Down's Syndrome people risk 'extinction' at the hands of science, fear and ignorance

[Caxoo]

So long as they're not aborting them late term/3rd tri, go for it

Babies are still viable during the second trimester. What's more special about the third than the second?

Or maybe 2nd, I don't remember which one is the bright-line for consciousness

Whichever trimester consciousness develops in

[Hesher]

I have never been able to figure out how it logically follows that infanticide is okay just because abortion is allowed?

It's becoming more and more evident who uses emotion and who uses logic in these debates.

Third trimester abortions involve pulling the baby out enough so that most of the body is out, but the head still remains inside the woman. You then kill the baby using scissors. The fact that the head is still inside the woman makes it legal. If the baby's head came out, then it becomes murder. Doesn't get more arbitrary than that.

[Hesher]

So long as they're not aborting them late term/3rd tri, go for it

Babies are still viable during the second trimester. What's more special about the third than the second?

[Caxoo]

I have never been able to figure out how it logically follows that infanticide is okay just because abortion is allowed?

It's becoming more and more evident who uses emotion and who uses logic in these debates.

Ardently pro-choice here, but very late term abortions are completely analogous to infanticide

[notorius1]

Those who support abortion have no right to get upset if someone aborts the baby because it'll be short, not have blonde hair, is gay, is mixed race, etc. It's either an absolute choice, where there's no moral judgement regarding the reasons, or you're going to start having to parse "acceptable" reasons, which is as intellectually dishonest as it gets.

Agreed 100%.

[Hesher]

Baby born at 21 weeks and 6 days....

as of 2013, was doing fine and in Kindergarten.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/healt...349/story.html

[Faulkner10]

I have never been able to figure out how it logically follows that infanticide is okay just because abortion is allowed?

It's becoming more and more evident who uses emotion and who uses logic in these debates.

P1) Only homo sapiens with self-awareness are persons
P2) It is okay to kill homo sapiens that are not persons
P3) Fetuses lack self awareness
P4) Fetuses are not persons (from P1 and P3)
P5)It is okay to kill fetuses because they are not persons (from P2 and P4)

Carrying that further:

P6) Infants are not self-aware
P7) Infants are not persons (from P1)
Conclusion: It is okay to kill infants (from P2 and P7)

So you have to come up with some distinguishing trait other than self-awareness for personhood, right?

[HarryFlashman]

The same percentage of people with Down Syndrome will exist; it's just that a higher proportion will be killed in utero.
Again, there's not significant moral difference between
(1) a Down Syndrome baby 9 months from conception, but in the womb; and,
(2) a Down Syndrome baby 6 months from conception, born prematurely.

Why should the latter have a right to life if the former does not - despite the fact that the former is actually MORE developed in every way?

Liberal logic.

Well the test is done while the foetus is weeks old so it can then be aborted early. This is different to killing a new born baby. The foetus by that stage has barely grown into much more than a blob.

[immune18]

Oh god. Knew this would turn into a herp derp 'abortions are murder' thread. If you honestly believe aborting a DS baby is murder, please throw yourself off a bridge. Can't even comprehend how stupid a person has to be to believe this.

[notorius1]

Ardently pro-choice here, but very late term abortions are completely analogous to infanticide

I don't agree. The age of the fetus has no bearing on the fact that the woman still owns all parts of her reproductive system.


Let's not forget the legal rights conferred to individuals upon birth.


They just ain't the same thing at all.

[Faulkner10]

Well the test is done while the foetus is weeks old so it can then be aborted early. This is different to killing a new born baby. The foetus by that stage has barely grown into much more than a blob.

One pro-choicer here has argued that the distinguishing trait (in his mind) is some undefined level of brain activity: more than mere impulses but less than full sentience or self-awareness (true self-awareness only coming at some point within the first two years of birth)

What's your proposed distinguishing trait?

