$20.00
$15.00
$30.00
$5.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
100 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Making a point rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm staunchly pro-choice as I've said on here many times.

Yet while the choice is ultimately the mother's, some reasons for making that choice are indeed better than others. Saving the life of the mother is in this sense a better reason than reasons based on what is essentially eugenics.

So here's a question to those who think it's okay to abort a baby/fetus if that baby will be born with Down's syndrome. Why is that acceptable when say aborting a baby because it's a girl or because (if a hypothetical gay gene were to exist) because the baby would be gay?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
I'm staunchly pro-choice as I've said on here many times.

Yet while the choice is ultimately the mother's, some reasons for making that choice are indeed better than others. Saving the life of the mother is in this sense a better reason than reasons based on what is essentially eugenics.

So here's a question to those who think it's okay to abort a baby/fetus if that baby will be born with Down's syndrome. Why is that acceptable when say aborting a baby because it's a girl or because (if a hypothetical gay gene were to exist) because the baby would be gay?


Downs children usually add an extra burden to the parents' life. Some add a small burden, some (where the impairment is greatest) add a large burden. Downs babies are far more likely to have heart defects that require surgery in the first few months.

Your other cases add no extra burden on to the parents.

Therefore I think it is totally acceptably for parents to decide that the extra burden imposed by a Downs baby would be too much for them.
9 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Julius Waller
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm pro-choice - the mother does not need to give me a reason for her choice. That's why its called a choice.
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
mbmbmbmbmb
TrustyJules wrote:
I'm pro-choice - the mother does not need to give me a reason for her choice. That's why its called a choice.
:golf clap:

I'm pro-choice too. We can still have what we think good and bad reasons.

As for being a burden, that's true of every child.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
As for being a burden, that's true of every child.


Which is why I said extra burden. Or do you contend that there is no extra burden? Or that no amount of burden should be enough for the parents to choose to abort?

6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
mbmbmbmbmb
andyl wrote:
whac3 wrote:
As for being a burden, that's true of every child.


Which is why I said extra burden. Or do you contend that there is no extra burden? Or that no amount of burden should be enough for the parents to choose to abort?


They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
whac3 wrote:
They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.

absolutely ridiculous - im getting the impression you have no clue about raising a child with down syndrome
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marco Mann
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
The question seems to be what medical conditions, if any, do you think are an acceptable reason to abort a fetus and how does this differ from non-medical reasons such the sex (or sexuality) of the fetus.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
mbmbmbmbmb
single sentences wrote:
whac3 wrote:
They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.

absolutely ridiculous - im getting the impression you have no clue about raising a child with down syndrome

Bot ridiculous. Yes, often it can also be associated with other medical issues but 1. not always and 2. people without learning disabilities can also have unexpected medical issues.

So take whatever impressions you want.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
mbmbmbmbmb
AttackFactorZero wrote:
The question seems to be what medical conditions, if any, do you think are an acceptable reason to abort a fetus and how does this differ from non-medical reasons such the sex (or sexuality) of the fetus.

I would say I have a problem with it when it smacks of eugenics.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Carter
United States
North Liberty
Iowa
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Calling it eugenics is an overstatement.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Julius Waller
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
TrustyJules wrote:
I'm pro-choice - the mother does not need to give me a reason for her choice. That's why its called a choice.
:golf clap:

I'm pro-choice too. We can still have what we think good and bad reasons.

(...)


I cant think of any reason to abort a child personally but I am not a woman. My mother was terminally ill with leukaemia when I was gestating inside her. She died shortly after I was born. It is conceivable she would have been better off aborting me but she didn't - it was her choice.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
single sentences wrote:
whac3 wrote:
They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.

absolutely ridiculous - im getting the impression you have no clue about raising a child with down syndrome

Bot ridiculous. Yes, often it can also be associated with other medical issues but 1. not always and 2. people without learning disabilities can also have unexpected medical issues.

So take whatever impressions you want.


The correct question to ask some no-nothing typing away in his mom's basement is - "Do you have children?" If he doesn't, then fuck him, anything he offers to the discussion is just a distraction.

As the parent of a son with a disability I say fuck anyone who believes that it's humane to gut the life of an unborn child solely on the basis of Downs or any disability and how difficult parenting a child with a disability is. With the advancement of medical tech it's true that babies that may have little chance of survival or such short and impaired lives that they may never even achieve speech or outward signs of self-awareness can be detected early. At that point the decision truly is the parent's to make and I agree with that. I know the story you're referring to and I think it really is eugenics at heart because based on what I read (which may not be the whole picture) a baby who is normal except for the presence of Downs is subject to elimination based on the needs and wants of the parents. That's an ethical dilemma that requires a lot more than a few morons with zero experience raising kids or dealing with children who suffer from any disability.

