|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Cite one source. Cite one source that gives you reason to think that they want this to be mandatory other than paranoia. I cannot find some point where they outright say 'Lets make autism cures mandatory'. Mostly because there isn't a 'cure' as of yet. due to their activities it certainly seems plausible. I'll grant you this point. It is only speculation and 'connecting the dots'. Tatum Girlparts posted:Also, you selfish fucker, those 'caretakers' are loving mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters. These aren't nurses that spend six hours with them, these are people who have spent their loving LIVES with these people suffering from an extreme end of the illness, who the gently caress are you to dismiss their desire for both them and their loved one to live a normal life? I do not mean to dismiss them. I'm talking about people who literally had a member of their board say the only reason they did not commit a murder-suicide(6:20) of them and their autistic child is the 'normal child' that they already had. I'm talking about people who seem to believe that autistic children have no loving worth unless they are cured. I'm talking about Autism Speaks in that regard, not caretakers who genuinely care and who genuinely want their loved ones to be happy. I'm sorry that I made it seem like I was dismissing all people's wishes for their children, and themselves, to be able to lead a normal life. Tatum Girlparts posted:All this invoking autistic people, have you ever worked with the severely autistic? I don't mean hanging out with your friend I mean going through a three week period where you get punched and kicked because you're a different helper than they're used to and that just ruins all the hard work people have done getting them to be level, and feeling like poo poo because a grown man is bawling in horror because someone new didn't know you can't smile to him and talk to him and she made the horrible sin of saying 'hello' as she walked in and now you have to clean this up. No, I haven't. I realize now that what I've been saying has been very insensitive to those who have. I'm sorry for that.I didn't mean to, but that is no excuse. Tatum Girlparts posted:You're legitimately the worst person in this thread, I want to be clear. Sedan and Jackal and poo poo are arguing in the abstract but you're hiding behind 'well my autistic friend said...' like a coward while you insult a group of people who have legitimately gone through a very hard time who want people to understand that autism is an illness that hurts more than the person it's in. You are, in the spiritual sense, a terrible human being. I'm not trying to hide behind her. I am stating what she has said, and basically been my main experience in this regard. I'm clearly not informed enough about this subject to be commenting. Thank you for opening my eyes to that. I'm sorry Tatum, I didn't mean to do anything that hurt anybody. I'm just going to bow out, and just...watch. Maybe I'll learn something.
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 10:06 |
|
rkajdi posted:Why? I disagree with her position and find it not to fit with reality, but it's the kind of thing that's commonly held. I see it as a nature cancerous outgrowth of the whole free will/neo-fatalism idea, but that's such a bag of cats to deal with that it's better to not discuss-- even normally rational people become nuts when you confront them with the idea that they aren't sole awesome controllers of their will. Because frequently when people who are not part of a minority want to speak their own minds on how that minority should be treated, they'll hide behind a made-up "friend" who is that minority and conveniently shares their hosed up, lovely opinion. Like I said earlier, it's really not hugely different from "my black friend says it's okay if I talk about how urban ferals are ruining America, ergo I'm not racist  ." The only difference is that it's an issue of ableism rather than racism.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:I do not mean to dismiss them. I'm talking about people who literally had a member of their board say the only reason they did not commit a murder-suicide(6:20) of them and their autistic child is the 'normal child' that they already had. I'm talking about people who seem to believe that autistic children have no loving worth unless they are cured. I'm talking about Autism Speaks in that regard, not caretakers who genuinely care and who genuinely want their loved ones to be happy. I'm sorry that I made it seem like I was dismissing all people's wishes for their children, and themselves, to be able to lead a normal life. How do you have such a lack of empathy that you don't understand that person wasn't telling that story as some loving bragging rights thing, but rather as a horrible, shameful, example of the devastation the illness caused them? Why do you not understand that the point is that they want a world where those hosed up thoughts don't exist because they can be fixed? edit: To be clear in a Narcotics Anonymous support group when someone says, say, I stole my mother's ring because I wanted drugs, they're not saying 'so we should all go rob our moms and get SUPER HIGH GUYS WHOOO' they're sharing a horrible part of their life so they can move on from it. sexpig by night fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Phineas Gage was the same person before and after the accident. He acted differently, but he was still a continuation of the same individual. People tend to act differently after traumatic experience (or really any kind of experience), regardless of brain damage. Does that make them different people? If so, you're literally