Ohio to ban abortion if baby has downs syndrome

[PACOX]

Whoever proposed the bill is retarded, why in the hell would it abortion suddenly been seen criminal if the baby tested for Downs Syndrome opposed to the baby being normal? Hell the bill is almost offensive.

"You have the right to choose except when you might actually choose to abort". GTFO of here with that nonsense. Take the bill to SCOTUS already and be done with it.

[Notshauna]

Even if the fetus is unborn, it still has potential of life. Ending that potential for life is murder in my books.

Umm, I hate to break it to you but you should have a basic understanding of reproduction at your age but, that vast majority of "potential" life is lost. For example as a male you produce an extreme excess of sperm, most of which is lost even without masturbation and for females every period is a lost ovum and is a permanent loss of potential life.

[Twix]

What about the millions of miscarriages that happen every year at no fault of the woman? Should we charge them with manslaughter? Should we be coming up with a solution to prevent as many miscarriages as possible?

Abortion is a choice, miscarriage is not. If you can't understand that then you must not be very intelligent.

[PACOX]

I guess the state of Ohio really wants the financial burden of helping families assist with children who have such developmental disorders.

The kid would get SSI but theres a whole lot to be said about that. For one, many people with Down Syndrome are very capable and able to work, but realistically their earning potential might be capped. They can work and be independent but half their SSI cut to were working and SSI arent enough or they could forgo some of the independence they are capable of for more SSI but forced into a lifestyle they dont want.

[Keltas]

So you are saying it is okay to kill people that could potentially become drains on society and/or criminals? Why not just kill all the current people who are drains on society or kill all criminals? I still prefer to let them live and choose what they want to do with their lives. A lot of successful people were adopted too so I think it's unfair to paint adopted kids as drains on society or criminals.

I'm not saying they all are, but a lot of them are, and again it's a trade off. Are a few successful people worth the cost of many unsuccessful ones?

And really, if we didn't have morality in the way, killing people who are already (not potentially as you put it) drains on society would actually be positive for everyone else yes. Obviously we shouldn't because that's fucked up, but logically it's definitely the better way to go about it. This is speaking with myself in mind too, knowing full well I'd be on that list because I'm like 70% blind and can't go outside during the day.

I'm asking why feelings should get in the way of something that logically would be a major benefit to society, when the other side is we lose a massive amount of resources that go to them, and most of them lead what I can only assume are miserable lives in exchange.

[Twix]

Why is your example potential life but sperm isn't potential life? What qualifies as potential life? It's not my fault you suck at formulating an actual argument that holds up to scrutiny.

Can a sperm become a human on its own? Nope. You suck at understanding basic biology.

[Belize]

Can a sperm become a human on its own? Nope. You suck at understanding basic biology.

Can a fetus become a human on its own?

Just wondering.

[Twix]

do you not understand what the word 'potential' means or...?

Sperm on its own has 0 potential to become a living human. His example is bad.

[Freighter]

That seems pretty stupid. Should be mandatory to get an abortion if there are severe defects.

[Twix]

Can a fetus become a human on its own?

Just wondering.

Of course not, it needs the mother to survive. Just like a baby needs the mother after he/she is born. You think a baby would survive on its own if no one took care of it?

[Spicymemer]

Abortion is morally wrong, anyone who disagrees is probably an insidiously radical left wing sycophant.
Its also morally wrong to bring a child into the world where there is little to no financial or social security.
And while not morally wrong, its objectively a bad decision to bring someone with a mental illness into the world, especially if their parents are not incredibly rich in both finances and dedication.

Using mmo-c userbase as a baseline, a lot of parents failed to asses the third point i made.

[Skizzit]

That is one of the dumbest bills I have read in a long time. Abortion to save a child from a potential life of suffering is one of the arguments for abortion. The idea that it would be legal to abort when the mother just chooses she does not want a child, but illegal when the child has a major genetic defect is just ludicrous.

