90% of Children with Down Syndrome are Aborted

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Society has no survival instinct or rights.[/quote]

Evoluation doesn’t make sense on the individual level. It only makes sense when talking about a population. Therefore, individual variations exist to benefit the survival of the whole population. The only way you can even talk about evolution is from a population, not individual, standpoint.

[quote]

Animals strive only to pass on genetic material.

[/quote] Agreed. But some of these will be eliminated because they were counterproductive to survival, no matter how much they strove to pass on their genetic material, and therefore, it only makes sense to look at groups of individuals, not solitary individuals.

[quote]
A parent that is willing to do what it takes to raise a child is a positive in that respect.[/quote]
This was a GIANT generalization. For instance, if you have two children, both are starving, one is younger and nearly dead, and you can’t save them both, would you say it’s not positive for the mother to kill or pass off the younger and devote all of her efforts to the older? What about aborting at one point in her life so she has more time to gather resources to devote once she does reproduce?

Strategic reproduction is seen in all animals and it’s not a black-and-white-one-answer-fits-all-situations issue.

[quote]
It can be as easily said that parents willing to kill their children for convenience is a negative survival trait.[/quote]

Depends on the situation. If you mean in general, kill because they don’t want to take care of it even thoug they could, sure. If you mean kill because it would greatly set them back, prevent them from devoting resources to future children, and actually put their children in a worst situation than if they’d waited, then from a purely survival standpoint, killing for convenience would work.

It’s not just a numbers game. Whoever pops out the most doesn’t win. It’s whoever pops out the most who then live the longest, gain the most power, and therefore produce the best offspring who win. If you have 10 kids and they all die, well you failed. If you have 5 kids and they all live on social security…lol. What am I saying? No one here wants to pay social security.

42

[quote]jre67t wrote:
Rhonyn you sound pretty retarded my friend. Your words come off as though you think you are superior to everyone around you. It kind of sounds like you support communism, well if that retard baby won’t help us plow the fields than let’s abort IT. What if your baby was born with defects and only found out a week later after it was born would you kill the baby knowing it will live but will only hamper YOUR life?
Your trying to play god you buffoon.
[/quote]
I would abort a child with down syndrome yes.
If it were legal to do it a week later then yes.
Here’s your argument
Blah blah - OMG EMOTIONS HEART STRINGS - BLAH BLAH - BRING ON THE OBTUSE LOGIC AND INEFFICIENCY

There is no playing God here, we are talking about abortoin and down syndrome. To detect and abort a Downy is within our means and is according to our government acceptable.

I posit that what is unacceptable is to allow those incapable of pulling their weight into society, while those who could are summarily murderd en masse.

That makes no sense from any angle.

43

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

I can give you enough examples to kill ten threads of people in todays society who have risen to very powerful and wealthy positions in spite of having children.
[/quote]

An outlier is not an indicator of a trend. Also, how many of those who rose to great power started out on the bottom and popped out a kid at a tender age? How many started out on the bottom and rose to the top with a disabled kid (I’m actually interested in if there are any who meet this)? Once again, maybe a few, but not anywhere close to enough to be anything other than outliers.

You get my point. It’s much easier to survive as a young person in today’s society without a kid. [/quote]using your basis of survival, we can absolutely discard outliers. In todays society people can and do survive comfortably with a kid at all levels. What is your “main point” here? Let’s just get to it.
[/quote]

I said it. I feel like you’re not getting it on purpose. Why don’t you take a stab at what my main point is, since I’ve said it repeatedly for about two pages now and I’m sure people are getting sick of it.

44

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:

[quote]jre67t wrote:
Rhonyn you sound pretty retarded my friend. Your words come off as though you think you are superior to everyone around you. It kind of sounds like you support communism, well if that retard baby won’t help us plow the fields than let’s abort IT. What if your baby was born with defects and only found out a week later after it was born would you kill the baby knowing it will live but will only hamper YOUR life?
Your trying to play god you buffoon.
[/quote]
I would abort a child with down syndrome yes.
If it were legal to do it a week later then yes.
Here’s your argument
Blah blah - OMG EMOTIONS HEART STRINGS - BLAH BLAH - BRING ON THE OBTUSE LOGIC AND INEFFICIENCY

There is no playing God here, we are talking about abortoin and down syndrome. To detect and abort a Downy is within our means and is according to our government acceptable.

I posit that what is unacceptable is to allow those incapable of pulling their weight into society, while those who could are summarily murderd en masse.

That makes no sense from any angle.[/quote]

Do you feel that everyone should be allowed to make their own decision about this or that your answer should be applied for everyone?