a different person every second of every day. How do you determine which time period is the "real" you worth protecting? Seriously, the idea is incredibly disordered. Also, since anecdotes are apparently an important and valuable source of information on this topic, my uncle's best friend is married with a severely autistic son. They gave up on a number of dreams after their first born had autism, including having more children (didn't think they could handle their son PLUS other children), having grandchildren, ever being able to retire by themselves, career aspirations, trips and a whole host of activities that they will never be able to do with their child (sports, shopping, just loving going to lunch, etc). They love their son but a few years back he had a drunken breakdown at a party we held when my cousin passed the California bar and he admitted he wished they had never had kids and he would have had an abortion if he knew what it would all meant But lets not CURE this person because we wouldn't want to change the "fundamental essence of who he is". cheese fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:Because frequently when people who are not part of a minority want to speak their own minds on how that minority should be treated, they'll hide behind a made-up "friend" who is that minority and conveniently shares their hosed up, lovely opinion. I started out writing a post assuming that this was more or less the case, but then E-Tank posted the start of this page. Maybe you, me, all of us, should be giving our interlocutors the benefit of the doubt. Discendo Vox was right all along! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:How do you have such a lack of empathy that you don't understand that person wasn't telling that story as some loving bragging rights thing, but rather as a horrible, shameful, example of the devastation the illness caused them? Why do you not understand that the point is that they want a world where those hosed up thoughts don't exist because they can be fixed? I don't know. It just didn't occur to me. The idea of her saying the only thing that kept her from committing suicide and murdering her child was the normal child. It struck me and got me outraged and I just...didn't think about any other possibilities. I'm in the wrong, I understand that now. I'm sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
e: ^^ what is this thread even about anymoreE-Tank posted:I do not mean to dismiss them. I'm talking about people who literally had a member of their board say the only reason they did not commit a murder-suicide(6:20) of them and their autistic child is the 'normal child' that they already had. I'm talking about people who seem to believe that autistic children have no loving worth unless they are cured. I'm talking about Autism Speaks in that regard, not caretakers who genuinely care and who genuinely want their loved ones to be happy. I'm sorry that I made it seem like I was dismissing all people's wishes for their children, and themselves, to be able to lead a normal life. R. Mute fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:I don't know. It just didn't occur to me. The idea of her saying the only thing that kept her from committing suicide and murdering her child was the normal child. It struck me and got me outraged and I just...didn't think about any other possibilities. I'm in the wrong, I understand that now. I'm sorry. I'm sorry I got lovely in those last few posts that wasn't cool, this kinda poo poo comes up a decent bit in assorted stupid online communities and it just kinda always feels like the same. Thank you for listening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
cheese posted:Also, since anecdotes are apparently an important and valuable source of information on this topic, my uncle's best friend is married with a severely autistic son. They gave up on a number of dreams after their first born had autism, including having more children (didn't think they could handle their son PLUS other children), having grandchildren, ever being able to retire by themselves, career aspirations, trips and a whole host of activities that they will never be able to do with their child (sports, shopping, just loving going to lunch, etc). They love their son but a few years back he had a drunken breakdown at a party we held when my cousin passed the California bar and he admitted he wished they had never had kids and he would have had an abortion if he knew what it would all meant Yup. I know a lot of people want to poo poo on the caregivers who would rater not be in the situation, but drat if this doesn't show how one bad break can destroy an entire family's chance for anything resembling success. I've got a buddy a few years older than me who's in a similar situation-- he has a younger brother with Downs Syndrome. His parents were older when they had this brother, and now is father has just suddenly died. He's going to be taking care of his brother, since it's too much for just his mother to do. That's deep sixing the chances for his own kids to have normal lives. The realities of aborting fetuses that have developmental problems are that it's done out of survival as much as anything else. gently caress people who are making GBS threads on folks for making the rational decision.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
