[plusone]

Antipathy? Just the opposite. If the baby is diabled (from new info, it seems that it may not be), I have nothing but sympathy. That is why I would hate to see a sick child born to a lifetime of suffering.

[Scothia]

That is why I would hate to see a sick child born to a lifetime of suffering.

So now you get to say whose life is worth living, and none but the perfect need apply?

What about children whose disablity comes upon them after birth? Take 'em out back and put 'em out of their (our) misery?

[hocndoc]

How sick is too sick to be protected from intentional killing by a third party or the State even when the child is no danger to the life of anyone else?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/919843/posts

Your comments about the uterus expelling an unhealthy child is not exactly correct. Miscarriages happen when the child dies or is so ill that he or she ceases to function.

On the other hand, we do interfere if there are premature contractions (i.e., the womb is trying to expell the child) but no death of the child or immediate danger to the mother.

[Scothia]

That is why I would hate to see a sick child born to a lifetime of suffering.

Been published before, but bears repeating:

Case history: A woman with chronic tuberculosis is pregnant. Her husband has syphilis. Of their three children, one is blind, another deaf, and the other suffers tuberculosis. Yet another child died in infancy. This child is at high risk for physical defects, will most likely have mental illness and eventually will go competely deaf.

Do you recommend abortion?

Congratulations, you've just killed Beethoven.