Down's Syndrome...

Quite true, on all accounts.

This is a tough topic. As previously stated abortion is touchy enough, adding the dehumanizing of people with disabilities and its a wildfire waiting to happen. Part of this is because most people believe that if someone's opinion differs from their own that person must be corrected because they are wrong. This is not the most effective way to handle a differing of opinions.

For my own part I never knew where I'd lie on the abortion debate until my girlfriend and I had a pregnancy scare. She said she'd want to abort it and and right there and then I knew where I stood. That was my child, a person I helped create, and she'd kill it because it would inconvenience her.

But I do believe that it's everyone's choice and I'll respect that.

You see, I'm 100% with dawkins on this one.

And the reason why is simple... Of all the abortions people can have, you can categorize them in two groups:

- Because I don't want it (Or now's not the right time)or because it's my body and I do what I want (yet somehow people aren't quite as keen when it comes to chopping their own legs off: these are actual parts of their body)
- Because there's something wrong with the baby or pregnancy.

It seems kind of obvious to me that, if abortion is to be considered acceptable on occasion, the most acceptable of those occasions is when there is something wrong with the one being killed, just like when it comes to your limbs, the one that makes sense to remove is the one with the disease.

Abortion is a hot subject to begin with. It's one people like to jump all over it. Add in a disability and we've got a fire!!!

Absolutely. The problem is people mistake the mix of feminist propaganda with the whole "don't ever say anything bad about anyone with a disability coz it's wrong" for their hearts and sense of morality. Resulting in things like the twitter response to dawkins, or this very thread. On this very website some people have suggested (at least) one other shuts up because of the way he behaves (mostly a communication style which unlike mine doesn't even contain expletives), and probably have reported many of his posts in the hope of having him banned, a form of "online abortion". Yet this person clearly has traits of someone who has some form of ASD (considered to be a disability).

Seems strange that the same person can believe these three things:
-abortion is a right
-aborting babies just because they're different is a wrong
-You don't do things like me and I don't like your ways: go away!

A dilemma which, interestingly enough, is perfectly represented by the facial expressions of people who are fortunate enough to ride on the same bus as two lads (twins) who have Down's and quite loudly talk about their sexual fantasies. It's "cheesoid" meets "right and wrong" meets "does not compute". (seriously I've witnessed it a couple of times, all the passengers look like they're suffering from acute diarrhoea, it's quite something)

I spent my 4th year of school being best friends with a kid who had it, they were trialing incorporating him into a normal school. I happened to be in the next grade up at the time with a couple of mates, so I guess it was easier for an outcast from the norm to associate with an outcast group. They decided it did not work after that first year of it.... he was rather easy going but wanted to kiss everybody all the time.
:blink:
Even after that experience I really do not think I know enough about it to approach the topic, beyond to say IMO at the end of the day its the mothers choice irregardless of disablement or not. The parent must have been considering it to ask, and to me Dawkin's opinion is just representative of what he would do - nothing more.

ren wrote: Seems strange that the same person can believe these three things:
-abortion is a right
-aborting babies just because they're different is a wrong
-You don't do things like me and I don't like your ways: go away!

I don't think that's strange (or accurate of any view expressed here, but whatever). To me it suggests your initial assertion

ren wrote: Of all the abortions people can have, you can categorize them in two groups:

- Because I don't want it (Or now's not the right time)or because it's my body and I do what I want (yet somehow people aren't quite as keen when it comes to chopping their own legs off: these are actual parts of their body)
- Because there's something wrong with the baby or pregnancy.

is incorrect.

just like when it comes to your limbs, the one that makes sense to remove is the one with the disease.

A poor choice of straw man given most people will do whatever possible to keep a limb, diseased or not.

A poor choice of straw man given most people will do whatever possible to keep a limb, diseased or not.

Straw man would need an opposing argument. There isn't one. My own argument is that people abort healthy babies a lot more than they remove healthy limbs, and people will be happier to remove a cancerous limb than a healthy one. Which isn't even an argument, just putting numbers into words.


BTW, whilst the holier-than-thou crowd pat each other on the back, I can't help but notice TOTJO seems to have aborted the guy with ASD/aspergers, for the grand crime of behaving like a guy with ASD/Aspergers! Hurray!

He's neither aborted nor abandoned, ren ...

He's neither aborted nor abandoned, ren ...

I am sorry, but either we cannot find the requested profile or this account is no longer active. Please contact the site administrator if you believe this is an error.

I'd like to report a problem with the website then!

