Quote of the day

posted at 10:30 pm on December 1, 2008 by Allahpundit

“Someone close to me in our family has a learning disability, which has been a handicap and a sorrow to her, and my lifelong experience of children and adults with learning disabilities, including many with Down’s, as they have grown older has given me a different perspective. I am convinced that it is a grave misfortune for babies to be born with Down’s or any comparably serious syndrome. It’s a misfortune for their parents and their siblings as well. Sad observations over decades have convinced me: a damaged baby is a damaged family, even now…

There are some strange contradictions surrounding the question of abortion. People who reject abortion as always wrong are consistent and one cannot argue with them. But anyone who thinks abortion is acceptable under some circumstances, and who yet disapproves of what’s emotionally seen as ‘eugenic’ abortion, is in an untenable position. After all, people accept abortion for certain ‘social reasons’, and what more powerful ‘social reason’ could there be for an abortion than the virtual certainty that the foetus would be condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty, to the great sorrow and hardship of its family?”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Are you kidding me??

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 10:35 PM

But anyone who thinks abortion is acceptable under some circumstances, and who yet disapproves of what’s emotionally seen as ‘eugenic’ abortion, is in an untenable position.

I also think people who think abortion is wrong, yet think rape/incest should be accepted are intellectually untenable positions. It’s either murder or it’s not.

I’ve worked with Down’s kids. People are people.

Spirit of 1776 on December 1, 2008 at 10:41 PM

After all, people accept abortion for certain ’social reasons’, and what more powerful ’social reason’ could there be for an abortion than the virtual certainty that the foetus would be condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty, to the great sorrow and hardship of its family?”

So… you’re saying we should just go ahead and abort all future liberals.

Stunning.

Mojave Mark on December 1, 2008 at 10:42 PM

Same with kids with complete cleft lips and palates. They will always have a scar from the repair surgery. They will have problems speaking. Their teeth don’t grow in properly. Why don’t we just drown them in a river like kittens?

Or maybe Steven Hawking should have been killed when they discovered his disabilities. Or Beethoven – he was profoundly deaf, after all. Or Einstein, considering he couldn’t speak properly.

It’s easy to play judge when you can’t be bothered to actually figure out that all life is precious. Even those that you determine unworthy of life.

Plus, considering how Nazism offed the infirm, children with disabilities and the elderly, it’s not a good road to travel….

mjk on December 1, 2008 at 10:43 PM

Very interesting,so,in other words
what Germany did to their’undesireables’,
as a less burden, to Germany,would in essence
be good for Germany!!

And in turn,snuffing out life,or a flaw in
said child would be better in the long run
for said family!

canopfor on December 1, 2008 at 10:43 PM

“It’s not eugenics because LOOK OVER THERE!!

Jim Treacher on December 1, 2008 at 10:43 PM

ALLAHPUNDIT – “Killing babies is patriotic”

Firebird on December 1, 2008 at 10:45 PM

So we should abort the poor, those who will be susceptible to substance abuse, those who are emotionally ill-equipped to deal with diappointment and hardship? Maybe when we ID the cancer gene those “condemned” persons should be denied what life is ahead? Parkinsons? Homely people? What next?

The arguments in that article are a disgrace!

clnurnberg on December 1, 2008 at 10:47 PM

But anyone who thinks abortion is acceptable under some circumstances, and who yet disapproves of what’s emotionally seen as ‘eugenic’ abortion, is in an untenable position.

I think taking a life is acceptable under some circumstances (self-defense, war), does that mean I can’t condemn taking a life under any circumstances?

RightOFLeft on December 1, 2008 at 10:47 PM

It’s either murder or it’s not.

I’ve worked with Down’s kids. People are people.

Spirit of 1776 on December 1, 2008 at 10:41 PM

Yes, but there is morally defensible ‘murder’ and morally INDEFENSIBLE ‘murder.’

If all ‘murder’ was equal then we could not:
- kill to protect ourselves or our family
- kill to protect freedom
- kill certain types of criminals
- kill animals for their fur or meat

Religious_Zealot on December 1, 2008 at 10:48 PM

If God exists and abortion is morally wrong, do the consequences of having an abortion fall only on the decision maker or are more souls held responsible for the act, i.e. sins of the father visited upon everyone for the rest of time, etc?

dk on December 1, 2008 at 10:49 PM

So… you’re saying we should just go ahead and abort all future liberals.