cheese posted:Also, since anecdotes are apparently an important and valuable source of information on this topic, my uncle's best friend is married with a severely autistic son. They gave up on a number of dreams after their first born had autism, including having more children (didn't think they could handle their son PLUS other children), having grandchildren, ever being able to retire by themselves, career aspirations, trips and a whole host of activities that they will never be able to do with their child (sports, shopping, just loving going to lunch, etc). They love their son but a few years back he had a drunken breakdown at a party we held when my cousin passed the California bar and he admitted he wished they had never had kids and he would have had an abortion if he knew what it would all meant Same thing happened with my aunt and my cousin. She is his sole caretaker since her marriage collapsed a decade ago (I don't know why so I won't point fingers). He's got a reasonable level of functionality, he can hold down a mcjob, do basic functions but living on his own would be impossible. In 2010 he got on the wrong bus due to a change in route and he sat on the bus for four hours until the driver had to stop and try and sort things out with him. She is utterly terrified about what his life is going to be like when she's gone and has absolutely given up her own life and dreams to try and make him comfortable. gently caress Autism, and gently caress anyone who thinks that denying treatment would be anything but monstrous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
I don't think any of us can say anything about the ethical aspects of curing autism because we don't have a cure and therefore don't know what a cure would involve or what it's effects would be.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I think it's pretty telling when the two biggest MUH RITES leftists we have here both team up to poo poo on a woman's right to choose. Again, guess you stopped reading the bill of rights somewhere between the 3rd and 8th ammendments, correct? Because telling a woman she doesn't have the right to an arbotion for whatever reason she wants means that you just poo poo on the 9th ammendment. Tatum Girlparts posted:So to be clear, a woman finds out she is going to have an autistic child, let's not add any extra poo poo like her being single or anything, just an average woman, she gets an abortion because she's not able to handle that in her life right now. Holy canoli git over yourselves. Quit it with the hair-trigger sensitivity to suggestions that the ethics of abortion might, in some cases, be complicated. Every mother, in every single instance, has the right to an abortion, and no one else on earth has the right to interfere. OK? Now, having said that. Does it in any way disquiet you that parents might someday selectively abort homosexual or transgender fetuses? Just think about the question all by itself, don't worry about your answer making it onto a pro-life pamphlet or something, because it's not going to. Would it be OK if transgender or homosexual people were screened out and vanished from the earth?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Now, having said that. Does it in any way disquiet you that parents might someday selectively abort homosexual or transgender fetuses? Just think about the question all by itself, don't worry about your answer making it onto a pro-life pamphlet or something, because it's not going to. Would it be OK if transgender or homosexual people were screened out and vanished from the earth? Dude, we cannot test for homosexuality or transexuality the way we can test for the mental illness that is autism. Being gay/trans =/= having a mental illness (for instance, being autistic). Why are you drawing this terrible comparison? Just to be obtuse or?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
Caros posted:Same thing happened with my aunt and my cousin. She is his sole caretaker since her marriage collapsed a decade ago (I don't know why so I won't point fingers). He's got a reasonable level of functionality, he can hold down a mcjob, do basic functions but living on his own would be impossible. In 2010 he got on the wrong bus due to a change in route and he sat on the bus for four hours until the driver had to stop and try and sort things out with him. She is utterly terrified about what his life is going to be like when she's gone and has absolutely given up her own life and dreams to try and make him comfortable. This sounds about the level that my brother-in-law is at. He holds down a simple menial job, and can operate a car just well enough to drive short distances (to work or the store, which because his family live in the country are too far to walk to). But he can't read without someone sitting next to him to read words longer than four syllables to him, he can't monitor his own finances, he can't plan more than a few days in advance without help, and he'll also never live on his own. And when my in-laws grow older, maybe even I'm just 16 or 20 years, he'll have to move in with me and my wife because his other siblings sure won't step up to the plate. And that's a heavy burden that weighs on his parents, not because they hate him or resent him, but because they love and worry about him. They've confided in us a few times that they had prayed every day after they discovered he was autistic that one day he would wake up normal, for his own sake of having a better quality of life than he will ever be able to now. So I feel for those caretakers. Autism Speaks as an organization sounds like total poo poo, but the people they supposedly represent aren't awful people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Holy canoli git over yourselves. Quit it with the hair-trigger sensitivity to suggestions that the ethics of abortion might, in some cases, be complicated. Every mother, in every single instance, has the right to an abortion, and no one else on earth has the right to interfere. OK? Nah because that isn't a thing that's remotely the same so I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it. Crazy