[Mistame]

This is utterly . Birth defects are exactly the reason people should have abortions.

Of course not, it needs the mother to survive. Just like a baby needs the mother after he/she is born. You think a baby would survive on its own if no one took care of it?

Your entire argument is so much drivel. A fetus requires the body of the mother to survive. An infant does not. Also, your arguments about "murder", "rights", etc, are all fallacious. Person-hood begins at birth.

[Collegeguy]

Just go to the next state.

[Klingers]

I can never support late term abortions, but are we just talking about first trimester fetuses here?

If we are, I have never, never understood the problem with soft eugenics. Removing a genetically damaged cluster of cells isn't the same thing as a death camp. Why is pre-selecting for intelligence, athleticism and freedom from serious health conditions a bad thing? Aren't you doing your best as a future parent to give your potential future human the best possible start in life?

[tankbug]

No, it's not. You shouldn't have the right to kill life just because it's flawed.


Aborting because you don't want a kid is one thing. Aborting because you don't want a boy/girl/kid with disabilities is another thing entirely.

I don't think they're that different. "I don't want a kid, because I'm not ready to be a parent, and my life and the life of the kid will be ruined" is similar to "I don't want this kid, because I'm not ready to sacrifice everything else in my life on a person that will never live a full life, and be totally helpless if they outlive me.
Personally, I don't really care what the reason is as long as the little parasitic lump inside you is little more than goldfish. Parents who go through with the pregnancy just because they want to prove to the world that they're strong enough to parent a kid with Downs piss me off, though. It's very selfish. The kid will suffer eventually, and will never contribute to society.

[Kithelle]

No, it's not. You shouldn't have the right to kill life just because it's flawed.


Aborting because you don't want a kid is one thing. Aborting because you don't want a boy/girl/kid with disabilities is another thing entirely.

Honestly, I think aborting because a child will have a troubled future is a better reason to abort than just because someone doesn't want to swallow a pill, put on a rubber, or roll the dice and lost because they wanted a good time and can't deal with the consequences.

[pateuvasiliu]

Ok, but why do we let feelings in a single instant for a single life get in the way of society and progress as a whole so much then? Baby hitler is a horrible example because it's not an off-chance, it's straight up he WILL do wrong, and you being able to stop that shouldn't be stopped because you feel bad. Sometimes your personal feelings should be taken out of the equation so everyone can benefit.

Also, a lot of them don't really outright choose "yeah I'm gonna go be a criminal or drain society of resources by living off social systems" and more fall into that because they grew up unloved in an orphanage, get thrown into the world bitter, resentful, poor, and lost, and have nowhere else to turn.

By your logic it's okay for me to go kill Bill Gates, take his money and donate to hobos since the many >>> just one.

Also, a lot of them don't really outright choose "yeah I'm gonna go be a criminal or drain society of resources by living off social systems" and more fall into that because they grew up unloved in an orphanage, get thrown into the world bitter, resentful, poor, and lost, and have nowhere else to turn

A lot doesn't mean all. Better for 99 guilty people to walk away than for 100 people, out of which 1 is innocent, to be convicted.

You don't get to wave away someone's right to life just because statistics tell you their life will be shitty. It should be their choice.

- - - Updated - - -

Don't use logic, reason or facts. people that are 'pro-life' don't care about that. The only reason is to spite others and to feel that they have power over other people in some way or form, there is only malicious intent in these people. Whatever reason they use is nothing but a poor excuse.

Yeah, wanting to protect life makes you malicious.

How smart.

[Najnaj]

Even if the fetus is unborn, it still has potential of life. Ending that potential for life is murder in my books.

Then your book is what we commonly refer to as wrong. Words have meanings and you can not just ignore that. Not having sex during ovulation is also stopping a potential life. Is that murder too? Masturbation...murder?

Murder means the unlawful killing of one human by another.

[Collegeguy]

I wouldn't consider not wanting a downs kid eugenics.

People just don't want to live with that level of crazy.