Stunning.

Mojave Mark on December 1, 2008 at 10:42 PM

Very clever. Thanks for the laugh, great Mojave Mark.

ALLAHPUNDIT – “Killing babies is patriotic”

Firebird on December 1, 2008 at 10:45 PM

What’s the matter with you? Note that in QoD, everything is a quote, every time.

Entelechy on December 1, 2008 at 10:50 PM

If all ‘murder’ was equal then we could not:
- kill to protect ourselves or our family
- kill to protect freedom
- kill certain types of criminals
- kill animals for their fur or meat

I don’t equate murder with death. Ie to kill in my mind is not to murder.

Spirit of 1776 on December 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM

I just spent the last 4 hours of my life helping my child with his homework, just like I do most nights. To think, if I had just exterminated him, I could have spent it tending to my own needs instead. That would have been so much more fulfilling.

sheesh on December 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM

The only thing that matters in the debate over abortion is when does life begin. Everything falls into place once that question is answered. If it can’t be answered, then the benefit of the doubt must side with life.

windbag on December 1, 2008 at 10:52 PM

and what more powerful ’social reason’ could there be for an abortion than the virtual certainty that the foetus would be condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty,

Isn’t this what liberals want us all to feel so they can social engineer us?

Tommy_G on December 1, 2008 at 10:52 PM

“Same with kids with complete cleft lips and palates. ”

Or anyone with less than 20-20 vision. We could do that retroactively if you turn out to need glasses before you are, say, 16 years old.

crosspatch on December 1, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Hold up. Is she advocating aborting all children with “learning disabilities”?

“Even now there is nowhere near enough money to help everyone with learning disabilities lead a full and semi-independent life.”

How did we get from Down’s babies (which I don’t agree with aborting), to children with learning disabilities? And is she equating the two? I mean just how “learning disabled” do you have to be to warrant abortion in her warped world?

Would this include kids who are slow readers? Kids with dyslexia? Kids who flip numbers without knowing they are doing it (I know there’s a name for that, just can’t think of it right now.) Heck, why stop there? Why don’t we just get rid of all the kids with autism? Oh, and those with hyperactivity (ADD, ADHD) are really a nuisance as well… And those kids with green eyes, I mean they can be such a burden.

How about the teenager who is constantly late and giving you heartache? Oh, yeah, we can still take them to Nebraska, so I guess they can still be born.

Does she hear herself? Seriously. You can’t be against eugenics but for killing certain children who aren’t perfect. Just like you can’t color a square black and proclaim it white. Unless this is really 1984, which would, of course, nullify the whole argument.

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation

By Ronald Reagan

The 10th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade is a good time for us to pause and reflect. Our nationwide policy of abortion-on-demand through all nine months of pregnancy was neither voted for by our people nor enacted by our legislators — not a single state had such unrestricted abortion before the Supreme Court decreed it to be national policy in 1973. But the consequences of this judicial decision are now obvious: since 1973, more than 15 million unborn children have had their lives snuffed out by legalized abortions. That is over ten times the number of Americans lost in all our nation’s wars.

read the rest:

http://www.nationalreview.com/document/reagan200406101030.asp

joey24007 on December 1, 2008 at 10:56 PM

I’ve worked with Down’s kids. People are people.

Spirit of 1776 on December 1, 2008 at 10:41 PM

In high school, I babysat a teenage girl with Downes, and she was the most normal one in the family! I think she helped them through the parents’ divorce, just by being cheerful, as well as saying the things no one else either wanted to say or knew they were really saying.

Anyone who wants a different picture of Downes and other kids with disabilities should watch Matt Stone and Trey Parker’s documentary “How’s Your News?” I’m dead serious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUVhqptbyig

In the producers’ words, loosely paraphrasing, it gives so much more humanity to the disabled than “Dustin Hoffmann is a retard.” “Richard Gere is a retard.” etc. These are truly special human beings who are exceptionally happy to be alive and share that joy with their families. It’s great seeing them on the road, unscripted and being themselves.

chunderroad on December 1, 2008 at 10:56 PM

My best friend’s son has Down Syndrome. Every single moment of his life has been joyful for him. His parents love him, share joy with him, and sometimes worry and are challenged by his limitations.