I know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:Dude, we cannot test for homosexuality or transexuality the way we can test for the mental illness that is autism. Being gay/trans =/= having a mental illness (for instance, being autistic). Why are you drawing this terrible comparison? Just to be obtuse or? SedanChair posted:But how oddly specific we are in our definition of "disorder." Which is more debilitating, to flap your arms and hop in place while playing video games or to lack all capacity for analysis or introspection and fail to recognize the danger in Rick Santorum's eyes? To have a detailed interest in trains or to fear people based on their race? Political opinions SedanChair doesn't like: literally worse than autism. Eta: Also, I think people missed this: SedanChair posted:That's because autism is mostly pretend in the first place. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
In terms of its diagnosis it is in many cases absolutely pretend.nutranurse posted:Dude, we cannot test for homosexuality or transexuality the way we can test for the mental illness that is autism. Being gay/trans =/= having a mental illness (for instance, being autistic). Why are you drawing this terrible comparison? Just to be obtuse or? We can't test for either of them prenatally at this point. If I'm not mistaken however, that's a goal of Autism Speaks. And being gay or trans was seen as a mental illness by the mental health profession a very short time ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Holy canoli git over yourselves. Quit it with the hair-trigger sensitivity to suggestions that the ethics of abortion might, in some cases, be complicated. Every mother, in every single instance, has the right to an abortion, and no one else on earth has the right to interfere. OK? No, it's not ok. But no one can do a single thing to stop them from making that decision for bad reasons, so what's your actual point? Who What Now fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:01
|
|
nutranurse posted:Dude, we cannot test for homosexuality or transexuality the way we can test for the mental illness that is autism. Being gay/trans =/= having a mental illness (for instance, being autistic). Why are you drawing this terrible comparison? Just to be obtuse or? He's asking if such a test were developed and parents are given the choice to abort based on criteria like homosexuality or transexuality; how would you feel about that?
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:No, it's not ok. But no one can do asingle thing to stop them from making that decision for bad reasons, so what's your actual point? Do we normally base our ethical judgment in specific matters on whether or not we can do anything about them?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Holy canoli git over yourselves. Quit it with the hair-trigger sensitivity to suggestions that the ethics of abortion might, in some cases, be complicated. Every mother, in every single instance, has the right to an abortion, and no one else on earth has the right to interfere. OK? A woman has an absolute right to choose, so she gets to come up with whatever reason she wants to not have an abortion. And the rest of us get to shut the gently caress up about it and let her do whatever she chooses. I say this as a bi man, which I guess would be enough of a group to be the ones selected for abortion in your story. I wouldn't know any different since I'd never exist and thus would never have thought a thing, and my potentialness wouldn't override the rights of actual existing people. Any position other than this (especially tired liberal pearl-clutching) is starting to put up barriers around a woman's right to choose, which we all know culminates in dead women in allies and lives ruined through unplanned children.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Do we normally base our ethical judgment in specific matters on whether or not we can do anything about them? That often plays a role, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:A woman has an absolute right to choose, so she gets to come up with whatever reason she wants to not have an abortion. And the rest of us get to shut the gently caress up about it and let her do whatever she chooses. I say this as a bi man, which I guess would be enough of a group to be the ones selected for abortion in your story. I wouldn't know any different since I'd never exist and thus would never have thought a thing, and my potentialness wouldn't override the rights of actual existing people. Any position other than this (especially tired liberal pearl-clutching) is starting to put up barriers around a woman's right to choose, which we all know culminates in dead women in allies and lives ruined through unplanned children. We already agreed that she has that right. But would it be appropriate to attempt to educate people that it's possible to live as a fulfilled and worthwhile homosexual or transgender human being?