[cixelsidCDN]

Except Down Syndrome babies will still exist. They'll just all be killed in the womb.
Lots of them are killed OUTSIDE of the womb in places like China and India. If you think there's a significant moral difference between killing a baby 3 minutes after they're born and 3 minutes before they're born, please elucidate.

Does it look like any of us are in China or India brah? Lots of babies that don't have down syndrome are killed there, what's your fukking point?

[JuggerNorth]

The author is a Christian pro lifer, what do you expect?

[johsin28]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/heal...ignorance.html

WTF?

I don't think I have ever read such an insane article in a long time.

Cliffs:

- Downs Sydrome people are becoming 'extinct' because of better screening and non-invasive testing procedures allowing pregnant women to abort downs syndrome babies.

You have your own reality
Dogs have their own reality
Cats have their own reality
Down syndrome have their own reality

Just because something doesn't fit definition of perfect society puppet doesn't mean they don't have right to live and experience it with their reality (whatever it may b)

[Faulkner10]

Does it look like any of us are in China or India brah? Lots of babies that don't have down syndrome are killed there, what's your fukking point?

My fukking point is that no one has yet offered any morally-relevant difference between a baby with DS killed after birth and one with DS killed before birth.

Is that actually difficult to discern from my post? How the hell are the pro-lifers the alleged "herp derpers" here?

[HarryFlashman]

One pro-choicer here has argued that the distinguishing trait (in his mind) is some undefined level of brain activity: more than mere impulses but less than full sentience or self-awareness (true self-awareness only coming at some point within the first two years of birth)

What's your proposed distinguishing trait?

Well the time that the baby starts responding to stimulus is a sign that it is developing into a person. But thankfully that is way after the test for downs, so there is no issue there in my eyes. The thing is a baby with downs isn't just going to have a tough life, but the whole family are going to struggle. You have a downs syndrome child and you have a child forever that will never grow up. When you're old, rather than knowing your child will be happy and living an independent life, you'll be worried that your adult sized baby wont be able to take care of themselves. How are you going to be allowed to die? I feel for people that have downs syndrome kids, we made the choice before we had ours that we'd abort if the child had it. It wasn't a nice thing to discuss, but before we even created the baby we made that decision. Thankfully that didn't happen.

[Caxoo]

I don't agree. The age of the fetus has no bearing on the fact that the woman still owns all parts of her reproductive system.


Let's not forget the legal rights conferred to individuals upon birth.


They just ain't the same thing at all.

The fetus is not considered a "part of the woman's reproductive tract". Insofar as the fetus lacks consciousness, the woman has full autonomy over its fate. Once it develops consciousness, it develops rights of its own, in that it is a person, an entity unto itself. Therefore, late term abortions (past some point in the 2nd trimester I guess) are analogous to killing the baby out of the womb

There is no non-arbitrary distinction between a 6, 7, 8, or 9 month fetus in the womb and an infant right out of the womb. The least arbitrary standard is intrinsic to the fetus - that is, whether it has developed consciousness or not

[infinit]

Well the time that the baby starts responding to stimulus is a sign that it is developing into a person.

That would also be a sign it is developing into a cat.

[Faulkner10]

Well the time that the baby starts responding to stimulus is a sign that it is developing into a person. But thankfully that is way after the test for downs, so there is no issue there in my eyes.

So your distinguishing feature is response to stimulus?

So if a comatose adult does not respond to stimulus, is he not a person?
Or is he a person for the period that he is in a coma because he - at one earlier point - DID respond to stimulus?

If that's the case, you've got two different threshold tests:
1) Once responded to stimulus
2) Now responds to stimulus

This seems a bit convoluted and there doesn't seem to be a clear reason as to why someone who USED TO (and may in the future) respond to stimulus magically qualifies as a person; it seems out of step with the Test (2), which doesn't permit much leeway.

[DrFlexologist]

[JuggerNorth]

So your distinguishing feature is response to stimulus?

