You've smuggled the idea that it's kind of OK to kill people who take up resources and make our lives harder into a long and rambling hit piece aimed at people with down syndrome so you can try and hide behind "I'm just being realistic, man."
Everyone I know would prefer to have a healthy child vs one with down's syndrome. No one is acting like it's all sunshine and rainbows. But we are saying that you don't get to kill people just because they make your life harder or drain resources. We're saying human value goes far beyond that.
This entire idea that the discussion is just "people who are unreasonably positive about down syndrome" vs "super-realistic pro-abortion activists" is a ludicrous false dichotomy.
You've set up a strawman because if you just said what you truly thought in a few sentences, you'd look too evil.
You're ignoring the issue of not having a threshold for suffering that justifies mercy killing. You've stated it's just your opinion. It'll vary per person.
Which means your viewpoint on mercy killing can't be functionally used in society.
I'm not ignoring anything because you haven't actually established mercy killing as a moral decision. You've simply stated "it's my opinion."
Very simple - but also very flawed - because that threshold is entirely subjective.
It requires that I come up with my own subjective opinion about it and then make that decision for someone else based on what I would want.
Meaning your threshold for mercy killings is simply if the killer themselves feels like it.
To call that flawed is an understatement.
For my fellow Sun Devil fans following me - fair warning that I'm going full politics on this account.
If you're trying to avoid that in your feeds, fair warning to unfollow now.
@Bobbythirdway I feel the same way - like when all these people are angry about the children in Palestine I'm just like "yeah but how many have you adopted?"
Shuts them right up because they realize if they don't adopt a child they certainly don't get to pretend they care about them.
Right?
God bless you. I hope you and your daughter are both living happy healthy lives.
Your story is going to cause a flood of pro-choicers to comment and say "I'm happy for you BUT" and then lecture you about not judging others.
Your story threatens the core of their narrative that the child in the womb isn't the same human outside of it.
I know you don't care. That's the root of the problem right there.
The real risk of you having a son is him turning out like you. So I'll share your sentiment there. We don't need more selfish and uncaring men.
I'll pray for wisdom for you, and a happy healthy life for your daughter.
@BasilianThought@jagrmeister Fun fact: you don't need to be able to adopt every child you care about.
This argument is genuinely stupid and I promise you don't apply it evenly and consistently throughout your world view.
What kind of insane comment is this?
"Oh you'd have raised your born child?!"
Like, who asks such a dumb question as if it's even mildly socially acceptable to just abandon your children or kill them.
Yes, it's easy to pass judgement on stupid, evil, selfish people who kill their offspring.
Telling someone else to humble themselves as if it isn't entirely biblical to pass judgement on those who would kill children is wild too. We are not called to withhold judgement of others who commit horrible sins.
So wait, your personal story is just you testing your child for genetic issues? Dummy, almost everyone gets that done. I did on both my sons.
That doesn't mean you have some powerful personal anecdote to share on why it's on to kill a child in the womb. Lol like wtf are you even talking about at this point.
Yet those aren't the conditions being discussed in either of the examples you commented on.
You jumped all around until we landed here because your views weren't defensible outside of a radical personal example you have (but haven't explained.)
The rarity of post-20 week abortions doesn't mean they don't happen. It also doesn't mean they aren't evil just because they are rare.
No one - I repeat NO ONE - is arguing the removal of a dead baby due to natural death in the womb is wrong. That's not elective abortion. It isn't even in the same universe. (Go ahead and try to say women are dying because they can't get that care. Then I'm going to ask you for an example. Then you're going to realize you don't have one off the top of your head. You just know the activists day that a lot. Then you're going to Google it and pull out one of the 5-6 propaganda stories that get circulated by activists. Stories of real women, but with tons of omissions, misinformation, and outright lies.) I've been down this road before.
I believe you when you say you chose to kill your child. I hope you repent for it. For your sake.
The most disturbing part is those that are convinced it is a moral good. He's got actual human beings, some who even allege to be Christian, supporting him and trying to lend support for his decision.
I'm heartened to see the backlash though. Our culture isn't totally lost yet. We have a fighting chance.
@lanadelzayebal 😂😂 you know you've broken someone when they resort to "I know you are but what am I"
Move along little Russian bot. I'm finished with you now.
When you say "You value your values more than the well being of your kid" and then try to tie that back into personal values being selfish, you are absolutely saying personal values are automatically selfish simply by the fact that you use them to govern your choices.
Where your argument fails is in recognizing the subjectivity of value based decision making. A Jehovah's Witness, to use your example, believes that giving their child a blood transfusion is a severe spiritual violation that jeopardizes their child's salvation and place in heaven.
So from your perspective, as someone who doesn't believe that, it's selfish. (Although that doesn't quite make sense because the parent gains nothing from it.)
From the parent's perspective, it's deeply selfless as they might be condemning their child to death to save them eternally. That would mean the parent is taking on the pain of losing a child for what they perceive to be a greater good.
If you think that is a crappy choice for the parent to make, now apply that to what you and others are arguing about aborting down syndrome babies so the parent takes on temporary sadness to "save the child from suffering."