Would you abort a down syndrome fetus?

[got tonkaed]

tell a pregnant woman a fetus isnt part of her body and see how well that works out for you....just a hunch.

[suggs]

Yes yes yes of course.
Anyway, the important thing is that each individual has the choice.
I know, Suggs crapping on about freedom again...
Wake up before we all end up in a theocratic fascist state. Vote Ron Paul.

[Gregrios]

One more thing. I don't know if any of you have ever met a person with down syndrome or not but I'll tell you this. They are the most happy people you'll ever see.

[got tonkaed]

One more thing. I don't know if any of you have ever met a person with down syndrome or not but I'll tell you this. They are the most happy people you'll ever see.

i think some interesting questions can be asked about happiness given the context of someone with down syndrome

[Gregrios]

tell a pregnant woman a fetus isnt part of her body and see how well that works out for you....just a hunch.

It's ok. I'm safe from any slaps through the safety of the internet.

[Neoteny]

One more thing. I don't know if any of you have ever met a person with down syndrome or not but I'll tell you this. They are the most happy people you'll ever see.

i think some interesting questions can be asked about happiness given the context of someone with down syndrome

Indeed.

[suggs]

are down syndrome people really human?

[got tonkaed]

well its one thing if your views are only your views on the internet, its quite a different thing if your actually going to have these views in the real world.

[Gregrios]

One more thing. I don't know if any of you have ever met a person with down syndrome or not but I'll tell you this. They are the most happy people you'll ever see.

i think some interesting questions can be asked about happiness given the context of someone with down syndrome

I'm not saying that the standards of happiness are the same for a person with and without down sydrome. All I'm saying is their happy. Happiness is happiness and it's as simple as that.

So, to argue that it's unfair for the child with DS to be born is baloni if you ask me. That's my point.

Also, to argue that it's unfair for parents to have to take care of a DS child, is plain selfishness and therefore should NOT be considered into a decision on whether or not to have an abortion.

The only scenerio I would agree with an abortion on would be a scenerio where if a child would have to live his\her life as a complete vegtable. With no possible cure. That's the only way I would accept it.

[suggs]

i meant a la Singer, are they capable of thought, feelings etc
The answer is prob. yes.
In real life i collect Jackboots.

[Gregrios]

well its one thing if your views are only your views on the internet, its quite a different thing if your actually going to have these views in the real world.

What are you implying? Please tell your not saying what I think your saying.

[got tonkaed]

I'm not saying that the standards of happiness are the same for a person with and without down sydrome. All I'm saying is their happy. Happiness is happiness and it's as simple as that.
So, to argue that it's unfair for the child with DS to be born is baloni if you ask me. That's my point.

Also, to argue that it's unfair for parents to have to take care of a DS child, is plain selfishness and therefore should NOT be considered into a decision on whether or not to have an abortion.

The only scenerio I would agree with an abortion on would be a scenerio where if a child would have to live his\her life as a complete vegtable. With no possible cure. That's the only way I would accept it.

bolded because you are arguing exactly opposite things in those sentences.

Why shouldnt a parents ability to parent effectively be considered when trying to decided whether or not to keep a child? They are going to be the primary caregivers after all.

[got tonkaed]

well its one thing if your views are only your views on the internet, its quite a different thing if your actually going to have these views in the real world.

What are you implying? Please tell your not saying what I think your saying.

well i was just saying that no matter what your views...if you only are able to say them because nothing bad can happen to you on the internet....then youll never really have that much of a leg to stand on in the real world.

I wasnt necessarily claiming you didnt, but just as a bit of advice.

[Gregrios]

I'm not saying that the standards of happiness are the same for a person with and without down sydrome. All I'm saying is their happy. Happiness is happiness and it's as simple as that.
So, to argue that it's unfair for the child with DS to be born is baloni if you ask me. That's my point.

Also, to argue that it's unfair for parents to have to take care of a DS child, is plain selfishness and therefore should NOT be considered into a decision on whether or not to have an abortion.

The only scenerio I would agree with an abortion on would be a scenerio where if a child would have to live his\her life as a complete vegtable. With no possible cure. That's the only way I would accept it.

bolded because you are arguing exactly opposite things in those sentences.

Why shouldnt a parents ability to parent effectively be considered when trying to decided whether or not to keep a child? They are going to be the primary caregivers after all.

Obviously what I'm saying isn't sinking in. Your missing my point. I'm not real big on continuely repeating myself, so I suggest reading what I said again. Let it sink in and then tell me how your questions look.

[got tonkaed]

i understand your argument i just disagree with it.

I get that you think something that isnt born yet has a right to life that supercedes the parents. I disagree with this. Therefore the simple assumptions that are involved with that type of logic i dont agree with.

Things that are not alive do not take primacy over things that are.

[Neoteny]

I'm not saying that the standards of happiness are the same for a person with and without down sydrome.

Happiness is happiness and it's as simple as that.

There is a distinct contradiction in your comments. This is the point tonka is trying to make. Perhaps you should reread what you type.

[life-saver]

I would say yes, but I've had so many interactions with DS kids, I couldn't go through with it.