This ogre would deprive them all of the infinite joy he has brought their family, in order to – what? – shield them from hardship? Why does she have an opinion on their lives? What a sad, joyless person.

Jaibones on December 1, 2008 at 11:01 PM

Isn’t this what liberals want us all to feel so they can social engineer us?

Tommy_G on December 1, 2008 at 10:52 PM

They already have most people thinking just having babies is a lifetime sentence of “frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty.”

chunderroad on December 1, 2008 at 11:02 PM

My stars. Her article gave me chills.

The only thing that matters in the debate over abortion is when does life begin. Everything falls into place once that question is answered. If it can’t be answered, then the benefit of the doubt must side with life.

+1
Unless you are The One then that question is above your pay grade, and therefore you must not allow your children to be punished with babies.

meltenn on December 1, 2008 at 11:02 PM

My new grandaughter (2 weeks) is perfect. I think that she should be allowed to live, based on my diagnosis.

What is wrong with these people??? How can a person survive with no heart??

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:03 PM

Further, she says (like many/most pro-”choice” advocates):

“For one thing I do not think that any woman should be pressed, for any reason, to have an abortion. To do so would be wrong. She must be free to choose and free to make a bad choice.”

Free to make a “bad choice”? I’m assuming that would mean KEEPING THE BABY in her books? “Oh, sure, you’re free to choose, but there’s only one RIGHT answer.” This is one of those things that disturbed me so much about the Trig “controversies.” Pro-choice people had a FIT that Sarah and Todd made the CHOICE to keep the baby.

The pro-choicers would have you believe they are saying “You can have chocolate or vanilla ice cream.” But THEY don’t believe both choices are valid. They think THEIR choice (to abort) is the only valid choice. To give someone a true choice, you either believe both choices are valid or you don’t. You don’t say, “You have a choice, but if you don’t abort, you’re wrong.”

UGH! Did you have to post this now? It’s going to be mighty hard to sleep wondering which of my children and (future) grandchildren these idiots are coming after next!

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:04 PM

What the author is really saying is that she doesn’t want the burden of an imperfect child.

After all, people accept abortion for certain ’social reasons’, and what more powerful ’social reason’ could there be for an abortion than the virtual certainty that the foetus would be condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty.

Is she speaking for the child or for herself…?
Also,just how many people could fit into that description one way or another.
Why are libs always looking for some sort of Logan’s Run utopia?
Who want’s to go to Carousel?

NeoKong on December 1, 2008 at 11:06 PM

This is the last time I’ll ever read an article or post of yours. You are such a downer, a complete opposite to DS children I have taken care of in my years as a nurse. I usually scroll through your post except this post I was curious of your ‘Quote of the day’ headings. Before the Captain join HA, never bothered with this site.

atemely on December 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

The pro-abortion crowd used the Palin’s “bad choice” as a predictor of other errors she would be sure to make.

This woman has written other seriously illogical crap.

clnurnberg on December 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

This isn’t over yet, eventually the advocates would love nothing better than “possible stigmatization” to be a valid reason for abortion.

Imagine how a child would feel if they had the only brown eyes in a family blue-eyed people; the horror.

Bishop on December 1, 2008 at 11:09 PM

Oh, sure, you’re free to choose, but there’s only one RIGHT answer.”

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:04 PM

Let’s be honest, you are saying that one choice (not to abort) is the right choice.

BTW, I agree.

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:10 PM

“It’s not eugenics because LOOK OVER THERE!!“

Jim Treacher

Has this woman dead to rights. She takes her feelings, dresses them up in some pseudo-intellectual language and acts like it’s a reasoned argument.
And how long before the social engineers want to abort more than the unborn?

snaggletoothie on December 1, 2008 at 11:14 PM

What’s truly pathetic about this attempt, is that this horrible woman is acknowledging that this isn’t simply “terminating a pregnancy,” they are literally squashing out the life of a human being and she accepts that, because that human being might be a burden. That is insane. Its not she’s saying “Well, its only a clump of cells, not a person.” She fully understands that it is a human life being ended, and she has no problem with it.

Insane, and depraved.

jimmy the notable on December 1, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Someone close to me in our family has a learning disability, which has been a handicap and a sorrow to her, and my lifelong experience of children and adults with learning disabilities, including many with Down’s, as they have grown older has given me a different perspective.

Learning disability! Good gracious. Well it’s not too late, push the brat down a flight of stairs or something, it’s the only humane thing to do. The nerve, to be handicapped!

