Skip to main content

View Diary: My Response to Five Questions on Abortion (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I wasn't talking about evolution (4+ / 0-)

    I'm talking about reproduction in the here and now.  Two people choose to have a baby, and they don't expect to have a mutant.  Yes, there is a very accepted scientific definition of what is, and what is not correct reproduction.

    Down syndrome is identified as a genetic disease and so far no one has identified any benefits that might be covered under natural selection.

    There's scientific correctness and political correctness.  46 chromosomes is correct, 47 is not correct.

    •  That is just fucking wrong. I worked for many (0+ / 0-)

      years with developmentally disabled adults, meaning with several people with Downs. "Not correct" is not just politically incorrect, it is scientifically and fucking humanistically incorrect. I think we all know you're making an effort at being good and right on this, but, again, glibness on issues like this is not doing you any favors at all. It is in fact hurting your considerably.

    •  And leave everything else I said aside (for a (0+ / 0-)

      moment) - what the fuck have the last 3 billion years of reprodoction on Earth been - all one big fucking mistake?What have a couple hundred thousand years of reproduction by Homo Sapiens been - without an ability to test for fetal genetic disorders - been - "not correct"?

      This is just nuts.

      •  Do you understand what a chromosome disorder is? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LadyMiseryAli

        You have 46 chromosomes, I have 46 chromosomes.  That is the mark of our species, not 47.  Sorry to have to be blunt, but yes, not genetically correct for a member of Homo Sapiens.

        For those couple hundred thousand years, a "defective copy" was left outside in the cold or drowned.  Or the child couldn't compete or keep up.  Those with fetal genetic disorders didn't live long enough to have children, or couldn't have children.  The species moved on with 46 chromosomes.

        So wouldn't it actually be calling evolution a big mistake to not abort a fetus with a genetic disorder, and instead hope for a roll of the dice that moves us forward?

        What are you arguing for?  There are random and beneficial mutations, and there are well understood genetic defects.  They're different things.

        •  If you read my comments, and I think you did, (0+ / 0-)

          you know that I know very well what it is, as I spend many years working with people with Downs. MY complaint with you is that you express yourself with the compassion and tact of a Republican blogger.

          •  And you sound like a pro-lifer (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jmcgrew, LadyMiseryAli

            Is a Downs child a gift from God now also, like rape babies?
            If we start down the path that admiting what Downs is become offensive to those with Downs, then how offensive is it to then abort a Downs fetus?  Isn't that an even bigger slap in the face?

            This is a discussion of civil rights.  You can't aford to be sentimental and worried about offending people.  If a Downs parent is offended that I don't want to be a Downs parent, does that take my choice away?  By what right?

            •  That ws a very weak response. How do I even (0+ / 0-)

              begin to sound like a pro-lifer? By defending the Downs adults I worked with against being called "not correct"? Fuck you, Norm. THis has nothing to do with you defending your positions - I think people should be able to to abort if Downs is detected, and in just about every other possible scenario, just by the way - this is you not liking like being called out for being a thickfooted dolt.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site