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Do we normally base our ethical judgment in specific matters on whether or not we can do anything about them? Yes. When we start saying things aren't ethical, normal people usually look for ways to stop them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:He's asking if such a test were developed and parents are given the choice to abort based on criteria like homosexuality or transexuality; how would you feel about that? Roughly the same way I would feel if we could test for our kids having magic powers: this is a ridiculous line of questioning and is only being done to derail a conversation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:He's asking if such a test were developed and parents are given the choice to abort based on criteria like homosexuality or transexuality; how would you feel about that? Same as our ability to test for unicorn farts and fairy queefs, I imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:We already agreed that she has that right. But would it be appropriate to attempt to educate people that it's possible to live as a fulfilled and worthwhile homosexual or transgender human being? How many homosexuals are you aware of who are incapable of surviving on their own for an extended period of time due to their homosexuality. Not social stigma mind you, but their homosexuality makes it impossible for them to balance a checkbook, or handle a change in bus schedules, or not scream uncontrollably when faced with a stranger. While not all, or even most cases of autism are this bad, it is also not a non-zero number. I absolutely support education to explain to people that it is possible to live a fulfilled life with autism. It is also possible to be a massive emotional and financial burden with autism, something that differentiates it from homosexuality. Yes homosexuality was once categorized incorrectly as a mental illness because we are/were bigots. Do you believe that autism is incorrectly categorized as a mental illness, or are you just drawing a bullshit comparison that is at once pretty offensive to members of both groups? Caros fucked around with this message at 03:12 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
Women have the right to choose no matter what. If a would-be mother doesn't want an autistic or Down's Syndrome baby, that's her prerogative. And yes, I would say the same thing if she wanted to abort based on the baby's sexual orientation or gender identity. Women have the right to choose and this is unconditional. But I don't think gay babies or trans babies can be detected or diagnosed like that. As far as I know, sexual orientation is a complex fluid thing that is probably influenced by genetics as well as upbringing. Transgenderism is even less understood. And neither are comparable to autism, Down's Syndrome, or anything like that. It's actually pretty offensive that someone thinks they're equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:We already agreed that she has that right. But would it be appropriate to attempt to educate people that it's possible to live as a fulfilled and worthwhile homosexual or transgender human being? Yes. But she either is going to believe them or she isn't. Plus as we both know "education" around abortion really means trying to scare or bully women into having the baby. The only moral decision as the person not having the abortion is to shut the gently caress up and honor the woman's wishes. I don't get any more mad about losing these potential people than I do about losing potential siblings if my dad decided not to have sex with my mom one night where conception would be possible. As a society, we have a huge problem about making life for the living, instead of the not yet living or the dead. This fear of yours is yet another manifestation of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
A lot of the talk here seems to refer to this hypothetically, or as a phenomenon relegated to China, but is there anything right now that prevents a woman in any country which allows abortion to do it sex-selectively?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Caros posted:How many homosexuals are you aware of who are incapable of surviving on their own for an extended period of time due to their homosexuality. Not social stigma mind you, but their homosexuality makes it impossible for them to balance a checkbook, or handle a change in bus schedules, or not scream uncontrollably when faced with a stranger. I think that autism presents so many different ways and at so many levels of impact that it's a mistake to put them all on a single spectrum. I have worked with youth who were nonverbal and would randomly scream and scratch at their genitals until restrained, and youth who just needed to bounce on a trampoline every once in a while. In both cases the diagnosis was "autism" and that's useless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:A lot of the talk here seems to refer to this hypothetically, or as a phenomenon relegated to China, but is there anything right now that prevents a woman in any country which allows abortion to do it sex-selectively? Yes. We've past laws in this country in several states, though it's just really standard abortion restrictions in drag.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Now, having said that. Does it in any way disquiet you that parents might someday selectively abort homosexual or transgender fetuses? Just think about the question all by itself, don't worry about your answer making it onto a pro-life pamphlet or something, because it's not going to. Would it be OK if transgender or homosexual people were screened out and vanished from the earth? This doesn't strike me as a sensible comparison because the burdens of having a homosexual, transgender, or female (in the case of sex selection) child (besides the imaginary ones stemming from the parents' own bigotry) are an artificial creation of a wider homophobic, transphobic, and misogynistic society. In societies that place large financial burdens on people who have daughters, it's the logical result that some fraction people will respond to those incentives by sex selection. On the contrary, the burden of having an autistic child is a very real thing. We don't have to condemn mothers for aborting baby girls: unlike screaming at poor desperate women, fighting the misogynistic policies will solve the sex-selection problem .