[Gregrios]

well its one thing if your views are only your views on the internet, its quite a different thing if your actually going to have these views in the real world.

What are you implying? Please tell your not saying what I think your saying.

well i was just saying that no matter what your views...if you only are able to say them because nothing bad can happen to you on the internet....then youll never really have that much of a leg to stand on in the real world.

I wasnt necessarily claiming you didnt, but just as a bit of advice.

Are you serious? I was just making a joke like you were about the wrath of woman when a person simplifies pregency. Man, your looking way TOO deep into this. I thought you were just joking around. I guess not. By the way, I don't need advice when it comes to the world. I know it pretty well. My views are my views no matter where I go. This just happens to be the place where the most interesting topics come up.

So, to politely call me fake is the same as bluntly saying it.

[got tonkaed]

lol i wasnt trying to be Dr. Phil.

i think if either one of us is looking a little to deep into that sequence it might be you.

Lets take a recap

you make a comment about avoiding womans wrath -obviously a joke
i say a comment about consistency of views - a half truth
You pounce on that claiming i am on your back - overly defensive
I clarify my statement in order to avoid confusion -pretty clear there
You come up with that statement - again overly defensive....

by my count thats 2 consecutive overly defensive statements....maybe you need to sit a few plays out?

[Gregrios]

I'm not saying that the standards of happiness are the same for a person with and without down sydrome.

Happiness is happiness and it's as simple as that.

There is a distinct contradiction in your comments. This is the point tonka is trying to make. Perhaps you should reread what you type.

I'm sorry. I just don't see it. I've reread it 3 times and I don't know what your talking about. Both those statements are exactly what I wanted to say. I'll try to simplify both statements into one so you know where I'm coming from. Here it goes.

A person with down sydrome is happy because they don't realize what troubles they actually have. A person without DS who realizes all his troubles but yet is still happy has a different standard of happiness. On one hand you have willing happiness and on the other you have automatic happiness.

Let me put it this way:

You have 2 people.
1 has DS and the other doesn't.
Both are happy.
The one with DS doesn't know why he's\she's happy.
The one without DS knows why he's\she's happy.

I don't know if that clearifies what I'm saying at all but that's all the work I'm putting into making a simple point.

[got tonkaed]

Well this is how neo and i read your point.....

You claim that 2 people are both happy and that happiness is something that is always the same.

Yet you make a distinction between their happiness...one person knows they are happy for a reason, one does not.

Two things cannot be seperate and at the same time equal to borrow from law philosophy.

Therefore, you cannot have a distinction and have an absolute as happiness....there is the rebuttal to your point.

[Gregrios]

lol i wasnt trying to be Dr. Phil.

i think if either one of us is looking a little to deep into that sequence it might be you.

Lets take a recap

you make a comment about avoiding womans wrath -obviously a joke
i say a comment about consistency of views - a half truth
You pounce on that claiming i am on your back - overly defensive
I clarify my statement in order to avoid confusion -pretty clear there
You come up with that statement - again overly defensive....

by my count thats 2 consecutive overly defensive statements....maybe you need to sit a few plays out?

That isn't defensive. You havn't seen defensive yet. I was actually trying quite hard to be CLEAR & SERIOUS. I guess it can come accross that way though. Don't worry about getting me upset. Not many poeple can do it. Let alone a stranger.

[Gregrios]

Well this is how neo and i read your point.....

You claim that 2 people are both happy and that happiness is something that is always the same.

Yet you make a distinction between their happiness...one person knows they are happy for a reason, one does not.

Two things cannot be seperate and at the same time equal to borrow from law philosophy.

Therefore, you cannot have a distinction and have an absolute as happiness....there is the rebuttal to your point.

See that's where your wrong. I'm making the distinction between the reasons for happiness and the overall feeling of being happy. That's all I'm saying. Two completely diiferent things that tie into each other.

[got tonkaed]

well thats the problem....your distinction invalidates your premise.

I understand where your coming from, i just dont think you see the result of the statement the way that you make it.

Allow me to use another example to explain why there is a difference.

Lets say for instance that two people take a test. One person studies, but cannot master the material and they fail the test. Another person is told to just pick whatever answers they would like, without ever being taught any of the information. They also fail the test.

Would you say the two cases are the exact same? Or because there is a key difference, one of them was just randomly incorrect whereas one could not understand the material, there is a differnce in the way they fail.

[Gregrios]

well thats the problem....your distinction invalidates your premise.

I understand where your coming from, i just dont think you see the result of the statement the way that you make it.

Allow me to use another example to explain why there is a difference.

Lets say for instance that two people take a test. One person studies, but cannot master the material and they fail the test. Another person is told to just pick whatever answers they would like, without ever being taught any of the information. They also fail the test.

Would you say the two cases are the exact same? Or because there is a key difference, one of them was just randomly incorrect whereas one could not understand the material, there is a differnce in the way they fail.

I would say they both used different ways to get the failing grade but both ended up failing regardless. They took different approaches and yet ended up in the same place. That is exactly what I'm saying about the DS topic.