h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Better information in clinics? I have argued for that, and I do. I must say that in my experience, pressure conmes from parents as well, when the pregnant woman is in her teens.
You're right, we are responsible for our own actions. I was just noting that it happens...

There's a lot of discussion around sex and the intellectually handicapped here in NZ. I was surprised to discover during a seminar, because I know intellectually handicapped people who have married, that they did so on their parents sufferance - it is actually illegal! (Unless that's changed since December 2000, and I don't think it has.)Many parents have been horrified to discover their Downs syndrome daughter is pregnant, (married or no) and insisted on having her aborted, and others have sterilised their children so as to avoid the issue (back when that was allowed - doctors now won't do it.)
The point is: Downs syndrome is *not* heritable and even two parents with it stand a good chance of having an average child (Yes, I was astonished too) and (b) Downs syndrome people are perfectly capable of having opinions and making decisions, though many of their parents infantilise them.

Matholwch, I am happy to be corrected about the background of these people - all I had to go on is their public personae.
PS:<< to those who think that this conversation is absurd in the middle of an abortion discussion . I think it casts the arguments of the anti-abortion lobby into sharp relief, and is no dafter.>>
What does that mean? My opinion of Monty Python (and it makes no difference what you say, my aesthetic opinion is mine, and I will retain it) is that they both suck and blow at the same time. What's that got to do with 'anti-abortion' arguments? That's right - nowt. I think you outsmarted yourself there, old boy.

<>

What is outrageous is suggesting that considering a foetus as a potential human life *leads to* warped thinking about living children, handicapped or otherwise. As if this would be the obvious next step or outcome.

You can get almost anywhere from anywhere else depending on what sort of convoluted path you take.

One could just as easily say that believing in Islam leads to becoming a terrorist. Except of course that would be not only outrageous but extremely narrow-minded and harshly judgemental of all Islamic people. One could just as easily say that being a Christian anti-abortionist leads to murdering doctors in clinics . . .

az

Math,

Totally agree with you about Billy Conolly. And I'm quite looking forward to the re-release of Life of Brian

I've always liked Monty Python though I agree (with whoever said it) that some of their television programmes in the series were a bit hit and miss. But every now and then a gem of a sketch: the five-minute argument, the dead parrot, the aforementioned twit of the year and four Yorkshiremen. . .

az

I thought Monty Python were pretty good but like Billy Connoly fairly middle of the road stylistically with the two extremes being the safe and predictable as personified by Bernard Manning, Jimmy Tarbuck, Friends, Terry and June. The other extreme being the often controversial works of artists who deliberately and ourageously confronted contemporary notions of what was acceptable Jo Brand, Bill Hicks, Spike Milligan and Chris Morris

My all time favourite if I had to pick one would be Spike Milligan a true working class hero even before the Prince Charles comment. Not only was he achingly funny, but honest and sad by turns aswell but never without losing sight of the vain of mirth that runs through every part of life. Not to mention his penchant for putting semi-naked or scantily clad, but nearly always increadably buxom women into his sketches (8year old badger 31 year old badger). Most of all I really miss his absurd inane ramblings....

But atleast we have Della

What in the name of Bob are you on woman? Enough with the diversionary tactics already.
BTW - I am well familiar with the 'only potentially a human life argument'. You know where that leads? To people like Peter Singer (Australian 'ethicist') who says that a farm animal has a superior right to life than a child with an intellectual handicap. That to me, is outrageous!

Sometimes I wish you would make yourself familiar with reality, fair enough we can all be a little unclear at times which can lead to misinterpretation. However quite often you ignore whats in our posts and sometimes you attribute thoughts to us that have never crossed our minds. I would bet my life that none not one of the people on here have, if they do hold to the "potential life argument", gone from there to summing up that some children with special needs are inferior to farm animals.

But thanks for telling us about Peter Singer, you might be interested to know he has knocked you out of my top ten muddled thinkers.

The point is: Downs syndrome is *not* heritable and even two parents with it stand a good chance of having an average child (Yes, I was astonished too) and (b) Downs syndrome people are perfectly capable of having opinions and making decisions, though many of their parents infantilise them.

Well done Della you have successfully proved your point. Dont let the fact that not one person here was contesting it take anything away from that...small steps...

one love

"Every sperm is sacred..."

I'd forgotten that sketch. I watched some old Billy Conolly the other night and he told a story of him and his sister being taken in and washed and put to bed with the neighouring, rather large, catholic family. They only got found out when Billy's parents found 2 of the catholic kids outside on the street.

Billy Conolly is certainly very funny but lets not forget that John Cleese called Eddie Izzard the funniest man in Britain.

I agree that Spike Milligan was a genius.

