Jump to content
CrazyBoards.org




"Immoral not to abort"


Recommended Posts

Normally I don't post here because I hate the news, but this one made me cry. I think I threw up in my mouth a tiny bit.

 

Who the fuck are you, Richard Dawkins, to decide whose life is worth living and whose isn't? Fuck you.

 

Edit: Just realized the link all clashes together. Some scientist thinks it is immoral "not to abort" a baby who has down's syndrome.  I don't think I've ever read a more stupid thing on the internet. 

 

A mother asked him whether or not she should have a baby with down's. His reply?

 

 

Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice.

 

 

What a fucking asshole.

 

All lives matter.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/aug/21/richard-dawkins-immoral-not-to-abort-a-downs-syndrome-foetus

Edited by writehellarandomshiny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well.

 

We eat animals that have a higher cognitive functioning than individuals with DS.  You can't say #allivesmatter unless you're vegan.  There's really no difference between a person with DS and a smart pig. 

 

I'm with Dawkins 100% on this one.

 

What separates humans from animals is sentience.  Folks with Downs don't have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(edited for being a bigger dick than the mods, even though I am a mod-I've cooled off just a little.)

 

Whether or not to have a baby is a woman's choice, period, and it's a hard one and intensely personal. If someone doesn't feel like she can deal with a baby with Downs and give it a good life, then she may choose to abort. However, if she can cope and still wants her baby, more fucking power to her.

 

And saying people with Down's syndrome aren't sentient is so egregiously stupid that I don't even know how to address it. Would you say that about a kid with and ASD who couldn't talk, or would you wonder that was going on in his mind that he just hadn't found a way to communicate yet? As with Autism, there are varying degrees of impairment that come with Down's. Some people are pretty messed up. Others are like this guy:

 

http://www.ndsccenter.org/chess-takes-on-another-job/

 

You are way, way off here, dude.

Edited by Gearhead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big difference, based on brain scans.  I'll get to it later.   

 

It's a provable fact that people with Downs lack self-awareness, as does a two to three year old child, who they most closely resemble.  

 

Seriously, pigs really do have more self-awareness.  I was shopping for PhD programs in cognitive science when my brain broke.  This is the kind of thing I actually know a lot about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I still can't click on the link and get the article, but I get the jist of it from the answers here.

 

If I had been told my daughter was going to be born with Down's Syndrome, I honestly don't know what I would have done. I don't feel I personally, am capable of handing that long term. I have a hard enough time dealing with a fully mentally capable individual. 90% of my therapy sessions are about her and how to raise her the best I can so my mental difficulties and her absentee daddy don't affect her more than they should. It takes alot of my mental resources just to deal with my healthy "normal" child. I don't know that I would have the mental resources to deal with someone that would require so much extra care.

 

My brother's girlfriend has a child that has something going on. He's not been officially diagnosed with anything, but he's definitely not "right". I think he's probably autistic. He's almost 3 and doesn't speak. I think he says Momma and Daddy and that's it. He's super high energy and has a very short attention span. He throws violent temper tantrums over the smallest of things. We have a play room, most of the toys have a designated spot, my daughter is pretty good about putting things back where they belong. He'll go in there and literally within 5 minutes, every single toy in the room is on the floor or something. It takes hours to clean it back up after he's been in there (and of course his lame ass momma never offers to even help clean up the mess her son made). He's alot to handle, and I can only deal with him in very short doses. My brother has been with her since the child was only a couple of months old (if he was that old) and though I love my nieces and nephews, I hold no affection for this child. I simply cannot attach to him. I can't even say as I like him actually. I buy him Birthday presents and Christmas presents and attend his birthday parties and stuff like that, but I honestly just cannot attach to him.

 

I've had an abortion in my life, I was young, only 16 and knew that I was not capable of providing a good home for a child. I didn't choose adoption, because I didn't want to constantly worry about did my child go to a good home, what are they doing now, etc. Abortion was the best choice for me at the time and I've never regretted it.

 

So, in short, I have no clue what I would do, but I would probably go with the abortion/adoption route myself. I just don't think I'm mentally/physically/financially capable of that type of commitment.  But I do think it's wrong to word a choice like that in that manner. It should be presented as an option, but not told it's irresponsible to not do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt I'd choose to have a down's baby for practical reasons...the child would almost certainly always need someone to protect them and advocate for them in a governmental system prone to kicking them to the curb.

I'm 41...I'm not sure how long I'll be around to protect a severely disabled child from a world that doesn't really care much.

...But as a user of the county hospital system, I realized I was someone's idea of excess population...That's a pretty disturbing place to be, you know?

I cost the government a lot of fucking money.

Dawkins seems to have this pompous ass thing down pat.

Down's people really do vary in impairment. Shit, so do I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3740159/

People with DS have varying levels of “self-concept”—that is, how they think and feel about themselves. For typically developing persons, this principle has been generally divided into six developmental stages, which has been shown to be the same, albeit delayed, for people with DS: self-recognition (the ability to recognize oneself), self-representation (the ability to distinguish oneself from others), self-description (the ability to articulate features about oneself), self-assertion (the ability to be motivated toward a behavioral goal), self-regulation (the ability to change one’s behaviors based on situation), and self-evaluation (the ability to reflect on oneself) [DesRosters and Busch-Rossnagel, 1997; Glenn and Cunningham, 2004].

Edited by Stickler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a wide range of impairment in people with Down's Syndrome. There even was an actor a few years ago with Down's Syndrome ("Life Goes On"). My second cousin was born with Down's Syndrome. He was severely impaired, but he was sentient without a doubt. He clearly had an IQ higher than a pig and enjoyed life as a perpetual child. I find that comparison to a pig insulting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also believe it is okay to abort--I believe every life matters, but I understand that women may not always feel like they can have a child right then, so I respect that too... It's hard to clarify exactly how I feel on the issue without launching into a lengthy post and debate.