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:This doesn't strike me as a sensible comparison because the burdens of having a homosexual, transgender, or female (in the case of sex selection) child (besides the imaginary ones stemming from the parents' own bigotry) are an artificial creation of a wider homophobic, transphobic, and misogynistic society. In societies that place large financial burdens on people who have daughters, it's the logical result that some fraction people will respond to those incentives by sex selection. On the contrary, the burden of having an autistic child is a very real thing. I agree completely. I also think that a society with less stingy availability of resources for parents and which is more tolerant of different levels of social engagement and difference in general would be one in which more autistic people would find a place and cease to be a burden. Of course it was not intended as a one-to-one comparison.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
fermun posted:This was skipped over, so I'll chime in my thoughts. Probably everyone, most states in the US have a Mature Minor doctrine, a legal status where a minor is allowed to refuse treatment for medical procedures despite the will of their legal guardian. Anyone considered capable of understanding their situation and consequences both of treatment and nontreatment legally has the right to decide for themselves most places in the US. So it would apply to everyone, those who have the most severe symptoms would be less likely to be determined in court to be fully capable of understanding their current situation and consequences of both treatment and nontreatment. Yeah, these or comparable laws pretty much resolve the consent issues for scenarios involving that set of facts. I'm not sure how the law operates abroad. Absurd Alhazred posted:I started out writing a post assuming that this was more or less the case, but then E-Tank posted the start of this page. Maybe you, me, all of us, should be giving our interlocutors the benefit of the doubt. Discendo Vox was right all along! Looking forward to my new custom avatar, though the old one is still pretty relevant  rkajdi posted:It's all childish hand-wringing unless we actively start saying that women shouldn't get either bodily integrity or informed consent on birth issues. Either say that these aren't real rights (good loving luck with that-- you're a textbook misogynist then) or allow for these things to happen. The stress over sex selection is yet again anti-choice zealots trying to pry their way into people's wombs. They, um, really aren't. The last place I heard from on this set of issues was from my University's fairly prominent women's studies department, a favorably received job talk from a female applicant who received the position. This is a difficult set of issues, and reducing them to a binary, with one side consisting entirely of "textbook misogynists" and "anti-choice zealots" doesn't actually remove that complexity- although it does frustrate the discourse. It's probably counterproductive to frame abortion as an absolute right which either exists or does not. There aren't any of those under the law, and there aren't very many philosophies that espouse absolute rights, either, particularly ones that could be used to construct an absolute right to abortion. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
It's true that autism is a pretty useless label and does nothing to give anyone a good idea of what to expect, but that doesn't seem like good enough justification to start hand-wringing over the ethics of abortion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:25
|
|
nutranurse posted:Roughly the same way I would feel if we could test for our kids having magic powers: this is a ridiculous line of questioning and is only being done to derail a conversation. How so? My personal view is that a woman should be able to abort for any reason at all. But I still think exploring the possible social and ethical issues of enabling people to choose what their child will be like ahead of time is a pretty interesting line of discussion.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Yes. We've past laws in this country in several states, though it's just really standard abortion restrictions in drag.  How do you even enforce this?! Do you have a woman sign a declaration that she is aborting for a legitimate reason? This loving country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:It's true that autism is a pretty useless label and does nothing to give anyone a good idea of what to expect, but that doesn't seem like good enough justification to start hand-wringing over the ethics of abortion. Honestly the discussion didn't even start particularly about abortion, somebody mentioned that Autism Speaks may prefer to discover a "cure" as was done for Tay-Sachs, to do genetic screening so those children are never born. rkajdi is just hypersensitive to any topic that may encroach on women's right to choose (which is commendable).
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 10:06 |
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:How so? My personal view is that a woman should be able to abort for any reason at all. But I still think exploring the possible social and ethical issues of enabling people to choose what their child will be like ahead of time is a pretty interesting line of discussion. I'll ask a question I asked in the other thread: is the only way to avoid these supposed ethical issues to only allow abortion if the mother doesn't do any pre-natal testing first?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 03:30
|
|