Dash on December 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

Let’s be honest, you are saying that one choice (not to abort) is the right choice.

BTW, I agree.

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:10 PM

Look how they mocked and attacked Sarah and Bristol Palin. I think both sides feel strongly that their choice is correct, but one choice is less macabre than the other.

chunderroad on December 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

It must be a empty soul that advocates for the death of the innocent. How sad that we are witnessing these times, when these are the “progressive” views.

Mini14 on December 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

I don’t get the rap incest thing….I understand that it’s horrible to be raped, but I don’t get how it’s the kids fault…as a libertarian, my opposition to abortion is not religious, it’s a personal choice issue…at some point, thats a kid in there, and that kid has rights of his own…

the thing the pro choice people need to answer, to me, is “what chocie does the kid get, exactly ?”

johngalt on December 1, 2008 at 11:18 PM

The pro-abortion crowd used the Palin’s “bad choice” as a predictor of other errors she would be sure to make.

Indeed. I think that Charles Krauthammer put the liberal reaction to Sarah and Trig very well: “The viciousness with which she was attacked as a contradiction in terms, a conservative woman.

In Palin’s case, I think what adds to it is her decision at her age with four other children to have a down syndrome child. This, too, as Joseph Epstein wrote, in feminist circles if abortion is not about this, what’s it about?

And they look at her as sort of a back room — a backwater hick, who, for religious reasons, went ahead and had a child that they would never have.

Underneath it, I think, deep underneath it, I think it’s a self-loathing on the part of these feminists, knowing that what she did is virtuous and a generous act that they would have never have undertaken. And her having undertaken it is an affront to them, a silent rebuke.”

meltenn on December 1, 2008 at 11:19 PM

what more powerful “social reason” could there be for an abortion than the virtual certainty that the foetus would be condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty, to the great sorrow and hardship of its family?

How dare this Minette creature characterize families in this way.

Her perversion is revealed in her first sentence:

Eugenics is one of those knock-down words used to silence argument.

Eugenics is exactly what she is advocating. Witness how the liberal swats away condemnation of its coldness, animated only by its bloodthirstiness. Condemnation of murder and its justifications “silences argument.”

RushBaby on December 1, 2008 at 11:19 PM

But Jimmy, it would have been a poor, sick, burden of a human being. /

I wonder where this monster comes down on euthanasia, there are poor, sick diappointed people across the continuum of life. Maybe she’d like to off her granny too?

clnurnberg on December 1, 2008 at 11:20 PM

clnurnberg on December 1, 2008 at 11:20 PM

And one more thing. What if I get in a horrible car crash and someone has to take care of me? Even if I am conscious and cognitive, should my caretaker have the right to put me down, because I am a burden?

This woman….I can’t believe that thoughts like this go through her head.

jimmy the notable on December 1, 2008 at 11:22 PM

The arrogance is stunning. Who the hell is she to decide another life is a condemnation? What happened to the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, even if the pursuit requires some help along the way?

I feel as if I’ve been condemned to entertain her strange thoughts. What a burden that is.

Brian1972 on December 1, 2008 at 11:23 PM

Rationale for abortion:
1) child inconveniences the mother
2) child will be less than healthy
3) child will be unwanted
4) child will make mother gain weight
Taking these arguments to logical next step:
1) KILL anyone who gets in my way!
2) KILL anyone with a long-term illness!
3) KILL all who live in orphanages!
4) KILL all employees of Baskin-Robbins!

jgapinoy on December 1, 2008 at 11:24 PM

don’t worry:

in the future all pregancies will be ivf and all babies will be implants with obama’s complete dna.

the master race!

reliapundit on December 1, 2008 at 11:24 PM

I can see the bumper stickers now: “Better dead than Down”

Ortzinator on December 1, 2008 at 11:27 PM

Crap, I’m going back to the Happy Sarah thread. I want my warm fuzzies back.

Brian1972 on December 1, 2008 at 11:27 PM

My brother in law has Downs. He is 33 years old and still lives with his parents. He’ll live with them the rest of their lives. After they go, he’ll live with me and my wife. He is the most innocent and wonderful person I know. No one can tell me he should have been snuffed out in the womb because he might cause some inconveniences for his family or because he might be frustrated at times in life. He enjoys life more than any of us “normal people” and he is an inspiration to people around him. Who are we to judge his life as less valuable than our own?

t.ferg on December 1, 2008 at 11:27 PM

Oh, sure, you’re free to choose, but there’s only one RIGHT answer.”

