Posted on 12/23/2007 1:20:17 PM PST by FreedomCalls
Why not pass a law that all IV children must be given a chance to live? Limit the number of embryos to be implanted. After a period of time, adopt out those that were not wanted. No more killing babies, no more mega multi pregnancies and they all get an opportunity to survive whether male/female, healthy or handicapped. If a baby is not wanted because it can hear then a “normal lifestyle” family could adopt her.
Being partly disabled, I’d never, EVER wish such a condition on anyone, much less my own flesh and blood.
If these parents want to “choose” such a state for their children, then let it be their choice to foot the bill for the advanced care and education required over the kid’s lifetime — it’s a much easier “choice” if you know someone else will be taking care of things...
HIV parents should also select children with HIV.
Who really wants a healthy child anyways?
Unacceptable.
On the other side though, a child should not be discarded because of a disability. I would not want to see parents told that they will be denied any assistance if they don’t abort a child that is mentally or physically challenged.
No joke. Rabid deaf activists even think the implant procedure that allows people to hear is some sort of cultural genocide. On a personal not I once worked for a state rehab agency. We had a client who at one time was a nurse. She got the implant (We did not pay for that, by the way) I helped her purchase a stethascobe that she could use in conjuction with her implant. You would not believe what something like that costs. But she is once again working. And paying taxes.
Now for my funniest “deaf, but not really” story. Guy came in the office one day. Asked him what he needed. He writes on a pad “Need to see a counselor”. I did not need to write ‘cause he appeared able to read lips. I set him up to see our counselor who specialized in deaf & hearing impaired. Meeting over, the guy leaves. Counselor calls me into his office. “Interesting guy” says he. “How so” says I. “He’s not deaf” says he. “What! Then what was with the pad?” says I. “He only speaks when he can do so in bible verse” says he. “Going to make him a client?” says I. “Yep” says he. “Pysch eval first?” says I. “Oh yeah” says he.
embryo screening to choose deaf embryo = wrong, wrong
choose embryos that will be like them, sharing the same characteristics, language and culture = imaginary and wrong wrong
Oh, here we go!
You can’t give breeding couples the right to CHOOSE a handicapped baby without giving them the right to reject one as well.
What’s real interesting is what individuals consider ‘handicapped’. Eventually, the choice to dispose of a baby who will be homosexual -because they simply don’t want one, and it won’t ‘fit’ the family- WILL arrive. Then what? Can they then go back to redefine the parameters of parents’ ‘choice’ because discriminating like that is politically incorrect?
Who wants to bet that that is when all the enlightened liberals who support this insanity scream STOP?
Anyone who would want their child impaired or handicapped in any way is sick!
What happened to research to eliminate birth defects and such? PREFERRING an impaired child? Why don’t people like this adopt one- Lord knows there are many who can’t find homes because they are handicapped.
Wonder if the same MP would allow it if I wanted to screen my embryo’s for a sodomy gene. Wonder how far I would get...Oh yes, now I remember that has already been denounced by those same liberal democRATS
Bingo. How much is a deaf baby worth in the UK these days?
It is not narcissism, it is a cloistered social culture, one that is almost rabidly liberal. My wife was enrolled in the Deaf Education Program of a well known university that operated in conjunction with a “school for the deaf” until she was able to fully understand what social dynamics were involved. When she realized that to become fully qualified to teach in this culture she would have to become immersed in it, she found the idea so repugnant that she quit the course.
“Deaf advocates” want to think they can set up and sustain a separate society where “deafness” is not considered a “handicap”. Indeed, at the time my wife was enrolled, there was some debate if a deaf person should take advantage of any medical technology to restore their hearing.
I can see where this all leads, that deaf people are to some extent cut off from everyone else and if they are able to have their own society, they are free to develop their own morality and social rules, which appeared to be exactly the case. This is so sad, for any deaf person with strong moral values will find themselves doubly isolated from the rest of humanity on a social level.
Explains it all.
How very Muslim of them.
WHAT ..??
Then why have many organizations spent years and years forcing the disabled child INTO THE NORMAL SCHOOL ROOM ..??
These liberals really are loons.
My liberal spouse taught special education for many years. Children in various degrees being handicapped. Now the new phrase is "challenged"-I appraised her of this post, waiting to hear a feel good answer.
"Ridiculous", she said. The child will have to have specialized education. This will cost society more resource money in education . In spite of all the platitudes, their ability to secure decent employment will be hampered. Their interaction with the general population will be reduced, my spouse went on . "Selfish, selfish and selfish" she said.
We finally agree. As for me, I repeat that it is "me, me and more me".
Is that brimstone I smell?
Merry Christmas! Thanks, bfl
Right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.