The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Printable View

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

09-12-2008, 20:33
Strike For The South

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fragony

Funny, that is how I think about the muslims in europe.

Can somebody educate me on that suituation? There such a small % of the POP. I dont get it!
09-12-2008, 20:38
Big_John

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Can somebody educate me on that suituation? There such a small % of the POP. I dont get it!

link
09-12-2008, 20:41
Strike For The South

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big_John

link

thank you
09-12-2008, 21:00
Fragony

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

My only point is in my sig really.

hmmm I can see how this didn't quite work seemed like a good idea at the time. Scuzi for muslim remark was meant comical. We are doing just fine by the way, other countries can learn from us the debate is extremily harsh compared to our neighbours politically correct wishthinking, we are going to be just fine.
09-12-2008, 21:35
rvg

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Bollox
The detection and diagnosis is not absolute .

However since Lars is unable (or unwilling) to answer the question I put I may has well say that the level to which the presense of the disorder will affect the individual is not determinable until after the birth , often several years afer the birth .

Bull. The condition is known right around 5th month of pregnancy. The diagnosis is absolute, and there are no degrees of down's syndrome. You either have it, or you don't.
09-13-2008, 00:03
Big_John

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by rvg

there are no degrees of down's syndrome. You either have it, or you don't.

i believe his point is that the level of function of people with down syndrome is highly variable.
09-13-2008, 02:31
Tribesman

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Bull. The condition is known right around 5th month of pregnancy. The diagnosis is absolute, and there are no degrees of down's syndrome. You either have it, or you don't.

Really , then you won't mind naming the pre-natal process that gives your imaginary 100% accurate diagnosis then will you :yes:

As for the second part of that post John said enough already , and what was written was perfectly clear
09-13-2008, 03:11
m52nickerson

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironside

Yes, it's elimination, but of what? Induviduals? Yes... and no.
Genes? Yes... but that's evolution in a nutshell and by the time we can change the genes on this level, we're already creating new evolutionary conditions.

That's easy, homocide is the killing of an induvidual. Of course, then the following question is; What's an induvidual?
Ok, ok, legally it's the killing of a body, but that's also bizzare in the grey zones

I'm still waiting for an answer for the questions BTW...
But if you really can't answer it, then you can wait until we're old and gray and it's reality and not some forum speculation. But on the other hand you won't have thought through your own opinion on abortion until you atleast tried to answer them.

The best definition of an individual would be - existing as a distinct entity. Since a fetus is dependent on its mother, and only its for life, it would not be an individual. In other word until the fetus can survive out side of the womb it is not an individual.
09-13-2008, 04:02
rvg

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Really , then you won't mind naming the pre-natal process that gives your imaginary 100% accurate diagnosis then will you :yes:

As for the second part of that post John said enough already , and what was written was perfectly clear

Much to learn you still have, padawan... get a clue you must.

"Amniocentesis
This procedure is used to collect amniotic fluid, the liquid that is in the womb. It's performed in the doctor's office or in the hospital on an "out-patient" basis. A needle is inserted through the mother's abdominal wall into the uterus, using ultrasound to guide the needle. Approximately one ounce of fluid is taken for testing. This fluid contains fetal cells that can be examined for chromosome tests. It takes about 2 weeks to determine if the fetus has Down syndrome or not.

Amniocentesis is usually carried out between the 14th and 18th week of pregnancy; some doctors may do them as early as the 13th week. Side effects to the mother include cramping, bleeding, infection and leaking of amniotic fluid afterwards. There is a slight increase in the risk of miscarriage: the normal rate of miscarriage at this time of pregnancy is 2 to 3%, and amniocentesis increases that risk by an additional 1/2 to 1%. Amniocentesis is not recommended before the 14th week of pregnancy due to a higher risk of complications and loss of pregnancy.

Which mothers should have an amniocentesis? The current recommendations by professional obstetric groups is that women with a risk of having a child with Down syndrome of 1 in 250 or greater should be offered amniocentesis. There is controversy over whether to use the risk at the time of screening or the predicted risk at the time of birth. (The risk at the time of screening is higher since many fetuses with Down syndrome abort spontaneously around the time of screening or afterwards."
09-13-2008, 10:34
rory_20_uk

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

"Slight increase in risk of miscarriage"

Hardly something for all is it?

A risk of 1 in 500 would be considered minor, but if the odds of having the down's in the first place is only 1:250 it's not that different.

Going the other way and testing all, you'll cause thousands of miscarriages a year to ensure that there are no down's babies.

So, first off you're saying it's absolutely known, then if the odds ratio are worse than 1:250 they test you?

~:smoking:
09-13-2008, 10:44
AlexanderSextus

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

I dont know if this was posted before in this thread, but how is abortion bad if the foetus is aborted before there is any actual brain activity in the foetus??? I.e. How can you kill something if it's not alive??? Simply put, the bible says Life begins at conception, scientists have already scanned a Foetus and figured out that the brain is not active, until a certain point in time, so ergo life DOES NOT begin at the moment of conception. The bible is wrong, (YEAH I SAID IT! WHAT!!!) and abortion is okay. If you abort a foetus that has brain activity, that is murder.

oh, and i dont agree with "eugenic abortion" I was born with Cerebral Palsy, myself. I have a cousin with Downs Syndrome. Hes pretty cool. He even has a SMOKIN girlfriend.
09-13-2008, 11:01
Tribesman

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Much to learn you still have, padawan... get a clue you must.

