KILL unwanted or disabled babies at birth as they are not a real person'

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

There is another question which i feel is being forgotten .Is it ethically responsible to 'force life' on a severely disabled baby ?.A woman can have a late abortion(after 24weeks) stating severe disability as the reason which most find acceptible so should we force such a child to live?
The potential for life is there ,no question about that but what quality of life is there ?and should we concider that much more than we do at the moment ?.The answer to all those questions depends greatly on the severity of the disability but when should society deem a disability is severe enough to not have any or very little quality of life

If they do not think "life is not worth living" they they can kill themselfs, we are not "forcing a child to live" but "givng it a chance"

Abortion of the ground of disablity, sex, race and all other factors bar case of rape and when the womans life is under threat is wrong!

[richard s]

I think Francesca Minerva would have fitted quit nicely in the Nazi Parties ideology.

If the parents of the unborn child know that the infant is going to be severely disabled than it should be their decision and their alone to terminate the pregnancy at the earliest stage of pregnancy.

Then again some peoples/religions are totally opposed to this entirely, that is their right. I would suggest that they should look at the natural world around them (not the human species) and see how mother nature treats this subject. Arguably most of the human species does not put itself on the same playing field as other creatures we share on this dying planet.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

If they do not think "life is not worth living" they they can kill themselfs, we are not "forcing a child to live" but "givng it a chance"

Abortion of the ground of disablity, sex, race and all other factors bar case of rape and when the womans life is under threat is wrong!

In your opinion...

Originally Posted by richard s

I think Francesca Minerva would have fitted quit nicely in the Nazi Parties ideology.

If the parents of the unborn child know that the infant is going to be severely disabled than it should be their decision and their alone to terminate the pregnancy at the earliest stage of pregnancy.

Then again some peoples/religions are totally opposed to this entirely, that is their right. I would suggest that they should look at the natural world around them (not the human species) and see how mother nature treats this subject. Arguably most of the human species does not put itself on the same playing field as other creatures we share on this dying planet.

Once again, she is not proposing this as a policy, but as the starting point for a philosophical debate - big difference.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Once again, she is not proposing this as a policy, but as the starting point for a philosophical debate - big difference.

Which she should have not started!

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Why? It's a perfectlty good subject for debate although using the word "kill" is somewhat melodramatic. I suspect in practice "not try too hard to keep alive" is the unwritten rule.

In the natural world those with defective genes, minds or bodies generally die at birth or shortly after, either by them actually dying, or the mother realising that the offspring is unlikely to survive naturally cuts her losses and moves on. This keeps species strong and healthy.

Only we buck this trend and want to keep every offspring alive no mattter what. Genetically we're embarking on a race to deformity and illness at birth and thereafter being rife and eventually the norm. Every un-born needing medical intervention in the womb to even get to birth?

No it is not (except for Nazis), why should we not give babies a chance and if whren they reach adulthood and still do not want to live, then they can end their lives

In the near future they might be cures to these diablities and illnesses in the near future, hence why I fell that Abortion (Bar in cases when a Womans life in in the line) is wrong and I am not keen on Assisted Suicide.

So killing Babies as soon as they are born is 100% wrong!

[TheNorm]

'Pregnant women have asked for terminations because they did not want their holidays spoilt'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/wo...ys-spoilt.html

[richard s]

Thankfully everybody has different views. Thats why it is good to debate and to discuss things on forums like this one. It is good to get other peoples thoughts and ideas.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/wo...ys-spoilt.html

Whatever the law says, most people now think that abortion is a right under all circumstances and not something that is permissible if certain conditions are met, as the framers of the law surely intended. That particular slippery slope has long been slid down. And the same people now conceive of life as an existential supermarket in which they are consumers, choosing the way they live much as they choose cranberry juice or the flavour of crisps that they want. And the customer in the existential supermarket, as in Tesco, is always right.

Into this poisonous mixture we must add the notion that any form of distress, or even the slightest frustration arising no matter how self-indulgently, constitutes an impairment of mental health: for the mentally healthy person is always happy and never experiences any difficulties in life. In short, inconvenience is the greatest of all threats to our well-being, and must at all times be avoided. It is our right to avoid it.

What a damning indictment of the society we have become.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/wo...ys-spoilt.html

Its about time we replaced the Abortion Act 1967 with a new law banning abortions except for cases where the mothers life is at risk!!

Times have changed since the 1960s!

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

Its about time we replaced the Abortion Act 1967 with a new law banning abortions except for cases where the mothers life is at risk!!

Times have changed since the 1960s!

Read the article. That's almost exactly what the Abortion Act says already. It is being widely flouted by a great many doctors who are prepared to sign forms stating that a mother's mental or physical health is at risk when, frankly, it isn't.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Chris

Read the article. That's almost exactly what the Abortion Act says already. It is being widely flouted by a great many doctors who are prepared to sign forms stating that a mother's mental or physical health is at risk when, frankly, it isn't.

No it states that abortion can be done before 24 weeks for many reasons!

What I would like is more limitations on abortion!

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Chris

What a damning indictment of the society we have become.

Indeed.

The other day I was eating dinner in front of the TV, and an ad came on showing starving children (the ad was asking for donations). I carried on eating, then after a while wondered if that made me terribly callous.

Perhaps humans have a way of getting used to anything going on around us, even death. Maybe it is some sort of survival instinct.

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

No it states that abortion can be done before 24 weeks for many reasons!

What I would like is more limitations on abortion!

I would like more limitations on your use of exclamation marks. But that's something else I fear is sadly unlikely to happen.

You need to remember that during the time in which a abortion can be carried out a lot of people would generally not consider the foetus as a person. In their mind they are not killing anyone but stopping a life from occurring, it is different as the same distinction that could be made about birth control.