Weepy, heart-warming article here. But that’s not the point. The point is, people should get to choose whether their “potential” child becomes a real child. Deciding to have sex should not be the same thing as deciding to raise a child with Down’s Syndrome.
-
Recent Posts
- Our health care system is broken, part 3758373
- If a bad person believes something, it must be false!
- Word Munger 8 years in: What’s the use of blogging?
- Why “What if I’d never been born?” doesn’t wash, and why no one will be persuaded by this argument
- More pics from Colorado
- Belated, abbreviated vacationblogging: Coyote Gulch
- Boogie Boarding: South Carolina versus Hawaii
- Marketing Moab
- I went to a marathon and all I brought back was this blog post
- Happy anniversary, Word Munger!
Recent Comments
- AMac on Our health care system is broken, part 3758373
- david on Dave on 3 Quarks Daily
- pee pee eye on Does the “Retina Display” live up to its name?
- Just on Does the “Retina Display” live up to its name?
- Marco on How many countries can you name?
Blogs I like
- Boing Boing
- Brad DeLong
- Conversational Reading
- Davidson News
- fernham
- Good Math, Bad Math
- hit and run
- Jason Kottke
- Kevin Drum
- Language Log
- Lessig Blog
- Megan McArdle
- Metaxu Cafe
- Michael Bérubé
- ResearchBlogging.org
- Science Blogs
- slashdot
- Steven Johnson
- The Valve
- Uncertain Principles
- Voix de Michele
- Washington Monthly
- Whatever
Guilty pleasures
Archives
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
Categories
ScienceSeeker.org
You are right. That is why we have birth control.
Of course, some people confuse birth control with abortion.
It is nice that the left, which forces us to build ramps and
use knobless doors for the benefit of the handicapped, also
ensures that we kill as many handicapped people as possible
before they are born.
Discrimination: Bad - unless it is in utero.
The argument that a fetus is somehow a human life is a straw man for the real right-wing agenda, which is to regulate sex through governmental intervention. The right, especially the Christian right, does not honestly believe that a fetal life is the equivalent of human life — it’s just a more palatable way for them to argue for the regulation of sex.
Consider the efforts to ban the “day after” pill, which is nothing more than an extra-large dose of birth control pill. It does the same thing as a standard birth control pill, but somehow this is believed to constitute “murder.” Consider the fact that abstinence-only sex education is non-negotiable among the religious right, despite the fact that traditional sex-ed has been shown to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies. If the real issue was fetal life, the right would be clambering all over itself lobbying for traditional sex education.
Here’s a puzzle for you: if you could eliminate Down’s Syndrome by giving pregnant mothers a drug, would you? Or is that “discrimination”?