Iceland Eliminates People with Down Syndrome

[esieffe]

I personally have zero issues with abortion, but while Down’s syndrome can be a burden, it’s not as if people with Down’s are unable to lead an independent life. That makes me slightly uneasy.

Part of the final solution?

 

[Shredderbeam]

Shredderbeam (emphasis mine):

It’s inescapable Shredderbeam. This IS a “person” you are alluding to here.

Slip of the tongue (or fingers). I didn’t mean a person in the sense that I usually refer to it, I meant a brain-dead human.

You also said (again emphasis mine) . . .

There’s reasons for this reaction Shredderbeam. Good reasons. Don’t fight your interior self trying to give you the truth about this issue.

The reason is that some things are disgusting. Have you ever seen animals being slaughtered for meat? It’s sickening. So is somebody vomiting, fecal material, the smell of rot, etc.

From what I can make of your argument, the only thing that puts it on one side of the fence or the other is your feelings. “Four fetal cells” (not an actual thing, but I know what you mean) is fine by you, because it doesn’t repulse you. 25 year old, not fine, because it does.

It’s somewhat about my feelings - my feelings regarding harming something with the capacity to feel pain.

You’ve admitted that there’s a logical consistency with positions like Singer’s: If abortion is morally permissible, then so is killing newborn babies or even children up to a certain point (hm, where is that exactly?) But many, many people find that repulsive. Still, some people think murder is perfectly permissible in any circumstance, if a person is viewed as a threat to some goal, or can be used as an end. So whose feelings get to count?

I’m not claiming that I have some new rule that should be enforced, only that I’m not bothered by abortions. Personally, I would draw a blurry line at the point that a being becomes conscious AND self-aware.

Isn’t there a logical consistency to those who say, “Yes, these four cells may not “look” human to you, but it is a unique individual, not the same as skin that sloughs off through the course of a day.” We know that many, many miraculous things are happening that the naked eye cannot see. Should I deny they exist because I don’t have access to high powered microscopes? That seems curiously anti-logic and anti-scientific inquiry.

In a biological sense, yes, they are a unique individual, but I hesitate to use the word “individual” because it has so many connotations to “person”. Strictly speaking, it’s correct, though.

Not to forget China and female fetuses.

As I said to a poster previously, I suggest that you not mention that to anybody who is even remotely connected to the Holocaust/any genocide.

 

[Rau]

Slip of the tongue (or fingers). I didn’t mean a person in the sense that I usually refer to it, I meant a brain-dead human.

You’ve used the word “person” throughout in a purely arbitrary way. What defines “person” for you is the reaching of a stage where to kill would be wrong.

We all moves through stages of life - from not a human, to a human, to dead. We can’t “define” those stages - they are predetermined in a fundamental way.

There is something unassailable about the observation that to kill our offspring (regardless of their age) is heinous.

 

[Shredderbeam]

You’ve used the word “person” throughout in a purely arbitrary way. What defines “person” for you is the reaching of a stage where to kill would be wrong.

I’m only human, I make mistakes.

When I specify “person”, I mean a being capable of subjective experience AND self-awareness. But, being bound by the English language, it’s easy to use the word “person” where I didn’t mean to.

We all moves through stages of life - from not a human, to a human, to dead. We can’t “define” those stages - they are predetermined in a fundamental way.

No, those stages are 100% defined by us. Nature doesn’t have hard definitions. We can alternatively define humanity by my previously mentioned definition.

There is something unassailable about the observation that to kill our offspring (regardless of their age) is heinous.

Lots of things are disgusting. Have you ever seen an animal slaughtered for food? Were you disgusted, and if so, are you a vegan?

 

[Rau]

I’m only human, I make mistakes.

When I specify “person”, I mean a being capable of subjective experience AND self-awareness. But, being bound by the English language, it’s easy to use the word “person” where I didn’t mean to.

That’s not my point. My point is your definition of “person”. That it is just so as to serve your purpose.

No, those stages are 100% defined by us. Nature doesn’t have hard definitions. We can alternatively define humanity by my previously mentioned definition.

That’s unscientific. Your offspring - another human - comes into existence at an identifiable point, not one that you can choose to define. Prior to conception, there is you and your wife. After conception, there are 3 human lives, one the offspring of the other 2. No arbitrary definition there. Simply reality. “Person”? You crafted a definition for that.

Lots of things are disgusting. Have you ever seen an animal slaughtered for food? Were you disgusted, and if so, are you a vegan?

The idea of ending an animal’s life is not objectively disgusting. The idea of killing my offspring - entirely different.

 

[Trishie]

I feel somewhat stunned at this report.
I’d not read this post previously, but all I can think of right now is that I have a sister and her husband who raised and homeschooled their biological five children, and then adopted a Downs syndrome baby, whom they’ve lovingly raised to adulthood with every opportunity they could give him, a prayerful happy young man. He prays every night for all the family. He’s an altar-boy. He manages a few hours of work each week. He enjoys dancing
My sister and her husband also adopted a very damaged baby boy, whose life has continued far beyond his prognosis. He has required various surgeries. He has limited understanding and communication, but does very well, and cheerfully. They’ve helped him to develop as much as is possible to him, and all the family treasure both boys.

One of my brothers and his wife raised three biological children, and then adopted three childen ovr a period of a few years: an older boy with mixed disabilities, a Down’s syndrome child, and a little girl who couldn’t speak, couldn’t eat except through a tube. They obtained whatever surgery helped her to progress. She still cannot speak, only click, but she also is happy, she seems intelligent, and she communicates through a kind of sign language.

These five children adopted thus belong in our family since infancy or early childhood.
Iceland would think my family crazy perhaps. Maybe lots of people would…but Iceland appears to be overlooking the true value of children/people who are different in some ways (and aren’t we all).
Knowing the love and value , and the appreciation that our family has for these children, I’m sad to know they are being eliminated in this way.

I’ve shared regarding my sibling’s families previously in CAF, because it fills me with wonder. Yes, to care for 'handicapped children, to assist their individual development is a huge daily commitment, but the blessings in the children’s lives, and in their family’s lives is incalculable.

 

[superblue]

very old story, and a very sad one, they used abortion to eradicate down syndrome, disgusting any way you look at it, and im not sure if there is a human rights suit pending against or not on ole iceland there.

What makes this even more sick is consider this, Hitler tried to forefully extermenate an entire race and was wanting his own version of how the human race should look.

Iceland managed to pull off something that is on the same scale with out anyone blinking an eye or even tried to stop. An did it with out force of a military.

 

[Benadam]

Exactly.

This is euthanasia just as much as abortion.

 

[Rau]

Iceland managed to pull off something that is on the same scale with out anyone blinking an eye or even tried to stop. An did it with out force of a military.

Yes, because the care-givers of the defenceless chose to withdraw their care and become their exterminators.

 

[josh987654321]

Perhaps even more frightening is that many think this is “progress”.

Clinton and her ilk call it a ‘human right’. Sickening really to think how close she came to being President and the votes she got.

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[spiritualsoldier]

Jesus said, “whatever you did to the least of your brethren, you did unto me.” (Matthew 26:40)

Would you consider those diagnosed prenatally with diseases to be among the least of your brethren?