By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Would you abort your unborn child if you know that he/she would be mentally retarded?

curl-6 on 15 October 2012
sperrico87 said:
curl-6 said:
sperrico87 said:
curl-6 said:

sperrico87 said:

Who are you to pass that kind of judgement?  And how is mental retardation considered suffering? Does it cause physical pain?  People with disabilities need more love and care, not less. 

You know, Hitler and the Nazi's used scientists to conduct experiements during WWII to try and breed or alter people from their original state to make them more "perfect". 

The very idea that two people would have sexual intercourse (likely just for pleasure and not even procreation), learn they're with child, then decide to murder it in the end because they didn't want to deal with imperfections makes me sick to my stomach. 

Poeple with severe mental disabilitiers can have immensely decreased quality of life and impaired faculties. That's suffering.

And please, Hitler also used rockets to bomb people, does that make NASA evil for using them to get to the moon? The Nazis performed inhumane medical experiments, but does that mean we shouldn't perform surgery?

The choice ultimately lies with the mother, as it's her body.

And you can only murder a human being, not a clump of cells with only the POTENTIAL to be a human being.

A clump of cells?  When do you make the distinction between a "clump of cells" and a human being?  Do you just pick a day on the calendar and BAM it's a human at that point?  The mother is only responsible for half of the pregnancy, so I don't think all men should be forever cast off from having a say.  Last I checked, two lesbians cannot conceive a baby.  It takes a man and a woman.

Bold: That's complicated, but so is the conception argument; does it start the moment the sperm enters the egg? (And does that count as just the head of the sperm, or the whole thing?) The moment it begins to divide? When it embeds into the uterus wall? You could leverage similar arguments about someone becoming a legal sexual adult on their 18th birthday. That's just a chosen day, but it can make the difference between jail time and sex offense registry and consensual sex.

I agree that the man should have a say. I certainly would like to have a say in it if my partner was pregnant and considering an abortion, but ultimately I think the fact that it's her body gives her the final say, I don't think I should have the right to tell her what she can and can't do with her own body.

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue when you talk about becoming a legal sexual adult upon turning 18.  That is an arbitrary law fashioned by politcians and therefore it is void in my opinion.  Being appropriate age to have sex is up to different cultures, and different cultures do very much have different ideas of what is appropriate.  You cannot legislate morality, that has been proven throughout history.

As for when it becomes a life, I'm not even arguing that it begins at conception or not...that is beside the point as there is no way to convince you one way or the other... I was merely trying to get at when it was you though it became human vs "clump" (therefore it's meaningless and disposable).  To take this debate to the extreme... Scott Peterson got convicted of two counts of murder and life in prison for killing his wife and their unborn child...but if his wife had had an abortion the day before the murder she is merely exercising her right to choose?  It truly is a nutty thing.

I'm saying that the age of consent also depends on a day-to-day change but is seen as the difference between a heinous act and simple sex, so a day-to-day change on when abortion is acceptable isn't so absurd as other moral dilemmas are already decided in this way.

A foetus can feel pain and has basic brain functions in place at the third trimester, so I'd put the cutoff point around then. 



Around the Network
Majora on 15 October 2012

I think a lot of people get on their moral high horse about this question. I could argue that some people who would keep the child Hy are actually being selfish, and to demonstrate to the world how high they are morally bring the child into the world knowing that it will suffer, bringing pain to the person and the family.

Look at euthanasia and people in that situation. Some of these people cannot move, are in constant pain and wish to die through sheer misery. Some of the reasons these people wish to die are the disabilities that we still bring into this world. Isn't it kinder to prevent this before a person has a personality, friends, emotions, a memory, a name?



Rafux on 15 October 2012

Yes.



Moonhero on 15 October 2012

Yeah. I wouldn't want to be like that, and I wouldn't want to be the cause of someone else's crap life.



Ask stefl1504 for a sig, even if you don't need one.

TheBardsSong on 15 October 2012

^ You assume it's a crap life, but I've met plenty of happy mentally disabled people. They just need to be around the right people to have a quality life, as in pretty much nowhere near the majority of the people in this topic.

To the person above who thinks it's selfish to keep the kid... complete bullshit, it's FAR more selfish to decide the fate of someone's life yourself.



Around the Network
weaveworld on 15 October 2012

I don't even understand why you would question things like that.

I'd rather have a 'mentally challenged' kid than be a socially incapable retarded murderer.



naruball on 15 October 2012

Honestly, I don't know. The Christian inside me keeps telling that it is wrong, but then again keeping it might be even worse.
The parents WILL suffer. The other children will have a burden throughout their life. The grandparents and relatives too. I don't know how much the child will be able to understand, but I don't think he/she will be happy or reach the level of happiness that other children do.
I don't think this is cruel at all. In fact, the parents are saving many people from emotional distress with an abortion. I know several families with mentally chalenged children and no matter how much love they give to their child it does have a terrible impact on them



maverick40 on 15 October 2012

It depends on my financial situation to be honest. If me and my future wife have good jobs then it might be an option to keep the kid. Having a down syndrome kid is literally a life changer. Me or my wife would have to quit a job and look after the kid full time. Our standard of life would probably go down too.

It is a very tough decision.

OT: Most of ye are nerds who won't have kids anyways.



TheBardsSong on 15 October 2012
maverick40 said:

It depends on my financial situation to be honest. If me and my future wife have good jobs then it might be an option to keep the kid. Having a down syndrome kid is literally a life changer. Me or my wife would have to quit a job and look after the kid full time. Our standard of life would probably go down too.

It is a very tough decision.

OT: Most of ye are nerds who won't have kids anyways.


Is the joke that you are also a "nerd"?



sperrico87 on 15 October 2012
maverick40 said:

It depends on my financial situation to be honest. If me and my future wife have good jobs then it might be an option to keep the kid. Having a down syndrome kid is literally a life changer. Me or my wife would have to quit a job and look after the kid full time. Our standard of life would probably go down too.

It is a very tough decision.

OT: Most of ye are nerds who won't have kids anyways.


So the sanctity of life is based purely on money?  Unborn children are murdered without a second thought because you had unprotected sex purely for pleasure and it was too inconvenient to deal with the predictable outcome?  When did people become so completely immoral?  What is wrong with some people?