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:04 PM
Let’s be honest, you are saying that one choice (not to abort) is the right choice.

BTW, I agree.

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:10 PM

You’re right I AM! But I’m not the one that wrote that nonsense in the first place. I am pro-life. It just infuriates me when people call themselves “pro-choice” to avoid the more accurate term “pro-abortion.”

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:30 PM

OK, let me see if I have this right. Liberals think it’s all right to kill babies that would have a less than perfect life. Conservatives (in general) think it’s wrong to abort babies at all. Therefore, since no child can have perfect life, all liberals should abort all of their children?

Buford Gooch on December 1, 2008 at 11:30 PM

I don’t like that post! There are a lot of D S people that can live on their own! And some that cannot. The family chose to have them in their lives. They are more precious to the parents. That is a wrong attitude. My best friends daughter was in a horrific car wreck almost three years ago. She was beautiful, popular and very talented. Then she had one arm, one ear. Her skull was caved in because they had to take some of it out. Her parents were at the hospital ever day until October 20th of this year. Her birthday was Oct. 19th, she turned 27. Went into cardiac arrest. They unhooked her machine the next day. Now she is in peace. One never knows the outcome of what life has instore. Is not right to just take a baby’s life. Only with rare conditions. If that. The parents could admit their child in a hospital if that child is such a burden. There are other ways to deal with this.

sheebe on December 1, 2008 at 11:31 PM

Since going to college and now working full-time, I go out with my father jogging and walking in our local park in the morning.
Almost daily we meet with Down Syndrome men and women who are the most friendly and gracious people. I can not imagine why people will be so quick to abort a child, especially one with Down Syndrome.
I would recommend all those men and women who are going through such a decision, to spend a day with a special needs child. They are such lovely people. God bless them.
This opinion writer is so out of the loop.
We should stop this culture of death of the unborn and try to build responsibility again among the youth and frankly the adults.

jencab on December 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM

Coach Gene Stallings’ son, John Mark, was born with Down syndrome. He died last August at age 46. He made an impact on every life he touched:

“There weren’t any lives he (John Mark) touched that weren’t made better by his influence,” said Linda Knowles, Stallings’ secretary at Alabama. “He loved life, and he loved Alabama football.”

“He had a way of lighting up a room,” said Alabama Director of Events Larry White, the school’s sports information director during the Stallings years at Alabama.

Read the rest here.

mad_cow on December 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM

I have Asperger’s Syndrome and ADHD. Diagnosed when I was in my 20′s. I am 38 now.

They may be a nuisance but I would still have my 38 years over again.

Crux Australis on December 1, 2008 at 11:33 PM

Minette Marrin is a burden and a disappointment to me

clnurnberg on December 1, 2008 at 11:34 PM

…condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty

The illness is purely mental — and I wish that they wouldn’t talk about AllahPundit that way.

My collie says:

Besides, if all the beta-males were eliminated through a sustained eugenics effort, who would host our conservative political blogs?

CyberCipher on December 1, 2008 at 11:35 PM

Mimette or whatever her name is recycled this piece. She wrote a nasty column about Palin which, of course, was posted on HA. I googled her name and found another article she wrote also arguing for abortion for babies with cleft palates and posted the link here. The woman is a nutter.

Blake on December 1, 2008 at 11:36 PM

Look how they mocked and attacked Sarah and Bristol Palin. I think both sides feel strongly that their choice is correct, but one choice is less macabre than the other.

chunderroad on December 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

Of course, we all feel that we are correct. But at the end of the day, right is right, and dead is dead. You can change your mind, but you can’t change dead. Glad you think like I do.

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:36 PM

Aborting babies with Down syndrome is good for the environment.

They demand more attention, which means more resources go towards them, which means more consumption.

Fewer Down syndrome babies, less consumption.

It’s a win/win situation for the left – baby killing and saving mother erf.

madmonkphotog on December 1, 2008 at 11:36 PM

You’re right I AM! But I’m not the one that wrote that nonsense in the first place. I am pro-life. It just infuriates me when people call themselves “pro-choice” to avoid the more accurate term “pro-abortion.”

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:30 PM

What choice is there? Really?????