So if a comatose adult does not respond to stimulus, is he not a person?
Or is he a person for the period that he is in a coma because he - at one earlier point - DID respond to stimulus?

If that's the case, you've got two different threshold tests:
1) Once responded to stimulus
2) Now responds to stimulus

This seems a bit convoluted and there doesn't seem to be a clear reason as to why someone who USED TO (and may in the future) respond to stimulus magically qualifies as a person; it seems out of step with the Test (2), which doesn't permit much leeway.

Lol your arguments are so terrible it's not even funny. Do you not masturbate because each of your sperm is a possible baby?

[Faulkner10]

The fetus is not considered a "part of the woman's reproductive tract". Insofar as the fetus lacks consciousness, the woman has full autonomy over its fate. Once it develops consciousness, it develops rights of its own, in that it is a person, an entity unto itself. Therefore, late term abortions (past some point in the 2nd trimester I guess) are analogous to killing the baby out of the womb

There is no non-arbitrary distinction between a 6, 7, 8, or 9 month fetus in the womb and an infant right out of the womb. The least arbitrary standard is intrinsic to the fetus - that is, whether it has developed consciousness or not

While I appreciate your detailed approach here (srs), I think the "consciousness" threshold is still hazy.
Is it
1) simple subjective awareness - experiential capacity; the ability to feel/notice/perceive qualia?; or,
2) self-awareness?

(2) doesn't come until after the child's first birthday outside the womb. Some philosophers and medical ethicists believe that the distinguishing feature of personhood (what separates the human person from cats, dogs, etc., all of whom have simple awareness) is self-awareness. As a result, they believe that there's nothing more morally wrong with killing an infant (who lacks self-awareness) and a cat (who also lacks self-awareness).

Why are these thinkers wrong?

[poisyn]

This just in, down syndrome confirmed hereditary; Faulker and daughter both retarded

[notorius1]

Infants are not self-aware

According to whom?

[Faulkner10]

This just in, down syndrome confirmed hereditary; Faulker and daughter both retarded

Negs but can't put together a coherent counterargument and I'm the retarded one?

[Faulkner10]

According to whom?

http://www.psychology.emory.edu/cogn...fivelevels.pdf
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ousness-arise/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test

[eskim0]

Fetus are not people... they are fuking zygote that combined together. They are cells. Like you skin cells that die everyday and you don't shed a tear. Better to abort a pregnancy than have a parent give a baby a chitty childhood/life. Most people aren't pro life, they are pro pregnancy and don't give a fuk about the kid when it's born. The same people that bitch about criminals and lazy people being a burden to society. Crime went down 19 years after abortion became legal in the 70's.

Cliffs- it's not bad to abort down syndrome if you know you will be bad for the child and it will have a chitty life and is better off not being born (not dead it was never alive!!)

[Faulkner10]

Fetus are not people... they are fuking zygote that combined together. They are cells. Like you skin cells that die everyday and you don't shed a tear. Better to abort a pregnancy than have a parent give a baby a chitty childhood/life. Most people aren't pro life, they are pro pregnancy and don't give a fuk about the kid when it's born. The same people that bitch about criminals and lazy people being a burden to society. Crime went down 19 years after abortion became legal in the 70's.

Cliffs- it's not bad to abort down syndrome if you know you will be bad for the child and it will have a chitty life and is better off not being born (not dead it was never alive!!)

5.5 months old "zygote" - legal to kill in multiple US states and in the UK; also capable of surviving outside the womb.

[johsin28]

http://www.psychology.emory.edu/cogn...fivelevels.pdf
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ousness-arise/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test

Babies are awareness themselves so they can't become self aware till parents start feeding them bs about who they are and then they stop being awareness and become aware of that awareness.

[Faulkner10]

Babies are awareness themselves so they can't become self aware till parents start feeding them bs about who they are and then they stop being awareness and become aware of that awareness.