It is you who are without a clue as that process does not have a 100% detection rate .
09-13-2008, 15:35
rvg

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

It is you who are without a clue as that process does not have a 100% detection rate .

Get a clue you must...

"The syndrome is caused by the duplication of one member of chromosome pair 21, a condition called trisomy 21. It can be verified with 100% accuracy by two prenatal tests: chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis. Both procedures require removing cells from the fetus for testing and entail a small risk of producing a spontaneous abortion. Screening tests are used to identify high-risk pregnancies, minimizing the number who undergo the more invasive tests."
09-13-2008, 15:46
woad&fangs

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

Simply put, the bible says Life begins at conception, scientists have already scanned a Foetus and figured out that the brain is not active, until a certain point in time, so ergo life DOES NOT begin at the moment of conception. The bible is wrong, (YEAH I SAID IT! WHAT!!!)

Actually, the bible never mentions abortion and too my knowledge it never states when "life" begins in the womb.

Also, I fully support abortion for any reason whatsoever up through the 11th week. By the 12th week of gestation measurable brain activity appears.
09-13-2008, 16:09
Tribesman

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

"The syndrome is caused by the duplication of one member of chromosome pair 21, a condition called trisomy 21. It can be verified with 100% accuracy by two prenatal tests

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Thats rather lazy Rvg .
The result is not 100% accurate it is 99.4% accurate for the test you named and 97.4% using the Chorionic villus test , not counting Chorionic villus tests that did not give unambigous results which had to be followed with amniocentisis tests (which is curious since your claim of The diagnosis is absolutedoesn't quite fit with the words not unambigous does it).
Now it is possible to find papers of studies that give a higher accuracy in their research for the amniocentis method , as high as 98.8 even , but not the magic elusive 100% you claim . And it is also possible to find studies that give much lower accuracy for both tests .
You really need to get a clue before you try and come up with the 100% nonsense:yes:

BTW with that CV test what are the test results of normal healthy fetus being terminated due to the actual proceedure ? Does it vary from 3% if it is done right first time to over 10 % if repeated attempts are required ?
09-13-2008, 16:57
Andres

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesdachi

If someone feels so passionately about “life” then they should encourage people struggling with the decision by supporting them and offering to be there for them. It is too easy to arm-chair quarterback the decision while not taking any responsibility for the decision you have forced someone to make.

If YOU want someone to have their defect baby then YOU should offer to be there to help them raise that baby, if YOU are not going to be there then YOU don’t have any say in the decision.

Well said yesdachi :bow:

But, I have a question.

If abortion is allowed, do you think the taxpayers should support the parents of a disabled child and offer to be there for them?

After all, the parents had the "free choice" of keeping or not keeping the child, so if they chose to keep the child, should they have to face the consequences of their "free choice" and take care of the disabled child themselves, without any support from the state/the taxpayers?

I'm not trying to put words in yesdachi's mouth, but this is just a question that came up in my mind when reading his post :bow:

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoreTore

As always, I side with the humans. And since I don't consider a fetus a human in any way or form, this is a non-issue for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by woad&fangs

So therefore, it is not the bible that is wrong, but the people who think a brainless clump of cells with a 25% miscarrage rate is a "human life" who are wrong.

Also, I fully support abortion for any reason whatsoever up through the 11th week. By the 12th week of gestation measurable brain activity appears. At this point I consider the fetus to be human.

To determine whether a "clump of cells" is human life or not, is not exact science.

Imagine going to the gynecologist with your pregnant wife for an echography after 8 weeks of pregnance, only to see a dead little thingy where there should have been a heartbeat visible or, even better, watch the heartbeat of your child after six weeks of pregnancy, come back two weeks later and see that the heartbeat has disappeared...

Millions of people have to go through the experience of a miscarriage in an early state of pregnancy and I can tell you that losing "a brainless clump of cells" is devastating. You won't find many of those people agreeing with your statements about "clump of cells" or "non-issues".

I certainly don't.

Calling a fetus "non human" or a "clump of cells" is very distasteful and disrespectful imho.
09-13-2008, 17:10
Fragony

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Zeg je nu, niet bij jou hoop ik?
09-13-2008, 18:58
Banquo's Ghost

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fragony

Zeg je nu, niet bij jou hoop ik?

English only in the Backroom please. When I ban your sorry :daisy: for a thousand generations, it looks better to the boss when I know what for.

http://smileys.sur-la-toile.com/repo...9mons/0020.gif
09-13-2008, 19:05
rory_20_uk

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Re: ultrasound scans where the heartbeat is not there...

A scan is done on a woman. No heart beat is seen patient opts to have products of conception removed. Post procedure she has a followup scan to see if they got it all... At this point a heartbeat is seen.

