NBC's Snyderman: "It's Pro-Science To Abort Children With Genetic Defects"

I have an issue with a test that says you have a chance of lung cancer, brain cancer, MS, CP, ALS, when you grow up.

It's basing life not on a persons contributions, but on conditions.

reply to post by buster2010


So you only care for Stephen Hawking because of his intellect? Show me how not everybody is capable of his intellect? (Apart from those of disabled mind, might I add) what ever drives his soul is what drives his intellect.

reply to post by Sinny


Why not give them the choice instead of taking away the choice before they've even had a chance to be born?

It sounds good in theory but there are just too many ethical issues at stake. I do think that as advances in technology come forth, that folks with physical deformities will see improvements in mobility and quality of life. We can most certainly support these folks.

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Sinny

 

Why not give them the choice instead of taking away the choice before they've even had a chance to be born?

It sounds good in theory but there are just too many ethical issues at stake. I do think that as advances in technology come forth, that folks with physical deformities will see improvements in mobility and quality of life. We can most certainly support these folks.

I think this is the first time I ever starred you.

reply to post by acmpnsfal


Some people know others who were personally affected by eugenics experiments in the 1930s and 1940s.

I know a man who was castrated, preventing him from having children and it was all due to his race (he is Native American).

reply to post by The Sword

Ok but this is not about forced sterilization or castration, its about giving the parents the choice of whether or not they want to abort a pregnancy when the fetus has a genetic defect.

reply to post by The Sword


You can't see "pro-science" you just see "pro-eugenics"?

That's what seperates logical thinkers from emotional thinkers. Each are important to our human way, in this case the emotion is destructfull, not the other way round. Its biology 101, the fetus will know no different, and if the genetic defects can be presumed as likely before conception, the pregnancy need never occur.

On the other hand, bring that life into the world and watch it suffer, for a very long time.

Its like when a cat gets run over, and as a passer by you have to decide to leave it, take it to the vet, or do it a favor. Some desicions have to be seperated from emotion.

Put it this way. I would rather end a life before it begun, the "life" wouldn't even be conciously aware of it anyway :|

Than be held responsable for forcing them to live a "life" that they personnally may hate and or detest.

Some people didn't *ask* to be born either yaknow

reply to post by Sinny

ever consider that the baby thatis say three months along could care less with what its born with... i mean how would thay know any different?
seems just an easy cop out for would be parents to not be responsible for their actions

I am not Pro-Abortion but at the same time...there are Genetic tests that can be done very early in a pregnancy before a clump of cells achieves sentience that can determine if the Child that will eventually develop will have birth defects.

Now we are at the point where we can use Gene therapy to correct many of the Defects that can present themselves before the do present themselves by Taking some of the cells out and genetically reprogramming them to reproduce in a normal fashion thus preventing a deformity. We are not able to do this for every defect but we can do this in many cases if a simple test is done at a very early stage.

If it is a case we cannot yet fix...and the Cellular Growth in the womb is at a very early stage...I would be in favor with the Woman permission...to Abort this Non-Sentient Clump of Cells. If this is a Fetus in the much later or end game state of development...I would not be in favor but again...it is the WOMAN'S CHOICE! Not anyone elses!

We are capable of right now growing certain parts of the Human Body without the rest of the Body. We can grow Skin, Certain Organs, Limbs....and right now we are at the stage we can row a Human Heart without the aid of a Womb. I think this is a good thing.

The U.S. Military has the Genetic capability to create tissue that does not reject implants for the purpose of direct Brain to Computer Connection. The apps for this are unreal! Imagine being able to down load vast quantities of knowledge by simply Jacking into a Computer? Yahoo! Split Infinity

reply to post by dreamingawake


Since we don't live in a world where our species is effected by "natural selection" or "survival of the fit enough" anymore, nor do we have a need due to technology for every member in our society to contribute to building dwelling and gathering food i think everyone has equal rights to live and to equality (it seems equality is the last thing on any gov's agenda). Fact, abortion is the killing (no i didn't say murder) of a living human being and also the prevention of all the encounters that that human would have had with other humans which could have been lifechanging for either party (whether you're for or against abortion is a matter of opinion and not a fact, it still is what it is). Plenty of carers will tell you how much their life changed for the better when they quite their mundane monotonous job to be a fulltime carer for a relative or stranger.

I dont see how it is "pro-science", but I support it.

Eugenics is a dirty word because it used methods that victimised people, such as killings, racism or forced sterilisations.

I consider abortion victimless, so this kind of eugenics is not wrong, and quite the opposite, if it helps to prevent genetic defects then it is our moral obligation to abort genetically defect foetuses.

reply to post by Sinny


Suffer a long time? I assume your disabled in some way and are speaking from experience and not putting words from a abled persons perspective into all disabled persons mouth. I know many people with varied disabilities and alot of them are happy and content with what they were given, it is more often abled people who become disabled that suffer more as the know and have felt what they will now miss for the rest of their life. Your comment seems to come the emotional part of your brain not the logical one.

reply to post by kickstart


Our species is still affected by natural selection. I mean people who cant function in society usually get cast aside where nobody can see them and live a life that is not glamorous. Sure we have technology, we have the technology to decimate the entire planet if we wanted to, but should we use it? Is keeping someone alive with machines and constant care really worth it? Their quality of live will suck. They will be alive but they wont ever live a life equal to someone with no disability. Abortion is not really killing at all stages. I mean if the fetus cannot survive on its own I dont see how you could even begin to call it a human being. Its not aware. It doesnt think, it doesnt know its alive, it has no autonomy.

reply to post by kickstart


I formulated my emotions into a logical outcome.

No I am not disabled, but have worked with many people who are.

Originally posted by Maslo
I dont see how it is "pro-science", but I support it.

I don't see what is "pro-science" about it either - rather it is something that science allows us to do

reply to post by Maslo


Just out of curiosity to help with my understanding and not trying to argue, what factor in the abortion equation makes it seem like its victimless? Also why is it our moral obligation to abort genetically defective foetuses? I will take a guess you don't believe a unborn child is consious therefor just a piece of meat, and the disabled people in society are sucking to many of your tax dollars. I hope i'm wrong.....

reply to post by Sinny


Since you worked with many that are, ask a few that detest their life as you say and ask why and when the detest started. Won't have started early or be the disability itself, most will say when they grew up and felt first hand how cruel and insensitive abled people can be toward them. By your logical thinking we may aswell put fat, gay etc. people out of their misery to.

Originally posted by Maxmars
I cannot fault a parent deciding to do this... I do fault a culture that presumes to tell you how to feel about it.

Good call max. I totally agree. (It's ironic that I reckon the worst people in the world are judgemental people and that is in itself a judgemental statement I'm having a shot at myself here, nobody else )

reply to post by kickstart


Erm... Just.... NO!

Fat people make a choice to be fat, and gay people enjoy being gay.

Your a wee bit twisted, so no I won't harass any disabled people with your devastating questions.