Page 1 of 11

Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:16 pm
by _dartagnan
Do you feel it is wrong to keep a baby with Downs Syndrome?

=====================================================

‘Objectivist’ Writer: Trig Palin a Financial Burden Who Should Have Been Aborted

In stunningly self-centered, cruel fashion, Nicholas Provenzo, writer for the Center for the Advancement of Capitalism suggests that Sarah Palin’s decision to give birth to a child with Down Syndrome, is a financial burden that others are forced to suffer with.

Provenzo, who has written opinion pieces for the Washington Times, Capitalism Magazine, and the Atlanta Journal Constitution, as well as being a guest on Bill Maher’s former show, Politically Incorrect, makes his case for “the morality of aborting a fetus diagnosed with Down syndrome.”

The full first paragraph of the piece which is circulating amidst the blogosphere reads (emphasis mine):

Like many, I am troubled by the implications of Alaska governor and Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin's decision to knowingly give birth to a child disabled with Down syndrome. Given that Palin's decision is being celebrated in some quarters, it is crucial to reaffirm the morality of aborting a fetus diagnosed with Down syndrome (or by extension, any unborn fetus)—a freedom that anti-abortion advocates seek to deny.


Morally justifiable reasons for killing a baby? There is no justifiable reason for taking any child's life, and to call it a moral obligation to society is undeniably one of the more disgusting things to be written by a human being, about another human being.

In fact, advocating the abortion of a child based on the potential of that child having a disease or imperfection of some kind raises echoes of Nazi Germany’s quest for an Aryan race.

The suggestion that another life should be ended based on the presence of an extra chromosome, and that another healthy individual’s own life is more precious because of that, is over the top narcissism.

Maybe this shouldn’t surprise quite so much. After all, it wasn’t too long ago that sick individuals were offering up baby Trig on ebay. We live in a society where skeptics simply can't admire someone who stands on their principals. They must tear them down by insinuating that such a move is merely a political prop. Or, in this case, they argue that choosing life was actually a selfish move. A stunning argument to say the least.

However, Mr. Provenzo demonstrates his own level of selfishness in his rant. He doesn’t go the typical route of the pro-choice crowd, but reveals some very bizarre reasoning for why it is Palin’s obligation to have killed her baby boy – the care, love and effort required to raise Trig is a cost that others must bear.
A parent has a moral obligation to provide for his or her children until these children are equipped to provide for themselves. Because a person afflicted with Down syndrome is only capable of being marginally productive (if at all) and requires constant care and supervision, unless a parent enjoys the wealth to provide for the lifetime of assistance that their child will require, they are essentially stranding the cost of their child's life upon others.


I think Trig, and everyone who values life as a precious gift, all life, is extremely grateful for the Palin’s decision, no matter the challenges. Trig is a blessing and an inspiration to the conservative pro-life movement, as are Sarah and Todd Palin for making the right choice, the only choice.

And, if Mr. Provenzo needs examples of how someone with Down Syndrome has gone above and beyond the state of being ‘marginally productive,’ he only need look here, here, and of course, here, among countless others. In fact, I am quite certain that our very own readers could cite personal stories of their own.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rusty-weis ... e-been-abo

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:22 pm
by _silentkid
Nope...wait, uh....uh....nope. I know this is a set up for something else. I'm eagerly waiting in anticipation.

Edited to add: crap, I posted before the rest of the OP was up. I don't know how I did that.

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:34 pm
by _asbestosman
I detect a faint issue behind the main one. Behind the main drama of when life begins, I see a small question being asked about whether we should do what we can to decrease the number of humans who have DS or other disease without killing them since outright murder is unthinkable.

It's still quite a tricky issue. Now instead of talking about abortion, we'd be talking about designer babies. Is it wrong for parents to specify that they don't want their baby to be deaf/blind/have DS/short/tall/gay/straight/autistic/have asperger's/whatever?

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:42 pm
by _dblagent007
This sounds too much like Eugenics. I think this guy would have fit in quite well with the Nazis. After all, weren't they just trying to make the world a better place by ridding it of all the undesirables?

I am assuming this guy is a lefty, which seems to make his rationale for killing Trig a little weak. Don't most lefties want everyone to suck off the government nipple for the rest of their lives anyway? What is the problem with having a few extra truly disadvantages persons on the rolls.

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:10 pm
by _The Dude
Do you feel it is wrong to keep a baby with Downs Syndrome?


Amniocentesis is used to confirm Down's Syndrome up to the 4-5 month point. At this point we are not really talking about a child and I think it would be fine to abort and start over fresh, but I would hate to tell someone else what to do. If you want to keep a baby with Down's Syndrome then I'm fine with that. It's not going to do that much damage to the economy, really. Plus, since they are already sterile, this has no aspect that could be called eugenic or dysgenic.

Edit: actually males are sterile but females can have kids that are 50% likely to inherit the syndrome.

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:24 pm
by _LifeOnaPlate
good grief!

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:30 pm
by _silentkid
God aborts the majority of trisomy 21 fetuses (most never make it full term; they are miscarried).

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:32 pm
by _Doctor Steuss
[deleted]

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:34 pm
by _silentkid
Doctor Steuss wrote:deleted
LOL! Even though you deleted your educated opinion on this matter, you are still going to hell. I read it and it will forever be seared into my brain.

Re: Question for Atheists: Abortion

Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:56 pm
by _Doctor Steuss
silentkid wrote:
Doctor Steuss wrote:deleted
LOL! Even though you deleted your educated opinion on this matter, you are still going to hell. I read it and it will forever be seared into my brain.

Curses! Hopefully you are the only one that read it and it was somehow able to escape the all-seeing-eye of Lord Vishnu.

Blair/LoaP once asked me a provocative question regarding hell via a text-message a few months back. He mused whether or not hell would be like being in a hot-tub, and you’d eventually get used to it. I just hope hell won’t lower my sperm count.

-------------

On a more serious note. A while back my aunt attended a conference on stem-cell research. The presenter had some rather grandiose ideas of what could be accomplished, and one of those things was that stem-cell research could one day find a cure for DS. My cousin (her son) has DS, and she and I had a conversation on whether or not he needed to be “cured” (and also the long-term psychological effects such a “cure” would have on an individual). That conversation really made me wonder how much my ideology would influence such a decision and whether or not I would even be able of making such a judgment call.

Why is it that making babies is so much fun (*ehem*, or so I've heard), but deciding whether or not to keep a baby lacks the same thrill?