[Zhang Fei]

[The problem
With that reasoning is that at any moment, any of us could become inconvenient to be cared for. Strokes, car accidents, falls, tumors, the list goes on.

You cannot state the value of life based on the ability to produce for another’s comfort.]

---

When you condemn someone to becoming the next to last of his line, that will have electoral consequences, and quite appropriately so. Unless the state is willing to pick up the cost in its entirety, it has no business mandating that children with birth defects be brought to term. And yes, trisomy is a birth defect.

[Svartalfiar]

Unless the state is willing to pick up the cost in its entirety, it has no business mandating that children with birth defects be brought to term. And yes, trisomy is a birth defect.

So how is a baby with a potential birth defect any different from the homeless guy on the corner? The guy who gets in a permanently debilitating accident? The ten-year-old who's perfectly normal but mom and dad are druggies and can't provide?

[Billie Bud]

You miss the point. You seem focused only what a human life can bring to the table based upon an outlook present at birth.

However, human life has no guarantees of developmental productivity. A successful 35 year old surgeon could become completely unable to care for himself or herself through a stroke, car accident, or major illness. What about that life? Since that person is no linger able to be productive in the ways that others benefit, does that life get annihilated as well?

You seem to only value a life based on what you can get out of him or her.