As you mentioned, a child with asthma or perhaps a food allergy can create just as much extra work as a Downs child or a learning disability can. Not to mention disabilities that don't surface until school age or puberty that may be emotional or mental and not currently detectable. I think medical science will eventually be able to isolate and detect the signs of problems that may develop at, for example, puberty. Then what? Are parents going to be offered a kill switch on their unborn child because it will likely suffer from surliness at age 14?

Hell, half the people in here would have qualified for early termination based solely on their defective ideologies, and that goes double for the guy in Montana in his Mom's basement.
13 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
I see you...
United States
Avon
Ohio
flag msg tools
"I made a promise on the grave of my parents...
badge
...that I would rid this city of the evil that took their lives. "
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
andyl wrote:
whac3 wrote:
As for being a burden, that's true of every child.


Which is why I said extra burden. Or do you contend that there is no extra burden? Or that no amount of burden should be enough for the parents to choose to abort?


They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.


I disagree that Andyl's answer is a sham. What you consider a bad reason for an abortion, Andyl considers a good reason. There are plenty of people who think the reason of "to save the life of the mother" is a bad reason and a sham of an answer.

I would personally agree with Andyl. But then again I'm not a parent and have no desire to be one. My good reasons for an abortion are probably broader than someone who has children.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
I think medical science will eventually be able to isolate and detect the signs of problems that may develop at, for example, puberty. Then what? Are parents going to be offered a kill switch on their unborn child because it will likely suffer from surliness at age 14?

People are already making decisions to abort a fetus based on exactly the sort of things you are talking about. Not for "surliness" though, as I don't think that is something we can yet identify as being caused by genetics. Certainly genetics would influence such behavior, we just don't know which genes would do so, it is far too complicated for our current level of science.

Parents are, however making the abortion decision based on certain genes which are known to greatly increase the risk of certain types of cancers or which cause certain genetically inherited diseases. It is already occurring, and it is just going to get more and more common as more people come to accept it and we improve our knowledge of the effects that genetics have on human behavior, health, etc.

Only a matter of time before parents will be choosing eye and hair color I'm sure.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
AttackFactorZero wrote:
The question seems to be what medical conditions, if any, do you think are an acceptable reason to abort a fetus and how does this differ from non-medical reasons such the sex (or sexuality) of the fetus.

Parents are free to abort a fetus for any reason they want and it is none of your business why they do it.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
DWTripp wrote:
whac3 wrote:
single sentences wrote:
whac3 wrote:
They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.

absolutely ridiculous - im getting the impression you have no clue about raising a child with down syndrome

Bot ridiculous. Yes, often it can also be associated with other medical issues but 1. not always and 2. people without learning disabilities can also have unexpected medical issues.

So take whatever impressions you want.


The correct question to ask some no-nothing typing away in his mom's basement is - "Do you have children?" If he doesn't, then fuck him, anything he offers to the discussion is just a distraction.

As the parent of a son with a disability I say fuck anyone who believes that it's humane to gut the life of an unborn child solely on the basis of Downs or any disability and how difficult parenting a child with a disability is. With the advancement of medical tech it's true that babies that may have little chance of survival or such short and impaired lives that they may never even achieve speech or outward signs of self-awareness can be detected early. At that point the decision truly is the parent's to make and I agree with that. I know the story you're referring to and I think it really is eugenics at heart because based on what I read (which may not be the whole picture) a baby who is normal except for the presence of Downs is subject to elimination based on the needs and wants of the parents. That's an ethical dilemma that requires a lot more than a few morons with zero experience raising kids or dealing with children who suffer from any disability.

As you mentioned, a child with asthma or perhaps a food allergy can create just as much extra work as a Downs child or a learning disability can. Not to mention disabilities that don't surface until school age or puberty that may be emotional or mental and not currently detectable. I think medical science will eventually be able to isolate and detect the signs of problems that may develop at, for example, puberty. Then what? Are parents going to be offered a kill switch on their unborn child because it will likely suffer from surliness at age 14?

