Petition Against Screening For Autistic Embryos!!

Post Reply New Topic

I see your point, but look at the bigger picture. Validating abortion for autism would make the rest of us auties even bigger freaks of nature. We'd be like those many-limbed people they make documentaries about on Five. Do you really want that for our kind? Do you?

Abu_Zarqawi, you are wrong. Think about it: if we start aborting babies because of autism then it will spread to everything until it becomes like a real life Gattaca, and that is not ideal at all. Would you like to have a race of robots or a race of individuals? A world with only NTs would suck anyway, who will make all the technology? And do all the science? And mathematics? Autistic people, Aspies at least anyway, are far better in these areas than NTs.

I've signed the petition about three weeks, ago. I know where I stand on this issue, and there isn't anybody who can make me change my mind.

I want to make sure that womens right to terminate their pregnancy is protected. an unavoidable consequence of protecting that right will be that, as screening technology advances, some women will choose to abort babies for seemingly superficial reasons, such as autism, downs syndrome, serious physical deformities or debilitating diseases. it sucks, but thats the way the cookie's gonna crumble. and in practice i see very little you can do about it except trying to raise awareness about such conditions and make people realize having such a child, taxing and exhausting as it might be, will still be just as rewarding as having a normal child.

as for "our kind", my kind is humankind and i put the interests of humankind far above those of some minority group(even if im part of that group).
its possible but unlikely. many people choose to have children that have been screened with very serious conditions. the idea that humanity as a whole is so cynical as to descend to a gattaca-like society the moment someone spends a penny on researching screening technology is a bit misanthropic. besides, however inflated your sense of importance is, the world would do just fine with people with as.

The point remains that if they stop the research into letting this become a possibility, it won't be a problem.

Indeed.

so we can screen for everything but autism? if you wanna abort your baby because gonna be brownhaired or because its gonna have a low iq its a-ok, but if its autistic you gotta keep it. oh, you're poor, work three jobs, and dont have the time or money to care for a child with special needs? well sucks to be you then i guess. cant abort an autistic baby thats genocide you know

She never said that.

no she didnt, but if you say "abortion isnt wrong unless its done for this specific reason" you have to give some criteria as to why that reason is wrong and others arent. if you dont its just a statement and not an argument.

She meant (I know because I'm her friend) that screening for diseases is wrong but if the mother has been raped or something then that is a valid reason to abort the baby.

I am basically pro-choice, but I just don´t like the idea of humans "playing God". For this reason, I don´t like the idea of this type of screening in general. Besides, where would it stop? People could decide to abort their babies for other reasons too, like they have blue eyes, are female or are left-handed. Humans make all kinds of judgments in the world about what´s "better", and when people mess with these things the world becomes unbalanced. The Greeks called this "hubris" (egoistic pride), and it always backfires, in the end! I believe things happen for a reason. The world is diverse because it´s better that way. People just shouldn´t be messing with these things. Well, that´s my opinion.

what if its an extremely debilitating disease that will be fatal within a few years of birth and cause suffering and anguish to the baby? and what if the parents or parent are poor and cant pay for adequate medical treatment, let alone spend enough time with their child to give enough support and intimacy? in a world where the overwhelming majority live on like 1 dollar a day and billions dont have access to doctors or medicine, this is far from an unlikely scenario.

in that scenario, you would still just boil it down such a simple and black-and-white statement like "screening for diseases is wrong"?

in that case f**k off you heartless priviliged b***h

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm

Give me a G! give me an E! Give me an N!... ... Genocide!

Screening for diseases is not "wrong". Autism however is not a disease. I also think it is kind of cruel to prevent the birth of a kid just for 'any' disease. If the disease is actually a major issue or is deadly, then let the parents choose. But if you want more than that, refer to Gattaca.

If it's fatal then it would be OK (this is my opinion, not Gina's, although she might agree, not sure), especially if the parents live on a dollar a day.

I already said that if the parents had a major problem with the situation aborition should be allowed, and that would come under that category.

No need to swear at me, now, is there?

dont you see the problem here? its impossible, especially as screening technology advances, to categorize some reasons for abortion as legal and some as illegal, given that the choice is made by the mother and not forced on her. there is no black and white here, the entire issue of abortion is just one huge grey area. trying to separate immoral abortions from moral ones is a pointless exercise and will without fail be exploited by pro-life groups to encroach upon a womans right to choose.

its pretty terrible that women with the economic and emotional ability to care for an autistic child would choose to abort the baby for conveniences sake, im not denying that, but the way to prevent that is by making sure that people in our society are properly informed about what autism is, not by legislating poorly-thought out laws that play right into the hands of fundamentalist religious groups other assorted a**holes.

please think about this. in the end, what is more important: protecting the right to choose or preventing a few frivolous abortions(tragic as that may be)?
the UN definition of genocide is the systematic killing of a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. autistic people hardly fall within any of those categories.

as for this whole gattaca argument, there is absolutely no indication that screening for autism in embryos would lead to such a society. seriously. there isnt. it'd be hilarious if anyone could provide any proof to the contrary, but i doubt it. until then, referencing gattaca and frivolously using words like genocide just hurts your argument

From your logic, though, what's to stop it going further until eventually people are aborting babies because of hair colour etc. then having them all perfect just like Gattaca???