45

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Now all we need is Makavali and we will have all the normal players in place for 40 pages of argueing over the same damn thing again…[/quote]

Oh I’m here. Just quietly wondering why it’s okay to exploit a child for political propaganda. I could count on one hand the people on this board that are genuinely outraged about abortion. The rest are just lonely and need people to side with.

Usually they get hyper excited and make threads like this.

46

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:

[quote]jre67t wrote:
Rhonyn you sound pretty retarded my friend. Your words come off as though you think you are superior to everyone around you. It kind of sounds like you support communism, well if that retard baby won’t help us plow the fields than let’s abort IT. What if your baby was born with defects and only found out a week later after it was born would you kill the baby knowing it will live but will only hamper YOUR life?
Your trying to play god you buffoon.
[/quote]
I would abort a child with down syndrome yes.
If it were legal to do it a week later then yes.
Here’s your argument
Blah blah - OMG EMOTIONS HEART STRINGS - BLAH BLAH - BRING ON THE OBTUSE LOGIC AND INEFFICIENCY

There is no playing God here, we are talking about abortoin and down syndrome. To detect and abort a Downy is within our means and is according to our government acceptable.

I posit that what is unacceptable is to allow those incapable of pulling their weight into society, while those who could are summarily murderd en masse.

That makes no sense from any angle.[/quote]

Do you feel that everyone should be allowed to make their own decision about this or that your answer should be applied for everyone?[/quote]
I think that forcing me or other people to care for your drooling fleshbags because you didn’t have the balls to do the right thing is morally wrong.

I think if someone wants to and can raise a retarded child without forcing me or others to pay for it then, it is far less relevant to me. In practicality I see no problem.

Ideally, in an optimized society, abortion of people who were incapable of pulling their weight in society would be mandatory. I acknowledge that our society is not this ideal nor this optimized society.

The least I can ask for is that I am not required to give units of my labor to fund this bullshit.

47

Given the recent trend in biological reductionism on PWI, i think some of you may benefit from an “introduction to human behavioral biology”.

enjoy :slight_smile:

48

[quote]ironcross wrote:
If you have 5 kids and they all live on social security…lol. What am I saying? No one here wants to pay social security.[/quote]

But they will, through the nose. Because we stopped having enough children. The nation isn’t going to be crushed by a bunch of lower class working youngsters. It’s going to be bankrupted trying to look after increasingly childless, educated old folks.

49

Evolution doesn’t care how your children live. Only that they can reproduce. Hasn’t been a problem for the poor. It is the highly educated (the most likely to have ‘power’) who are losing that race.

50

[quote]kamui wrote:
Given the recent trend in biological reductionism on PWI, i think some of you may benefit from an “introduction to human behavioral biology”.

enjoy :slight_smile: [/quote]

Well, thanks, however ignoring biology altogether hardly is the answer either.

A good case of indluenza should be enough to convince anyone.

51

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

I can give you enough examples to kill ten threads of people in todays society who have risen to very powerful and wealthy positions in spite of having children.
[/quote]

An outlier is not an indicator of a trend. Also, how many of those who rose to great power started out on the bottom and popped out a kid at a tender age? How many started out on the bottom and rose to the top with a disabled kid (I’m actually interested in if there are any who meet this)? Once again, maybe a few, but not anywhere close to enough to be anything other than outliers.

You get my point. It’s much easier to survive as a young person in today’s society without a kid. [/quote]using your basis of survival, we can absolutely discard outliers. In todays society people can and do survive comfortably with a kid at all levels. What is your “main point” here? Let’s just get to it.
[/quote]

I said it. I feel like you’re not getting it on purpose. Why don’t you take a stab at what my main point is, since I’ve said it repeatedly for about two pages now and I’m sure people are getting sick of it.[/quote]I’m getting what you are saying just fine and have answered your points.

52

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

When discussing perfect creation, you must define clear quality measures. Your perception of perfect is in fact imperfect.[/quote]

You’re missing the point. A hunter/gather tribe could not support large deviations in the genetic code that didn’t make the person better able to survive. That’s why infanticide was practiced. Had it not been, you and I might not be here today. So no one should be surprised that today many still feel the urge to abort a kid that will hold them back in life.

You may not like this blatant, unfeeling logic. But it’s 100% why these kids are aborted. The parents still feel the urge to survive to the best of their capabilities, even in our domesticated, modern life. Who are you to tell them they shouldn’t when you are in fact here because your ancestors made a similar decision?[/quote]

No. I, in fact, am here because my then 17 year old mother and 18 father did not decide to take the easy way out and abort me. I am sure that they could have rationalized that having a kid at that young age would inhibit their ability to survive to the best of their capabilities. I’m sure it put a damper on their partying life for a while.

