Humanities problems with Folk that differ GENETICALLY

The world is such a tough place to live, I think we'd want to bring new people in with the best advantages necessary for survival.

To promote disabilities, because it's "cool" is crazy. I mean, why do we call it "disabilities" and not consider them X-men?

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: chr0naut

No he just pointed out a evolutionary fact..

The cold hard truth..

None the less, culling the afflicted is not curing the disease.

A 100% cull does not prevent the random prevalence of the Trisomy 21. It does nothing to purge us of the disease, only of those people.

Re-read the article.

a reply to:

In 2017 the artist Lester Magoogan was appointed a patron for Chestnut Tree Charity. A hospice for terminally ill children. That appointment was a giant leap forward for us as a race
For those unfamiliar with the work of Lester Magoogan,or to anyone that has posted to this thread,may I ask that you take 12mins out in order to watch this Irish documentary about Lester -
www.youtube.com...
It may hit a cord, genetic difference is something we as a race need to seriously think about -How would we cope if somebody decided to throw other life into the equation - KILL IT -- Just saying

And now the hypocrisy of the evangelical movement will come into play. After all they do not believe in abortion, seeing life begins at conception. Where are they right now, why are they not protesting or gearing up to protesting the very idea of this notion to destroy a life before it comes into being, all cause that child may or may not have downs syndrome.

Personally I think it is a shame, that they are doing this, cause the child is not perfect or is a bit defective. But then again aren't well all a bit defective, in one way or the other.

Honestly I wouldn't want a baby where I know it's going to be handicapped. I would run every test available so I can abort the pregnancy.
Life is already hard enough if you're pretty and can do whatever you set your mind on.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
And now the hypocrisy of the evangelical movement will come into play. After all they do not believe in abortion, seeing life begins at conception. Where are they right now, why are they not protesting or gearing up to protesting the very idea of this notion to destroy a life before it comes into being, all cause that child may or may not have downs syndrome.

Personally I think it is a shame, that they are doing this, cause the child is not perfect or is a bit defective. But then again aren't well all a bit defective, in one way or the other.

How does the evangelical community get blamed for this
I am at a loss
We get blamed for opposing abortion, then bashed because we dont accept it

Jesus taught we were to allow people their free will and love them.

Whats with preaching your beliefs at Christians

a reply to: Raggedyman

What I am pointing out, is that if there is no outcry from evangelicals about women going into an office and terminating a pregnancy, all cause the child may not be normal. And if this is popular in other countries, and starting to gain popularity in the USA, that the evangelicals should be out protesting this specific practice and stop such before it gets too much traction.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: Raggedyman

What I am pointing out, is that if there is no outcry from evangelicals about women going into an office and terminating a pregnancy, all cause the child may not be normal. And if this is popular in other countries, and starting to gain popularity in the USA, that the evangelicals should be out protesting this specific practice and stop such before it gets too much traction.

Well...
I thought they where
I thought there was a movement against abortion
Not to be offset by personal choice that you seem ready dismiss

But don't say it's not being protested
It's just nobody hears or cares in Iceland

But my point is if Christians complain there is an outcry, if we don't there is an outcry

They used to drown gingers and hunt albino. Why the sudden compassion for those syndromes, and not for Downsfolk?

originally posted by: DpatC
Im sorry but this is the wrong way to look at Downs.

No, it isn't. No parent wants their child born with Downs. Ever. EVER.

What chance do you have with others who are a bit "Genetically" different

"A bit" genetically different?? Downs is not like have blue eyes, or red hair. It's a severe genetic condition that completely changes the suffer's life. There is no 'getting better' from it. Do you even grasp what it means?

and as a Race you are thinking of colonizing other planets and meeting other Life! F""k Off..

Hmm, what's the chances of meeting an advanced civilisation who have all 'embraced' genetic defects resulting in severe mental retardation?

You're living in a dream world. No sane person would ever wish ill of someone suffering from Downs or any other life changing genetic disability - but who in their right mind wouldn't opt to correct it if they could and abolish such genetic defects completely?

a reply to: DpatC

The aren't boasting anything in that article. Way to spin for point scoring.

why not include this from the same article for some comparative perspective?

Other countries aren't lagging too far behind in Down syndrome termination rates. According to the most recent data available, the United States has an estimated termination rate for Down syndrome of 67 percent (1995-2011); in France it's 77 percent (2015); and Denmark, 98 percent (2015)

a reply to: chr0naut

Culling the effected is murdering the effected..

Just not allowing them to procreate is absolutely shady and a slippery slope, but it is not culling.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: chr0naut

Culling the effected is murdering the effected..

Just not allowing them to procreate is absolutely shady and a slippery slope, but it is not culling.

Please read the article.

The low figures were not achieved by modifying the genome and therefore preventing the mutation (whose numbers will persist exactly according to the mutation rate), nor were 'at risk parents' identified and prevented from procreating (we can't do that because we don't actually know what the risk factors are, the mutation appears to occur at random).

Down Syndrome is a genetic mutation but it is not really heritable, this means that of all the parents with Down Syndrome, only about 1% of their children will have the syndrome. So,even preventing those who have Down Syndrome from having children does almost nothing to the statistics.

It is plain ignorance to think that sterilizing those with Down Syndrome, or otherwise preventing them from procreating, does anything to reduce Down Syndrome numbers. It is just medieval grade ignorance and prejudice at work.

The low numbers in live births of those with the condition in Iceland were achieved by identifying those affected and then terminating the developing fetuses. That is a cull.

a reply to: chr0naut

That’s not true...

“So if your future spouse’s family happens to have this form of Down syndrome in the family AND this spouse inherited the DNA for it, then there is a chance your future kids could be at a higher risk than other kids. To be specific, if your spouse is a man, then there is about a 3% chance that your children would be affected. And if she is a future wife, then the risk is 12%.

This is, on average, about 24 or 96 times higher risk than usual (depending on age of course). Click here to learn more about where exactly that number comes from. But like I said, most of the time it won’t matter if someone in your spouse-to-be’s family had Down syndrome. ”


genetics.thetech.org...

And that is just with Down’s syndrome in your family.. Not if one of the parents actually have Down’s syndrome personally..



To be fair this is from a board post that links to a legit site, but I couldn’t find this quote on the primary source...

I am having a hard time finding a place with the stats for parents who have downs.


“As you can see, for 2 people with Down syndrome having babies, the chances are as follows:
-25% chance their child will be typical (no Down syndrome)
-50% chance their baby will have Down syndrome
-25% chance there will be no viable pregnancy”

www.mmo-champion.com...

a reply to: chr0naut

Yea it is 35-50% if only one parent has downs..

“Where one parent has Down’s syndrome, there is a 35% to 50% chance that the child would inherit the syndrome. This chance is even higher where both parents have Down’s syndrome.


www.downs-syndrome.org.uk...