Board index › General Discussion › Autism Politics, Activism, and Media Representation

Autism Abortion

Page 4 of 7 [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 1:36 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
My reasoning, as you seem to ignore entirely in this post, is simple: people with disabilities are still people. So to abort them solely because of they have a disability is wrong for the same reason racism is.


And people conceived by rape are still people. But that's ok? Who are you to decide which abortions are ok and which aren't?


As I already said, there is a difference. In fact, I'm just gonna go right ahead and quote my old post addressing the issue which you've straight out ignored:

Asp-Z wrote:
The issue of aborting because of a prenatal test has nothing to do with the woman's body. At that point, they've chosen to have a child. For this reason, it's an entirely different issue to the woman being raped - in that case, the woman has not chosen to have a child, and the choice is not being made because the child isn't good enough.

So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?


But the point is THEY ARE STILL PEOPLE.



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 1:37 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
My reasoning, as you seem to ignore entirely in this post, is simple: people with disabilities are still people. So to abort them solely because of they have a disability is wrong for the same reason racism is.


And people conceived by rape are still people. But that's ok? Who are you to decide which abortions are ok and which aren't?


As I already said, there is a difference. In fact, I'm just gonna go right ahead and quote my old post addressing the issue which you've straight out ignored:

Asp-Z wrote:
The issue of aborting because of a prenatal test has nothing to do with the woman's body. At that point, they've chosen to have a child. For this reason, it's an entirely different issue to the woman being raped - in that case, the woman has not chosen to have a child, and the choice is not being made because the child isn't good enough.

So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?


But the point is THEY ARE STILL PEOPLE.


And no one is disputing that or treating them as less of a person because of a personal attribute they possess...



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 1:41 pm

But you're saying it's ok to abort them beecause of that, but not to abort disabled fetuses because of their disability?



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 1:48 pm

Volodja wrote:
But you're saying it's ok to abort them beecause of that, but not to abort disabled fetuses because of their disability?


There is a difference between wanting a child but saying yours isn't good enough and never wanting a child at all in the first place. It's about the reasoning.



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 1:50 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
But you're saying it's ok to abort them beecause of that, but not to abort disabled fetuses because of their disability?


There is a difference between wanting a child but saying yours isn't good enough and never wanting a child at all in the first place. It's about the reasoning.


How do you know th woman who was raped never wanted a child? maybe she did, but not by rape.

Again, who are you to inflict your own opinion on everyone else?



ci
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,546
Location: Humboldt County, California

15 Dec 2010, 1:54 pm

I hate mice and if they get in your house they poop on things. Also they might have diseases and bite me. They tare things up and I have to throw them away and buy new things so they are costly but one time I looked at a young one and it looked at me. I couldn't kill it myself so I put the cat in the room because thats the instinctual job of the cat. I felt bad because the mouse looked innocent and not as threatening as others thought. A few months later the cat died of cancer and I took the cat to the vets and they said they couldn't do anything.

Nathan Young



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 2:07 pm

Volodja wrote:
How do you know th woman who was raped never wanted a child? maybe she did, but not by rape.


Irrelevant.

Quote:
Again, who are you to inflict your own opinion on everyone else?


I could say the same to you.



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 2:15 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
I could say the same to you.


lol

I'm not though - I'm for allowing women to choose. You're not.



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 2:17 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
I could say the same to you.


lol

I'm not though - I'm for allowing women to choose. You're not.


Who are you to say all of them should be able to choose? :roll:



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 2:35 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
I could say the same to you.


lol

I'm not though - I'm for allowing women to choose. You're not.


Who are you to say all of them should be able to choose? :roll:


It's her body, therefore it's her decision. You're the one saying you should be able to force women to give birth against their will. I'm saying it should be up to the woman herself what she does with her body. For some reason you ccan't grasp that... :?



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 2:39 pm

Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Volodja wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
I could say the same to you.


lol

I'm not though - I'm for allowing women to choose. You're not.


Who are you to say all of them should be able to choose? :roll:


It's her body, therefore it's her decision. You're the one saying you should be able to force women to give birth against their will. I'm saying it should be up to the woman herself what she does with her body. For some reason you ccan't grasp that... :?


Again, you're not listening to me at all. To once again quote one of my earlier posts:

Asp-Z wrote:
The issue of aborting because of a prenatal test has nothing to do with the woman's body. At that point, they've chosen to have a child. For this reason, it's an entirely different issue to the woman being raped - in that case, the woman has not chosen to have a child, and the choice is not being made because the child isn't good enough.

So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?


Unless you actually give me a proper response to that - something you have yet to do - I will cease this argument, as it's going nowhere but around in circles.