The first time I ever saw Eddie Izzard (doing the wolf sketch on television) I thought I was literally going to die laughing. I laughed so hard that I could barely breathe, I slid off the sofa to the floor and lay there holding my stomach and kicking my legs . . . just like in the cartoons. *sighs happily at the memory*

az

I love hearing stories like that


I was going to save my serious replies to the backlog for tomorrow, but I see your online Az.... I wanted to say thanks too for sharing more about your termination experience. I knew a bit of your story, but I didn't realise that it is such a strong experience for you when you post about it. Thanks for trusting us to tell us that.


kea.

kea,

I told it before when I was arguing with the originator of this thread. And I was just now wondering *where* in this huge backlog I had posted that and randomly clicked on a dot and it was the page with my posting on it! How weird and random is that! Posting 322 if you are interested. I even got a hug from Hoovooloo afterwards. Do I get to go down in hootoo history as having been hugged by Hoo?

Anyhow, discovered that you and I had had a little debate for a page or so afterwards that I didn't remember. And good debate. It was interesting for me to read it again knowing you a bit more now.

Meanwhile, it's obvious that last spring I hadn't honed my writing technique to its present day non-ad-hominem state.


az

There was a case here in Florida of a woman in a vegetative state who was raped by one of the caretakers of her home and became pregnanent. The parents wished to terminate the pregnancey. I cannot remember the outcome of the whole thing but we clearly have a perfect case in point. The woman's body would have been biologicaly capapble of producing the child. However, she would have been totaly unable to care for the child and the father was a rapist...

On Della's point. Well, I haven't ever actually heard of anyone promoting livestock over retarded kids. Most not be the inevitable end result over potential vs actual human life. Although, I know a lot of what would be considered "normal" people with less intellectual, moral, social value than the average bovine so perhaps he has a point...

Oh we definitely have to have a look at this. Especially before we condemn that man. I think it's important to understand that Singer is an academic, philosopher and ethicist. Alot of what he says will be be following complex lines of thought and reasoning. As can be seen from the article his work is often taken out of context:

http://www.drs.org.au/new_doctor/73/Singer.html

I've only had a quick look through as it's late. I'll have a better read tomorrow.

I think this is especially relevant:

>>
Singer’s ethics can be understood within the context of Western philosophy’s distinction between consequentialist and non-consequentialist ethics. Apologies for the jargon, but Singer is a consequentialist of the act-utilitarian variety. In essence, this ethic decrees an action morally right if, at the end of the day, it works out the best overall for all those affected. Non-consequentialists typically believe certain rules should be followed without regard to their consequences.

Singer’s most vehement critics are almost all non-consequentialists. They often claim to be believers in a rule that all human life is of equal worth. Singer arouses their passion by unblinkingly discussing possible circumstances – in particular, the presence of incurable and extreme suffering - when a human’s life may be worth less, or worthless, or even best foregone. Further angst arises from the, in my opinion unnecessary, desire of Singer to avoid considering the lost futures of dead or potential fetuses and newborns in his analysis lest that imply a moral duty to constant reproduction.

Interestingly, at times his detractors strongly support his positions, for instance, that there may be no moral difference between a late termination and infanticide2. Singer would, of course, allow that there is a difference if people get more upset about one than the other. <<



Az, you definitley get some kind of h2 record for that hug from hoovooloo . Maybe you should link the post off your page

That's great how you found your post - serendipity . I'll have a better read tomorrow. I remember quite a bit of what you said, although I had forgotten our conversation later too. I'm impressed that I read all that backlog to get to post so many blobs in.


kea.

Why did I accept Della' authority on anything

one love

Of course a statement made in a specific contex for a specific reason can and will be twisted to createst emotional impact by an irrational foe.

The idea of killing of deformed infants is by far not a new one. It was practiced for many years by many societies when the care of the child whose odds of living to adulthood were slim anyway would prove to be too big of a burden to the family to be worth it. In places where death is commonplace life seems to have less worth. Our abhorence of death seems to defy the laws of supply and demand.

Well boys and girls am off on holiday will catch up with everyone next month....

Have a nice holiday, Tamberlaine!

az

Men with Down's Syndrome (= having three copies of chromosome 21) are sterile. Women with Down's are often fertile but have a 50:50 chance of having a Down's child.

Just thought I'd clear that one up, for what it's worth.

Ste

Well, it's always nice to get a scientific viewpoint with facts attached, Ste

I'm here to give the totally over the top emotional viewpoint.

az

So we can get anyone in a two-pronged pincer attack?

I was just googling about Down's just now (piqued my interest) and found this good page: http://www.medivisionindia.com/genetics/downsyndrome.phtml

Apparently, the other 50% who have a Down's mother but are not Down's themselves still show mental deficiency.

Ste

Same old Blicky! Don't ever change, will you? I wouldn't know what to do.
<>
I didn't say, or think that anyone here was contesting what I said about Downs Syndrome... I was putting it more in the sense of this is an interesting fact that may astonish you as much as it did me - sharing a discovery. If you choose to take it as an attack, you're free to do so, but it makes no sense that you should...