53

[quote]kamui wrote:
Given the recent trend in biological reductionism on PWI, i think some of you may benefit from an “introduction to human behavioral biology”.

enjoy :slight_smile: [/quote]
My IQ has gone up 5 points from watching that.

54

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:
Given the recent trend in biological reductionism on PWI, i think some of you may benefit from an “introduction to human behavioral biology”.

enjoy :slight_smile: [/quote]

Well, thanks, however ignoring biology altogether hardly is the answer either.

A good case of indluenza should be enough to convince anyone.[/quote]

lol. I don’t have 57 minutes to watch that. Cliff notes?

So I watched a couple minutes of it and he’s basically pointing out that there are a variety o explanations and factors involved in human behavior. lol. I don’t think anyone here on either side was arguing counter that. Also, all of the factors he pointed out are nearly impossible to understand fully without a back ground in biology. Thus, I highly doubt Kamiu was arguing that biology isn’t how you approach the topic. I know he knows that evolutionary biology cannot equal biological reductionism.

55

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
I’m getting what you are saying just fine and have answered your points.
[/quote]

I think you just enjoy talking in circles :slight_smile: You never addressed my point about greed and selfishness. Where do they come from?

56

[quote]JEATON wrote:
No. I, in fact, am here because my then 17 year old mother and 18 father did not decide to take the easy way out and abort me. I am sure that they could have rationalized that having a kid at that young age would inhibit their ability to survive to the best of their capabilities. I’m sure it put a damper on their partying life for a while.
[/quote]

Well its not so much logic that runs through someone’s head when they’re considering abortion as blind fear; the thought that they “can’t do it”. It may actually be that they can’t do it, or they are very convinced that their life may be ruined when it really wouldn’t be. As I already pointed out, it stems from the fear of not being able to survive as well with a/another kid/birth and throughout our history may have been justified many many times over.

This doesn’t mean that abortion, infanticide, or birth is always right for a situation, but the fact that all exist give the whole population a better chance of surviving changing circumstances. As I’ve said before: a white rabbit doesn’t make sense in the summer, but the whole population “appreciates” it in the winter.

57

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:

[quote]jre67t wrote:
Rhonyn you sound pretty retarded my friend. Your words come off as though you think you are superior to everyone around you. It kind of sounds like you support communism, well if that retard baby won’t help us plow the fields than let’s abort IT. What if your baby was born with defects and only found out a week later after it was born would you kill the baby knowing it will live but will only hamper YOUR life?
Your trying to play god you buffoon.
[/quote]
I would abort a child with down syndrome yes.
If it were legal to do it a week later then yes.
Here’s your argument
Blah blah - OMG EMOTIONS HEART STRINGS - BLAH BLAH - BRING ON THE OBTUSE LOGIC AND INEFFICIENCY

There is no playing God here, we are talking about abortoin and down syndrome. To detect and abort a Downy is within our means and is according to our government acceptable.

I posit that what is unacceptable is to allow those incapable of pulling their weight into society, while those who could are summarily murderd en masse.

That makes no sense from any angle.[/quote]

Do you feel that everyone should be allowed to make their own decision about this or that your answer should be applied for everyone?[/quote]
I think that forcing me or other people to care for your drooling fleshbags because you didn’t have the balls to do the right thing is morally wrong.

I think if someone wants to and can raise a retarded child without forcing me or others to pay for it then, it is far less relevant to me. In practicality I see no problem.

Ideally, in an optimized society, abortion of people who were incapable of pulling their weight in society would be mandatory. I acknowledge that our society is not this ideal nor this optimized society.

The least I can ask for is that I am not required to give units of my labor to fund this bullshit.[/quote]

The problem with applying your opinion to everyone and forcing them to make the same decisions as you, no matter how well-reasoned, is that you lose important variations that emerge which might not make sense to you at a particular time, but which might help the whole population survive better. The truth is, if you are right, time will tell. Time is a better judge than any of us debating on what’s useful to society as opposed to what isn’t. So if you don’t want to make a mistake, let time do the work.

59

Mmmm, eugenics!

60

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
I’m getting what you are saying just fine and have answered your points.
[/quote]

I think you just enjoy talking in circles :slight_smile: You never addressed my point about greed and selfishness. Where do they come from?[/quote]
I did.address it. And if you look back, I’m taking your points head on… I must say you are circling back each time and trying with a new angle but they all boil down to the same egg. I posted my greed response.