 

What frustrated me about the article (to clarify) was someone saying to another person they felt it was immoral to have a child with Down's Syndrome. If a woman is well-educated about the risk, I see no reason why she should be told it's "immoral" to have a child. I've seen successful people with Down's. I guess I just feel like it's another slap in the face of the stigma of illness, I guess. 

Edited by writehellarandomshiny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a wide range of impairment in people with Down's Syndrome. There even was an actor a few years ago with Down's Syndrome ("Life Goes On"). My second cousin was born with Down's Syndrome. He was severely impaired, but he was sentient without a doubt. He clearly had an IQ higher than a pig and enjoyed life as a perpetual child. I find that comparison to a pig insulting. 

and I don't eat pork

 

Pigs are fucking smart.  They are smarter than dogs, cats, horses, or most of the animals humans traditionally keep as pets.  It's not meant to be a negative comparison so much as raise the point that there is a blurry line where some humans have less intellectual functionality than some animals which we eat.  I'm not saying we should eat people or anything, just that we should be realistic in how we look at things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the absolute impossibility of knowing ahead of time the quality of life of a person with Down's syndrome as well as the quality of life of the parent of that child, Dawkins has no legs to stand on passing judgment about the morality or immorality of the choice to birth that child or not.

 

 

 

Dawkins defended his comments on the social media website saying: "I do not for one moment apologise for approaching moral philosophic questions in a logical way. There's a place for emotion & this isn't it." --http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-28879659

 

Using logic as the ONLY criteria for answering a moral/ethical question is about the most foolish comment I have ever heard.

 

Granted with character limits, twitter is not the appropriate forum for involved philosophical debates.

 

Information fundamental to the woman's question is missing (How severe is the Down's? What medical complications/life expectancy issues are associated? What are the resources available to the child, caregivers, and support system? etc, But most importantly, does the mother desire to bring this child into the world?).

 

Therefore it is inappropriate to render an opinion, through the guise of dispassionate logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went vegan for health reasons...but now the idea of eating most animals squicks me out.

If I do go back to eating meat, I could live with wild meat easier. There's not a betrayal of trust there.

Pigs are smart, so are gorillas, chimps, parrots, and certain octopi..and I find the way we treat some of them morally repugnant. I think Down's people, on the whole, are more intelligent than chimps...Chimps can reach a level comparable to a human 4 year old, IIRC.

Still not cool to compare Down's people to pigs, methinks.

Is there academic research to show that pigs can learn vocabulary, and if so, how much language were they shown to be able to learn?

Got...ahem...some good links?

...bring us the bacon here, Velvis...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we're basing a person's worth based on their IQ then the majority of those with autism (an estimated 75%) who have mild to severe intellectual disabilities with an IQ of 70 and less would not make the cut. so those with high functioning autism and asperger's deserve to live but for the majority of those with autism it would be immoral not to abort them if there were prior knowledge of their condition? this is no different than having an opinion similar to those horrible parents of low functioning autistic kids who try to kill them to "put them out of their misery."

 

i'm sorry but this is not "being realistic." pointing out that there are sentient animals that are more intelligent than some of our human population should not provide reasoning to support eugenics and instead should make us more compassionate to those animals whose rich inner lives we do not value. people who are severely disabled have worth. they are capable of giving and receiving love and that is enough for me. a woman choosing to raise a child who is disabled is not an unethical person and the act of choosing to give birth to a baby with down's is not immoral in the least. that statement is absolutely ridiculous and severely lacking in compassion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dawkins is an asshole. I don't even need to click the link to know that what he said is massively assholeish. Dude has a superiority complex nine miles wide. 

 

Of course he thinks people with cognitive impairments shouldn't be alive. He values intelligence (and smugness) above all else. 

 

Anyway, fuck that guy. Just throw him out the window. Who cares what he thinks? He's an asshole. His words are worthless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow... pigs? Really? I'm pro choice all the way but I don't think peoples humanity cards are revoked because they have Downs Syndrome. 

 

And how did we get from Downs Syndrome to what meat we eat?

 

I'm just going to leave this quote here because I don't really know what else to say

 

 

 

Is it fair to compare Trisomy 21 to breast cancer?  No.  Down syndrome is not a disease.  Yes, there is a motley collection of conditions that may or may not accompany the triplication of chromosome 21, but in itself it is not a killer, nor is it something to "overcome".  One does not battle Down syndrome, you don't fight your chromosomes.  It simply is: a visual, intellectual and often physical disability.  There is no "hope" needed, other than one day perhaps society will realize how society itself disables hundreds of thousands with the condition every day.  It is not something to cure. -http://downsyndromeuprising.blogspot.co.uk/

 

Just to back up cosima, IQ tests are kind of bullshit and ignore so many facets of the human experience that they are kind of useless as a means of establishing a hierarchy based on a flawed notion of intelligence. How can we even compare human and animal IQ's anyway? Make a pig get a job in a cafe and see if it can take someones order?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pointing out that there are sentient animals that are more intelligent than some of our human population should not provide reasoning to support eugenics and instead should make us more compassionate to those animals whose rich inner lives we do not value

Well put and seconded.

Though I note that comparing the intellect of different species hits a lot of problems. A parrot may not make a brilliant human, but be an excellent parrot.

We value HUMAN intelligence. We kind of have trouble recognizing the validity of intelligence that isn't wired toward what's kept us alive and allowed us to become the dominant species.

Just sayin'.

Edited by Stickler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...