Can you say Sarah?? Love her. Love you.

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:39 PM

test

Blake on December 1, 2008 at 11:44 PM

Fewer Down syndrome babies, less consumption.

It’s a win/win situation for the left – baby killing and saving mother erf.

madmonkphotog on December 1, 2008 at 11:36 PM

Exactly. And let’s not ignore the gorilla in the room: Today it’s “imperfect” “foetuses”. Tomorrow its “inferior” ethnic groups.

RushBaby on December 1, 2008 at 11:45 PM

Test complete.

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:45 PM

“Jesus wept”

I seriously can’t understand how anyone could have such little value of human life. It’s like they are catagorizing human beings as somehow not human. Why? …because they don’t fit some mold? Sick.

jjjen on December 1, 2008 at 11:46 PM

If it were possible rank the lies of the “pro-life” movement, calling parent not wanting to live unpleasant lives “eugenicists” would rank near the top.

thuja on December 1, 2008 at 11:47 PM

Two posts eaten. Try for the third time:

Minette’s sez let’s abort kids with cleft palates.

Minette sez, appearance counts!

And you will note, in the older article she alludes that she has previously written on the same subject. Creepy!

Blake on December 1, 2008 at 11:48 PM

KCB, that’s what I mean. Even they don’t really believe in “choice.” They just can’t stomach putting “pro-abortion” in their platform because they know how that would sound.

That’s like the turkey thing with Sarah the other day. After watching it, my husband was like, “Huh. They’re upset over that? We used to chop their heads off and let them run around until they keeled over.” Then he said something really profound, “Maybe someone should tape a partial birth abortion and play that on the ‘net. Wonder if they’d get as upset about a baby being killed as they did that turkey.”

As the bumper sticker on my mil’s car says:

It’s not a choice, it’s a LIFE.

Oh, and just so we’re clear. I’m pro-choice too, only I think the choice comes WAY before you are holding that little stick. Just sayin’.

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM

Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention.[2] Throughout history, eugenics has been regarded by its various advocates as a social responsibility, an enlightened stance of a society, meant to create healthier, stronger and/or more intelligent people, to save resources, and lessen human suffering. Earlier proposed means of achieving these goals focused on selective breeding, while modern ones focus on prenatal testing, genetic counseling, birth control, in vitro fertilization, and genetic engineering. Opponents argue that eugenics is a temptation to the power hungry and is thus notably subject to corruption. Historically, some eugenics advocates have used it as a justification for state-sponsored discrimination, forced sterilization of persons deemed genetically defective, the killing of institutionalized populations, and genocide, such as during the Holocaust.

Wikipedia

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM

I aborted that ghoulish woman’s column with a nice palate cleanser. Just go watch the Sarah video again.

And Georgia in this time when some want to disregard the sanctity of innocent life, in this time when our children need to be protected from violence, especially our children with special needs and our children yet to be born, in this time Georgia, will you re-elect a man who does respect life?

Sarah Palin Dec 1, 2008

There that’s better. Now I can go to bed with a smile and a little hope for tomorrow.
G’night all.

Brian1972 on December 1, 2008 at 11:54 PM

If it were possible rank the lies of the “pro-life” movement, calling parent not wanting to live unpleasant lives “eugenicists” would rank near the top.

thuja on December 1, 2008 at 11:47 PM

Eugenics – A scientific movement devoted to the enrichment of the human species by regulating heredity.

If aborting children who are less than perfect is not regulating heredity, thus eugenics, what the hell is it? And apparently, from Blake’s post, she also supports aborting children with cleft palates, a surgically correctable procedure and one several movie stars has undergone including Stacy Keach.

Glynn on December 1, 2008 at 11:54 PM

If it were possible rank the lies of the “pro-life” movement, calling parent not wanting to live unpleasant lives face poss “eugenicists” would rank near the top.

Seig Heil when you say that.

Jim Treacher on December 1, 2008 at 11:55 PM

Endowed by your creator with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, unless you might cause great sorrow and hardship to you’re family.

Ok, I got it.

Dollayo on December 1, 2008 at 11:56 PM

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM

I’m a sarcastic a$$, but we’re on the same page of the same book. I kinda liked the turkey interview. It was real. Can’t say that about TV often anymore. Thank god my turkey was born full grown and cryopacked!!

