DOGE didn't make a dent in the deficit, but it did bring back screwworm and enable a historically large new Ebola outbreak, so it's not like they didn't achieve *anything*
People don’t abort their children with downs because the children suffer; in my experience people with downs are easy to please and fairly happy go lucky. People do it because raising a child with downs is a massive pain in the ass. Maybe people should feel shame for that.
A lot of people in the anti-abortion camp are criticizing this post. And I get it. I’m not countering them. But one thing I haven’t seen anyone say, at least not explicitly, is how little epistemic humility this guy, and people like him, have. And this complete lack of epistemic humility results in them playing God and making inapt comparison—comparisons they cannot possibly make because they cannot rightly evaluate the two alternatives.
This man and his wife were informed that their child would have a series of medical difficulties, both physical and mental. We know that about Down Syndrome. We know that by almost any metric this is a “harder” life than someone without any such condition. But these people turn around and say “and, thus, it would be better for the child if the child actually just died now.”
But they can’t know that. They can’t actually compare existence with Down Syndrome to non-existence/death, because they don’t know what the latter entails. In order to rightly and ably compare two things, you have to know enough about them. We don’t know enough about death to ably compare it to life—even life with difficulties. So one cannot truly and reasonably say “death is better than living with Down Syndrome.”
It would be like me asking “do you prefer to eat apples or smoogaboogaloogas?” Of course, you don’t know what a smoogaboogalooga is, so you would reply “uh, I don’t know what that is, so I can’t compare it to an apple.” That’s epistemic humility. This guy and his wife have none of that, because they decided that death (which they cannot understand and appreciate) is better than life.
But even now I’m being charitable. I’m assuming a lack of epistemic humility when in reality they weren’t deciding what was “best” for the child (death vs. life). They were deciding what was best for themselves. And they decided killing their child was best for themselves.
If his dad was from a trailer park or a barrio, he would be trying to avoid getting shanked in prison right now, not clowning on Twitter.
There's nothing more traditional than a spoiled nepotard failson of an oligarch.
For all the people trying to use “clump of cells” arguments or talking about the exact moment they think a life is worthwhile
This wasn’t a zygote
They were 4+ months pregnant. More than 20 weeks. This baby they killed had a face, eyes, ears, hands, fingers, organs…
Personally I think you SHOULD be scared to have a disabled kid. That is the normal human emotion
But any child can become disabled at any point, so you should at least abstractly make peace with the fact that you don’t get to sign up for parenthood ONLY to a healthy child
I asked this person if they advocated for killing a child if they became disabled a few years after birth.
He said, of course not, that would be killing a person. That's wrong.
I then asked how many weeks into a pregnancy does he think a baby in the womb becomes a person
He said 15-20 weeks
Ladies and gentlemen, the DS baby that was recently aborted passed his personhood threshold. (She was 20 weeks)
So according to his own moral framework, aborting that baby was murder.
He remained silent after I pointed that out to him.
These people are ghouls. They have no consistent ethics and their only Northstar is their pleasure.