Hell, half the people in here would have qualified for early termination based solely on their defective ideologies, and that goes double for the guy in Montana in his Mom's basement.

im perfectly fine with leaving the choice up to the parents - and i most certainly know more about down syndrome than you do (you dont even know that the term "downs child" is wrong)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
TrustyJules wrote:
I'm pro-choice - the mother does not need to give me a reason for her choice. That's why its called a choice.
:golf clap:

I'm pro-choice too. We can still have what we think good and bad reasons.

As for being a burden, that's true of every child.


So, it's the mother's choice, but you want to judge her on whether she has a "good" or "bad" reason for her decision? shake
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aric Ashgrove
United States
Independence
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
...at last I return back to the logical and sane world of wargaming, in order to truly enjoy games again.
badge
This picture is of the American politician, abolishinist, and Bowie knife duelist; General Cassius Marcellus Clay... Look him up!
mbmbmbmbmb
I am pro-choice, being a male without children. If it were my choice, I would NOT choose to abort a child over down-syndrome, personally.

However I do not think Moshe is far from the truth in mentioning abortion and planned parenthood's (for example in the USA) connection to the eugenics movement. Eugenics was ABSOLUTELY about deciding who was fit to live and reproduce, and enforcing that standard. The USA has a dark history of involvement in it.

Ultimately this all comes down to a moral judgement not a political one. The arguments are usually, "its none of the governments business what I do with my body (I fully agree),"vs "It is murder, imposing your will on others without their consent ( I mostly agree)."
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
single sentences wrote:
whac3 wrote:
They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.

absolutely ridiculous - im getting the impression you have no clue about raising a child with down syndrome


Geez, don't tell me we actually agree on something! surprise

As usual, he's just being a self-righteous hypocrite with no idea what he's talking about. He claims to be a researcher in advanced physics, and yet he insisted that plutonium wasn't stable enough to use to make a fission bomb. So having no clue what he's talking about in his own field (claimed), it's really no surprise he's clueless on this topic.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
i purposely avoided asking "do you have a child with down syndrome" in this thread and the one where this discussion originated - so i find it pretty ironic that the question "do you have children" is now being presented as a meaningful argument
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
single sentences wrote:
i purposely avoided asking "do you have a child with down syndrome" in this thread and the one where this discussion originated - so i find it pretty ironic that the question "do you have children" is now being presented as a meaningful argument


Don't mistake my over-the-top rejection of PC vocabulary "rules" as ignorance of this issue. That's all I have to say about it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James King
United States
North Central Louisiana / No Longer A Resident of the Shreveport/Bossier City Area / Currently I sponsor gaming groups in Monroe & Alexandria, LA.
Louisiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb



DWTripp wrote:
whac3 wrote:
single sentences wrote:
whac3 wrote:
They're no more an extra burden than a kid with asthma or any number of other conditions. Sorry that's a sham of a reason.

absolutely ridiculous - im getting the impression you have no clue about raising a child with down syndrome

Both ridiculous. Yes, often it can also be associated with other medical issues but 1. not always and 2. people without learning disabilities can also have unexpected medical issues.

So take whatever impressions you want.

The correct question to ask some no-nothing typing away in his mom's basement is - "Do you have children?" If he doesn't, then fuck him, anything he offers to the discussion is just a distraction.

Facts are valid regardless of who cites them as long as they're relevant and in proper context of the actual subject under discussion. Moreover, anecdotal evidence is not to be discounted.


DWTripp wrote:
As the parent of a son with a disability, I say fuck anyone who believes that it's humane to gut the life of an unborn child solely on the basis of Downs or any disability and how difficult parenting a child with a disability is.

And you exhibit a fucked-up attitude indeed because it appears that you would impose the ideology behind your decision on everybody else facing similar, if not exactly the same, circumstances.


DWTripp wrote:
With the advancement of medical tech, it's true that babies that may have little chance of survival or such short and impaired lives that they may never even achieve speech or outward signs of self-awareness can be detected early. At that point, the decision truly is the parent's to make and I agree with that.

Since most parents can only afford to have one or two children anyway, the decision you would impose on parents in such a situation could financially burden them to the point that they're saddled with such enormous medical expenses that make having another child anytime too soon -- if ever -- could become too cost prohibitive.


In certain cases, a woman may be rendered incapable of having more children if she decides to carry a pregnancy to term that she'd been warned by her obstetrician could impair her future reproductive health (if not her own life).


DWTripp wrote:
I know the story you're referring to and I think it really is eugenics at heart because based on what I read (which may not be the whole picture) a baby who is normal except for the presence of Downs is subject to elimination based on the needs and wants of the parents.