The second ultrasound was done by a midwife who kicked it up the chain of seniority as fast as she could (collared the first doctor she found - me). I did the same and took it to the first consultant I found. He sat there in silence looking at one report, then the other. Surely similar names or something else has happened??!?

Finally he goes to talk to the relatives. They go away smiling. Neither I nor the midwife wanted to know what had been said. Probably something like the logic: baby was dead, we did a procedure, and now it's alive! Modern medicine is great, eh?

Taxpayers fork out for known disabled? I'd say no.

I would also say that at risk women would be less likely to want to know in case they then get lumbered with a bill for the rest of their life.

~:smoking:
09-13-2008, 19:16
Fragony

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

sorry BG :bow:
09-13-2008, 19:33
Louis VI the Fat

Re : Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

English only in the Backroom please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frag

sorry BG :bow:

Imperialism, I cry!!

This is a Dutch-based site. What gives the Anglosaxons the right to proclaim their language the sole mode of communication? :whip:

It's fine with me that milk-drinking surrender monkeys like Fragony give in, but I demand equal recognition of French or I am out!

Clearly, the Backroom does not work if we all post in different languages. I understand the practical impossibilities of that. Hence, I suggest as a compromise that we limit as official languages of the Backroom English and French.

:drama2:
09-13-2008, 19:57
Big_John

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andres

To determine whether a "clump of cells" is human life or not, is not exact science.

few things are.

abortion is a philosophical question for most people, not a solely scientific judgment. the philosophical question of import is:

when does the fetus become a person deserving of personal rights that supersede the mother's rights of personal determination over her own life and body? science can be used to help you come to an answer to that question, but it can never be an 'exact science'.
09-13-2008, 20:14
Fragony

Re: Re : Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Imilk-drinking surrender monkeys like Fragony give in

Someone is just begging for a post-natal :beam:
09-14-2008, 00:08
AlexanderSextus

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big_John

few things are.

abortion is a philosophical question for most people, not a solely scientific judgment. the philosophical question of import is:

when does the fetus become a person deserving of personal rights that supersede the mother's rights of personal determination over her own life and body? science can be used to help you come to an answer to that question, but it can never be an 'exact science'.

The fetus becomes a person with individual rights as soon as we see that the fetus' brain is active and it is therefore, alive.

Oh, and W&F, i didnt say that the bible mentions abortion, but the Pro-Lifers say that life begins at conception and they use the bible as their justification for that statement. We have scientifically proven that false.
09-14-2008, 00:27
Rhyfelwyr

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

Oh, and W&F, i didnt say that the bible mentions abortion, but the Pro-Lifers say that life begins at conception and they use the bible as their justification for that statement. We have scientifically proven that false.

You have scientifically proven that unborn foetuses have no soul? Wow...

Also where was a human soul ever scientifically proven to exist in an adult?
09-14-2008, 10:24
rory_20_uk

Re: Re : Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Imperialism, I cry!!

This is a Dutch-based site. What gives the Anglosaxons the right to proclaim their language the sole mode of communication? :whip:

It's fine with me that milk-drinking surrender monkeys like Fragony give in, but I demand equal recognition of French or I am out!

Clearly, the Backroom does not work if we all post in different languages. I understand the practical impossibilities of that. Hence, I suggest as a compromise that we limit as official languages of the Backroom English and French.

Thinking such as this landed us with the EU and the 20+ languages that can be spoken. Again, oddly instead of decreasing the number with time to aid efficiency, they're increasing.

Life and soul is not necessarily the same thing.

~:smoking:
09-14-2008, 20:41
m52nickerson

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

The fetus becomes a person with individual rights as soon as we see that the fetus' brain is active and it is therefore, alive.

Oh, and W&F, i didnt say that the bible mentions abortion, but the Pro-Lifers say that life begins at conception and they use the bible as their justification for that statement. We have scientifically proven that false.

Does that mean someone who has not brain activity not alive?

Again, if you are speaking in scientific terms life "continues" at conception.

Now life is all around in different forms. We kill animals for food every day and they mean very little to anyone. Now if one of those animals is someones pet, that animals life now means something more. Same goes for a fetus. If it is not wanted is does not have the same value as a fetus that is wanted.
09-14-2008, 21:19
Evil_Maniac From Mars

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by m52nickerson

If it is not wanted is does not have the same value as a fetus that is wanted.

I beg to differ. That fetus still has the opportunity of growing up and living a full life, and therefore has value. If the parents don't want it, give it to an adoption agency, where there are many foster parents who will love and cherish an adopted child as their own.
09-14-2008, 22:25
Craterus

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

You have scientifically proven that unborn foetuses have no soul? Wow...

Also where was a human soul ever scientifically proven to exist in an adult?

If the issue is with souls then abortion isn't the issue. A soul lives on, does it not?

I have absolutely no problem with abortion to begin with, even less so if the child will (probably) be born with a defect.
09-14-2008, 22:34
Divinus Arma

Re: The Eugenic Annihilation of Children with Down's Syndrome

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Just to chime in here- I think in vitro fertilization is morally wrong for more or less the reasons you give. They fertilize a bunch of eggs, use a few and discard the rest.

Agreed.

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page