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 11:56 PM

Here is a very good interactive study on eugenics by Regent University as practiced by the Nazis and even the US during the 20s and 30s. They were called “useless eaters” back then. I think parents that choose to raise special needs children deserve a special place in heaven but not all parents are up for the extrordinary effort that goes into it.

goat on December 1, 2008 at 11:58 PM

AP, please don’t beat the baby horse the way Ed does. It gets really old after a while.

abobo on December 2, 2008 at 12:00 AM

If you read Marrin’s articles, it appears that it is her own sister with a mental disability.

clnurnberg on December 2, 2008 at 12:01 AM

Oh, and just so we’re clear. I’m pro-choice too, only I think the choice comes WAY before you are holding that little stick. Just sayin’.

UnderstandingisPower on December 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM

BTW, don’t say little stick… people might think we know each other ;-)

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:02 AM

Are you kidding me??

KCB on December 1, 2008 at 10:35 PM

KCB — thank you. I didn’t have to beyond the very first comment to see my exact sentiments expressed.

D2Boston on December 2, 2008 at 12:03 AM

Got it. I’ll keep that in mind, KCB!

UnderstandingisPower on December 2, 2008 at 12:04 AM

D2Boston on December 2, 2008 at 12:03 AM

I know..Unbelievable..

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:05 AM

Can’t spellllllll

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:05 AM

The ones with Downs are maybe the way we were supposed to be.

infidel on December 2, 2008 at 12:05 AM

I ran across this, and it basically summed up my feelings on the subject.

Potential People: A Life in Our Hands

Before we begin, let’s meet David Bascombe.

David lives in Cleveland in a brownstone walk up. He has a dog, a terrier, and likes to play tennis on the weekends. During the week he works as a financial analyst at a small firm. Every Friday he goes to Red Lobster dressed in a worn navy blue jacket that went out of style a decade ago. Every morning he reads the paper back to front, beginning with the sports section. Each time he finishes he sighs, scratches the scar on his chin that he got when he fell off the roof as a boy, finishes his cereal with bits of banana crumbled inside and drives to work in his red Honda Civic. Though he would never admit it to anyone, he enjoys the life he lives.

David is a potential person. That is he may or may not exist.

Why would he not exist? For starters, because you want to kill him.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2007/02/potential-people-life-in-our-hands.html

sharrukin on December 2, 2008 at 12:06 AM

UnderstandingisPower on December 2, 2008 at 12:04 AM

Thanks for playing. We need to keep our sense of humor, but more importantly we need to keep our RESOLVE!!! This inning is over, but we will win this game! Where is ManlyRash?????We need you back!! We could get AP to do a poll?????

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:10 AM

Again, as a gay dude, this is why I don’t support abortion. As soon as science is able to determine a baby in the womb will be gay, I’m sure many will be aborted. On a related note, I have one leg sligly shorter than the other. Should I have been aborted?

SouthernGent on December 2, 2008 at 12:12 AM

WOW…someone had a logic abortion!

gman43 on December 2, 2008 at 12:12 AM

If God exists and abortion is morally wrong, do the consequences of having an abortion fall only on the decision maker or are more souls held responsible for the act, i.e. sins of the father visited upon everyone for the rest of time, etc?

dk on December 1, 2008 at 10:49 PM

No. Jesus taught that we are responsible for our own action or inaction in the presence of evil. Hence, the mortal sin of an abortion falls upon the willing participants in the abortion, and the stain of it stays separately with each of those individuals. A mortal (deadly) sin is a premeditated evil act which affects another person or is directed at God; its commission cuts the sinner off from a loving relationship with God. Any individual in a state of mortal sin may remove it by true inward and outward repentance of the sin. Dying with the stain of a mortal sin unremoved by repentance condemns the individual to eternal damnation. Not their parents, not their children, but they themselves will bear the the punishment for the sin they have committed. See 1 John 5:16-17.

We are each given free will to live our lives as we choose. With such freedom comes responsibility for our actions or inactions both to those around us and to God.

unclesmrgol on December 2, 2008 at 12:13 AM

Again, as a gay dude, this is why I don’t support abortion. As soon as science is able to determine a baby in the womb will be gay, I’m sure many will be aborted. On a related note, I have one leg sligly shorter than the other. Should I have been aborted?

SouthernGent on December 2, 2008 at 12:12 AM

First they’ll come for you, then they’ll come for me…..