On the contrary, the prospects for such a child to leave a meaningful full live would also be under consideration. Moreover, the long-term care of such a child could financially impair a couple from having further children because of the ongoing financial burdens associated with that special-needs child.


DWTripp wrote:
That's an ethical dilemma that requires a lot more than a few morons with zero experience raising kids or dealing with children who suffer from any disability.

A couple who are trying to conceive or expecting their first child would fall under that category, too.


DWTripp wrote:
As you mentioned, a child with asthma or perhaps a food allergy can create just as much extra work as a Downs child or a learning disability can.

*However*, in your referring to certain asthmatic children or children with food allergeries, you're talking about the rare exception while most, if not all, Downs Syndrome children, teens, and adults always require a lot of work and attention.


DWTripp wrote:
Not to mention disabilities that don't surface until school age or puberty that may be emotional or mental and not currently detectable. I think medical science will eventually be able to isolate and detect the signs of problems that may develop at, for example, puberty. Then what? Are parents going to be offered a kill switch on their unborn child because it will likely suffer from surliness at age 14?

Don't be so blithely and offensively disingenuous. You trivialize such decision-making by making such incredulously off-base remarks like that.


DWTripp wrote:
Hell, half the people in here would have qualified for early termination based solely on their defective ideologies, and that goes double for the guy in Montana in his Mom's basement.

Since Dominionists aspire to eventually cull the non-Dominion-theology adopters from the populace for imprisonment and execution anyway, termination would indeed be the appropriate operative word in that case.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James King
United States
North Central Louisiana / No Longer A Resident of the Shreveport/Bossier City Area / Currently I sponsor gaming groups in Monroe & Alexandria, LA.
Louisiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb


whac3 wrote:
I'm staunchly pro-choice as I've said on here many times.

Yet while the choice is ultimately the mother's, some reasons for making that choice are indeed better than others. Saving the life of the mother is in this sense a better reason than reasons based on what is essentially eugenics.

So here's a question to those who think it's okay to abort a baby/fetus if that baby will be born with Down's syndrome. Why is that acceptable when say aborting a baby because it's a girl or because (if a hypothetical gay gene were to exist) because the baby would be gay?

Many Republicans back in 1992 inadvertently made the case for abortion in the case where the baby would be biracial when the Bush Campaign once again tried to revive its 1988 "Willie" Horton issue on a live news-discussion show only to be confronted by a counter question from James Carville which froze the Republicans in their tracks and caused them to drop the issue altogether.

Carville's question was: "If the white woman whom 'Willie' Horton raped had become pregnant as a result of that rape, should she then have been allowed to get an abortion *if she chose to*? OR should she have been forced to bear the child of the man who not only had raped and assaulted her but also had murdered her husband in the process?"

If the two Republicans had been consistent with the ideology espoued by the abortion plank of their own 1992 party platform, then they should have forthrightly said, "No, the woman in that case should be denied an abortion because our party's platform calls for no exceptions to be made for abortion whatsoever." However, neither of them deigned to respond to Carville's question. Only, by failing to respond to Carville's questio, they inadvertently left viewers with the distinct impression that "Yes, there might be be an exception indeed to be made for abortion when the child is either a product of rape and/or miscegenation (the term southern Republicans once used for a pregnancy that was the result of two people of different races) -- or both."

I myself have asked a variation of Carville's 1992 question without any mention of rape or assault and simply asked, "If medical technology had advanced to the point where an obstetrician could confirm the sexual orientation of a developing fetus, would you support a woman's right to choose abortion in cases where the results of such a sexual-orientation test confirmed in advance that the fetus was either gay or bisexual?"

To the best of my knowledge, nobody's yet ventured to provide a direct response to my question, either. For that reason, I infer unspoken support for such an option.

As to birth defects, any couple who deemed certain birth defects as being too burdensome in terms of detrimental long-terms reproductive-consequences for the woman and/or too detrimental for the best long-term prospects for any meaningful quality of life for a child, then yes, the couple in question should not be impugned for making an informed decision and not condemned for the personal decition they make.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
mbmbmbmbmb
The entitlement to a life of ease is appalling. One decision, you live through hardship, strengthening your character, and reaping the joy that such a child brings, and the other... well, it's the same decision as murdering your landlord so you don't have to pay the back rent. It's easier but you'll have to live with your decision. One step closer to pure sociopathy.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.