he's non verbal and basically has the mental capacity of a 2 year old, and he thrives on routine. He ultimately does just fine in his living situation now, has staff that truly care for him and has more social interactions through the day program he attends through the same agency that handles his care. All in all he's doing exactly the same, if not better than he was at home and my mom was able to finally live a normal life, get her education and now she's a professor. I feel bad for the families of people with disabilities that are unable to find a way for themselves and their autistic family member to live full lives. For 22 years my father and mother couldn't even go out for an evening dinner together without extensive planning for care, let alone something like a weekend away.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;50006892]What about rape victims?[/QUOTE] Maybe Indiana will take that answer from the old testament and have the rapist pay the victims father 50 silver shekels (or today's currency's equivalent) and then marry her. :downs:
Nah, they don't like Jews and the Old Testament is considered mostly Jewish here, anything about that in New Testament?
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;50006514]By that logic we should perhaps cull all disabled people away from civilization because they put too much of a burden upon society, perhaps into camps of some sort so that they aren't a burden to anyone. I remember a gentleman in Germany a long time ago with a sentiment very similar to the ones a majority of all of you hold in this particular matter, and if I recall correctly it didn't end well for him. It's extremely easy to get rid of someone you dislike if you just convince yourself they're not like you or me. Theres a reason soldiers often refer to their enemy in racial or other dehumanizing terms (gook, kraut, etc.) , it makes the act of ending their life very easy if you don't think of them as a human.[/QUOTE] There's difference between terminating an unconscious collection of cells and a fully formed infant about to be born. Besides, I don't see any of these anti-abortion activists whinging about the rights of children in poverty or with disabilities. All this will do is encourage people to go to other states for the procedure or, worse, have it done as a backalley job with all the risks it entails.
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;50006468]People should also not be able to terminate a person because they're differently abled.[/QUOTE] *disabled They are not differently abled. They are not substituting for their disability in any way.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50009291]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] You kinda have to figure that out in systems with nationalized health care - when there is basically no chance of the person waking up ever again (so maybe a year without improvement or whatever is decided to be a medically sound period of time), it's a waste of money and honestly also kinda weird to keep the person "alive".
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;50006693]"Jews are just rats, they need not be treated like humans, they don't function like you or I" you guys may think this analogy is far fetched but it's really unsettling how eerily Nazi-esque your guy's language is on this matter. I suppose I can't argue the life question since you all have unanimously decided this thing that you once were is no longer worthy of defense. I doubt a fetus would agree with you all, but they aren't people I suppose.[/QUOTE] Thats right. A fetus isn't a person. It has no personality, no memories, no experiences, nothing. And its retarded as hell to sweep Down's syndrome under the rug, when there are abortions made for problems seemingly smaller than that. It almost sounds like the law was made by the kind of people that posts photos of people with Down's syndrome just to reel in likes for being progressive and nice.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.