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:14 AM

Where is ManlyRash?????We need you back!!

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:10 AM

Go there.

Entelechy on December 2, 2008 at 12:15 AM

Summary:

Dear Person with Down Syndrome,

This world would have been a little bit better place if you hadn’t been born. You are an unnecessary burden to your parents who made the foolish mistake of not killing you when they had the chance.

Because of your particular defect, the suffering, grief and financial as well as emotional strains that you bring to your family and society so outweigh any possible contribution that you might somehow happen to make to the community that you are a net loss for the human race.

You are not even a zero. You are beneath that. You have less of a right to live than a convicted murder, rapist or terrorist, at least they have the capacity to contribute something.

P.S. I mean this all in the nicest possible way.

P.P.S. This also goes for all you mentally ill people if we ever figure out how to diagnose all you crazy folks in utero.

P.P.P.S. And sickle cell disease.

P.P.P.P.S. And childhood leukemia.

Which is ironic, because that’s exactly how I’ve always felt about liberal British journalists.

29Victor on December 2, 2008 at 12:16 AM

Entelechy on December 2, 2008 at 12:15 AM

Thanks. Added to my favorites!

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:17 AM

It is always wrong to kill any innocent person, born or unborn.

It is not a complicated concept.

Elizabetty on December 2, 2008 at 12:17 AM

I can see the bumper stickers now: “Better dead than Down”

Ortzinator on December 1, 2008 at 11:27 PM

I’ll refute that one with my own bumper sticker:

Better Down than AssClown

Laura in Maryland on December 2, 2008 at 12:18 AM

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2007/02/potential-people-life-in-our-hands.html

sharrukin on December 2, 2008 at 12:06 AM

That was an EXCELLENT article. Thanks so much for posting that. I am saving it.

Glynn on December 2, 2008 at 12:22 AM

Marrin’s resentment toward her sister is really very sad, isn’t it? Maybe she thinks the family income would have been better spent ALL on her. Perhaps she’s the mentally disabled one?

clnurnberg on December 2, 2008 at 12:23 AM

Which is ironic, because that’s exactly how I’ve always felt about liberal British journalists.

29Victor on December 2, 2008 at 12:16 AM

Me, too.

Glynn on December 2, 2008 at 12:24 AM

Marrin’s resentment toward her sister is really very sad, isn’t it? Maybe she thinks the family income would have been better spent ALL on her. Perhaps she’s the mentally disabled one?

clnurnberg on December 2, 2008 at 12:23 AM

She is the entiteled one./sarc

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:26 AM

After all, people accept abortion for certain ’social reasons’, and what more powerful ’social reason’ could there be for an abortion than the virtual certainty that the foetus would be condemned to a life of frustration, disappointment, dependence, serious illness and poverty, to the great sorrow and hardship of its family?”

So… you’re saying we should just go ahead and abort all future liberals.

Stunning.

Mojave Mark on December 1, 2008 at 10:42 PM

ROTFLMAO!!!

Seriously, I am crying laughing. And just before I read your post I was disgusted and angry at the article.

ramrocks on December 2, 2008 at 12:27 AM

Where is ManlyRash?????We need you back!!

KCB on December 2, 2008 at 12:10 AM

Go there.

Entelechy on December 2, 2008 at 12:15 AM

You two Rock!!! Thank you Entelechy, is not the same without ManlyRash! How I have missed him.

sheebe on December 2, 2008 at 12:29 AM

Going OT, but just got home from work and had to check out Change dot gov for the latest on Barry’s plan for me….

http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda/

Not ONE word about ‘A’, but plenty on give aways.

Then this under the heading of Law Enforcement

Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.

There goes semi-autos (all kinds), anything with more then a five shot capacity, and all those evil evil evil Black Rifles that are being used in the thousands of OK Corral shootouts in your neighborhood. It won’t do a thing for all those illegal guns in criminal hands but by golly you aren’t gonna beable to shoot up the neighborhood, no sir, unt-uh. Oh and those ‘tools’ to help law enforcement trace guns….that is the Encoded Ammo Act. If you don’t know about that go to the NRA.

Limerick on December 2, 2008 at 12:30 AM

I wonder how she feels about people with AIDS and the pain they cause themselves, their friends and their families.

I wonder if she believes that we should just let them all die.

At least Down Syndrome isn’t contagious.

29Victor on December 2, 2008 at 12:32 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3