POLITICS: U.N. Debates Ban On The Abortion Of Disabled Fetuses

Diplomats at the United Nations are debating a potential ban on abortion's being performed on fetuses that are disabled. The discussion ensued as the U.N. is busy drafting a international treaty on the rights of the disabled. The ban would outlaw the termination of a pregnancy for reasons of fetal disability even in countries where abortion is legal.



This is completely absurd and yet again highlights the total uselessness of the U.N. While the "pro life" crowd will no doubt hail this as some strange achievement, what of the families that have to carry these often malformed and sick fetuses? Why our health care system will no doubt absorb the lifelong cost that a severely disabled baby incurs, what of the rest of the world? These children will die a miserable death. Even those in our country will be artificially kept alive and subjected to an endless series of often painful procedures and for what? Pro life indeed.

Even more strange, why is the UN getting involved in the morals or society? This is certainly beyond their scope, no?
No matter what I logically think about abortion, it would need a total rethink if I knew the fetus I carried was severely malformed or retarded.
Abortion as birth control is abhorrant. This is totally different, IMHO>

[edit on 5-2-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by FredT
This is completely absurd and yet again highlights the total uselessness of the U.N.

Wow, I have to say I completely agree with your assessment. There are a couple of questions I have regarding the jurisdiction of the U.N., however. How can they have an international like this? It is like "the powers that be" taking the whole abortion debate, crumbling it up, and doing what they want. Banning abortion in one sense will undoubtedly lead to further refinements, thus bypassing the population of a nation, the ones who should have a say in a law of this type.

Also, how does one qualify a disabled fetus? Where does that line get drawn? Could end up being more liberal definitions to justify what appears to be a very conservative progression.

The U.N. increasingly defers attention away from the agendas of nations regarding their foriegn relations practice. Their is ample consideration of America overstepping its boundaries in the recent years if world opinion is any kind of yardstick. The U.N. has no right to address the domestic issues of a nation.

Originally posted by MemoryShock
. The U.N. has no right to address the domestic issues of a nation.

The UN had no right getting involved with the issues of a couple and their sex lives, let alone any nation.

Looks like the usual hijack and red herring.

...The UN was working to develop an international treaty on the rights of the disabled. The discussion got sabotaged - and twisted - and now everyone's forgotten about that international treay.

See how it works? ....We're moving back to eugenics and Nazi tactics - international treaties get in the way.


.

Originally posted by soficrow

See how it works? ....We're moving back to eugenics and Nazi tactics - international treaties get in the way.
.

I think it's possible we never veered away from it............I have pondered the possibility that the only thing public opinion really effects is the presentation of our medias. Think about it.........the last 20 or so years has been the first time we have been able to pursue physical manifestations of the eugenic premise, i.e. scientific testing etc. The whole Nazi deal could and has been suggested to be a pyschological and physical experimentation. Science is an ongoing thing and the pursuit of knowledge will not be stopped - even if it means classifing the research; for reasons of national security could just as easily mean from its own population. The only thing of real consequence is how people find out about new informations because of the priority religion and political ideologies have in the everyday life of the citizens. Science is involved but historically does not include the majority of an average persons attention.

Originally posted by soficrowLooks like the usual hijack and red herring.

Definetely agree with that though.