The website is functioning properly.

He is not 'only' a profile on a website, after all. And it is that which is neither aborted nor abandoned.

In this context

On this very website some people have suggested (at least) one other shuts up because of the way he behaves (mostly a communication style which unlike mine doesn't even contain expletives), and probably have reported many of his posts in the hope of having him banned, a form of "online abortion". Yet this person clearly has traits of someone who has some form of ASD (considered to be a disability).

Seems strange that the same person can believe these three things:
-abortion is a right
-aborting babies just because they're different is a wrong
-You don't do things like me and I don't like your ways: go away!

it is.

I'm not going to suggest banning the lad is the same as killing him before birth, but I do struggle to understand how members here can support the right to abortion yet demonize the aborting of disabled babies whilst constantly complaining and eventually banning a guy because of his disability.

I've complained about the BS going on in here on many occasions before, but I must say totjo seems to be reaching ever lower depths every day.

I am not going to derail this thread...

If you would like to discuss, either use PM, or state another thread...

The very lad you refer to, denounced TOTJO, and revoked his membership for your actions against another website... Actions which "the lad" deemed "un-jedi-like"....

You are an instigator as well, and you know we have had complaints against you....

Shall we open this whole can of worms publiclly? Where we can ask all of our membership to chime in...

I have no issues with it...

But, I'll say no more on it it this thread, as the actions taken against anyone have no bearing on this thread topic....

Hey, I never claimed him and I were pals.... I certainly didn't chuck him out for saying things I don't like. But yea, please, go ahead.

ren wrote: Straw man would need an opposing argument. There isn't one. My own argument is that people abort healthy babies a lot more than they remove healthy limbs, and people will be happier to remove a cancerous limb than a healthy one. Which isn't even an argument, just putting numbers into words.

This is a classic example of a straw man argument. The thread is about Richard Dawkins' comments on aborting babies with Down's syndrome. You are now talking about abortion versus amputation. It's pretty obvious that you are obfuscating for the sake of airing some kind of beef you've got with some of the 'holier-than-thou' people here. I'll offer no opinion on inadequacy or ineptitude unless I am asked.

Targeran Arynal wrote:

ren wrote: Straw man would need an opposing argument. There isn't one. My own argument is that people abort healthy babies a lot more than they remove healthy limbs, and people will be happier to remove a cancerous limb than a healthy one. Which isn't even an argument, just putting numbers into words.

This is a classic example of a straw man argument. The thread is about Richard Dawkins' comments on aborting babies with Down's syndrome. You are now talking about abortion versus amputation. It's pretty obvious that you are obfuscating for the sake of airing some kind of beef you've got with some of the 'holier-than-thou' people here. I'll offer no opinion on inadequacy or ineptitude unless I am asked.

Actually I was arguing the merits of the "it's my body I do what I want" argument for abortion, and noted that people are more willing to abort a healthy baby than they are to amputate a healthy limb. Nothing to do with beef with anyone here, as I do not know or give a damn about who here aborts or amputates what.

This being the philosophy of a (once) Jediist website, you'd think "the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language" would be the primary purpose of this place.

ren wrote: Actually I was arguing the merits of the "it's my body I do what I want" argument for abortion, and noted that people are more willing to abort a healthy baby than they are to amputate a healthy limb.

It is an interesting observation to be sure.

ren wrote: I've complained about the BS going on in here on many occasions before, but I must say totjo seems to be reaching ever lower depths every day.

This is not quite so interesting, or relevant.

Yes, people do indeed seem not to find the banning interesting or relevant, hence the "ever lower depths".

'The cut worm forgives the plow.' W. Blake

William Blake: Poet, painter, and specialist in worm psyche.

ren wrote: Yes, people do indeed seem not to find the banning interesting or relevant, hence the "ever lower depths".

Lol, here I go derailing, lol....

It is not interesting, because people understand... People read the boards, see public issues...

If it were possible to ban you, it probably would have happened too...

And few would have complained about that.... Or bitches for your reinstatement....

Quit trying to stir up a bunch of crap....

It's over, in the past..dwelling on it does nothing but prevent forward progress...the art of letting go is needed...by many it seems, as too many are entrenched in their perspectives...oh well

Back on topic...personally I'm not a fan of abortion for anything other than medical reasons. That being said I am not a woman and will therefore never fully understand the difficulties faced by a woman making that decision. It is her body, and hers to do with as she pleases after all only she will have to bear the psychological/physical/emotional weight of her decision...