As an expectant father, on one hand I agree with you but what if the parents disagree?
Then what?
That is a problem. But that problem was manufactured when the Feminazis turned abortion into a “woman’s” right to choose.
Twenty years ago I was arguing the the fact that Roe V Wade is an unconstitutional decision because it gives one group of people (women) a “constitutional right” based upon their group and thus denies that right to others based upon their group.
By their argument, everyone should have a right to “abort” what is nothing more than a “viable tissue mass.” And that means if a guy knocks a woman up, he should have the right to choose to have the child aborted.
Of course, they are both stupid and immoral arguments. The only defense a woman has in this decision is if her life is in impending jeopardy based upon the pregnancy or the continuation of the pregnancy.
Outside of that, what this article is discussing is women choosing to kill an unborn child because they or someone else deems that child “imperfect.” What’s next, aborting because of gender? Because of a club foot (easily fixed now yet women in England are aborting babies because of this)? Or because the child has Down’s Syndrome?
I don’t think the man or woman has a right to choose to abort a child based upon the probability that the child will die in X number of days. If that were a valid argument, that would justify aborting every child, because no one knows what is going to happen after delivery.
It is moss-covered rocks like this that start the slippery slope to eugenics, as demented a belief system as there ever was. If you doubt me, read G.K. Chesterton’s “Eugenics and Other Evils.” That book, with the appendix of many of the papers issued in the first half of the 20th century in support of eugenics paints that debate in the exact diabolical and evil light that it tries to hide with pretty colors.