Delirium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,573
Location: not here

15 Dec 2010, 3:14 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
Abortions should be allowed for legit reasons. Deciding your baby isn't good enough because it has a disability isn't one of them. There's such a thing as going too far. The Nazis wanted a "perfect" race of people, and this is the same attitude.


Right, because voluntary abortion is the same as killing 12 million people. There is not a :roll: big enough for your comment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum


Prenatal tests kill off many people, yes. And in this case, they'd kill off a whole group of people, which is the definition of genocide.


Voluntary abortion is not the same as genocide. Genocide involves killing fully conscious human beings who are able to survive outside the womb. Abortion is getting rid of an unwanted fetus. The fetus is not fully conscious and cannot survive outside the womb.

Also, not everybody is financially or emotionally able to care for a child with special needs. Even if the kid ended up being put up for adoption, it would most likely not get adopted. Most people want healthy babies.

And before you say "WELL IF YOU CAN'T HAVE A DISABLED KID DON'T HAVE A KID", the only way you can even tell if your kid will be disabled is if you do a prenatal test. It's better to know ahead of time so you can decide what to do rather than finding out later and having no idea how to care for a child with special needs.


As I mentioned before, once a prenatal test for something comes out, very few people with that disability are born. So you are pretty much killing off that group of people in the next generation.

Genocide is wiping out a group of people, not specifically killing people who can live outside the womb.

It does not matter whether or not you can tell the kid will be disabled before it's born as far as actually having the kid is concerned. If you have no idea how to care for a child with special needs, it's your job as a parent to find out. Parenthood in general, no matter what disabilities your kid has, isn't predicable anyway.


Jesus tapdancing Christ on a pogo stick, do I need to repeat myself?

NOT EVERYBODY IS FINANCIALLY OR EMOTIONALLY ABLE TO CARE FOR A CHILD WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. IT IS BETTER TO KNOW IN ADVANCE WHETHER OR NOT YOUR CHILD WILL HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS.


_________________
I don't post here anymore. If you want to talk to me, go to the WP Facebook group or my Last.fm account.


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 3:27 pm

Delirium wrote:
Jesus tapdancing Christ on a pogo stick, do I need to repeat myself?

NOT EVERYBODY IS FINANCIALLY OR EMOTIONALLY ABLE TO CARE FOR A CHILD WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. IT IS BETTER TO KNOW IN ADVANCE WHETHER OR NOT YOUR CHILD WILL HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS.


THEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY F**KING KID THE FIRST PLACE.

NEXT!



Volodja
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 814

15 Dec 2010, 4:00 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
The issue of aborting because of a prenatal test has nothing to do with the woman's body. At that point, they've chosen to have a child. For this reason, it's an entirely different issue to the woman being raped - in that case, the woman has not chosen to have a child, and the choice is not being made because the child isn't good enough.

So, again, why should a child be disallowed from birth purely because of a disability?



What does the fact that the women at one point wanted a child have to do with anything? The same could be said for a woman who's raped.

Until she reaches a certain point in her pregnancy, any woman should have the right to end it (even if that means changing her mind) and FOR WHATEVER REASON

Why do you find this so difficult to understand?



Delirium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,573
Location: not here

15 Dec 2010, 4:17 pm

Asp-Z wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Jesus tapdancing Christ on a pogo stick, do I need to repeat myself?

NOT EVERYBODY IS FINANCIALLY OR EMOTIONALLY ABLE TO CARE FOR A CHILD WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. IT IS BETTER TO KNOW IN ADVANCE WHETHER OR NOT YOUR CHILD WILL HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS.


THEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY F**KING KID THE FIRST PLACE.

NEXT!


You can't tell if your kid is going to be disabled unless you get a prenatal test.

kthxbai.

edit: Also, I find it hilarious how two men are arguing over abortion rights.


_________________
I don't post here anymore. If you want to talk to me, go to the WP Facebook group or my Last.fm account.


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

15 Dec 2010, 4:40 pm

Volodja wrote:
What does the fact that the women at one point wanted a child have to do with anything? The same could be said for a woman who's raped.

Until she reaches a certain point in her pregnancy, any woman should have the right to end it (even if that means changing her mind) and FOR WHATEVER REASON

Why do you find this so difficult to understand?


If your current pregnancy is one you chose to undergo, and you choose to abort your baby soely because of a disability, that's horrible. I have explained by reasoning behind that three times now, and I will no longer be replying to your posts because we're going around in circles as I said before.

Delirium wrote:
You can't tell if your kid is going to be disabled unless you get a prenatal test.


Never said you could, but I don't see why that's relevant... :?

Quote:
edit: Also, I find it hilarious how two men are arguing over abortion rights.


Now that is a good point ;)