Seriously Disabled Babies are "Not Viable People" and Should be Aborted
The new eugenics is growing at a horrifying pace. In the UK, a House of Lords, member argued that disabled children should be aborted for their own good. From the story:Seriously disabled children should be considered non-persons and would be better off having been aborted, according to a Peer speaking in the House of Lords Tuesday. Attempting to couch her assertion in terms of children's "rights",Why limit the killing of the disabled to abortion? Why not kill babies that make it to birth with serious disabilities like they do regularly in the Netherlands? Indeed, why limit the killing to babies? After seriously injured or ill patients become non viable people let's just put their heads on the chopping block, so to speak, and put us, er I mean them, out of our, er I mean, their misery?
Molly Baroness Meacher told the Lords that children born with severe disabilities are "not viable people". The comments came as the Lords debated an amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, put forward by Lady Swinton, Baroness Masham of Ilton, that would have protected unborn disabled children from abortion after the 24 week gestational time limit. The amendment was defeated by 89 votes to 22.
Under Britain's abortion law, children judged to have some form of disability, including such comparatively minor disabilities as club foot or cleft palate, can be aborted up to the time of natural birth.
Referring to two children she knows who were born prematurely with severe cerebral palsy, Baroness Meacher said, "They were natural births. Those two children cannot breathe naturally; they have to be helped to breathe. They will never talk. They lie on their backs and can do nothing. My belief is that there are children, born at those very early ages, who are not viable people. It would be in their best interests to have been aborted."
There was a time when such bigoted sentiments would have led to shunning. People saw it for the naked bigotry that it is. No more. These attitudes permeate the elite and medical intelligentsia and are seeping into society. The only antidote is to say, "Not on my watch," and mean it.
Labels: New Eugenics
posted by Wesley J. Smith at 2:29 PM
6 Comments:
Peter Singer's influence is widening. And note that one controversial case has already surfaced in Britain in which a fetus was aborted that would have had a cleft palate (but was otherwise normal so far as was known).
The widespread availability of "therapeutic" (ha ha) abortion and its widespread use as simple birth control, as opposed to being an absolute last resort in hard cases, has spread the idea of lives being disposable much as poison ivy spreads. It started out simply:
Pregnancy inconvenient? Terminate it.
Then it progressed:
Fetus going to have Down's syndrome? Can't have that! Gotta have the perfect child, so abort it.
Fetus going to have a mild defect that is easily correctible with surgery? Abort it anyway.
Grandma is in a nursing home? Starve her.
Care might be futile, even though it might also well be beneficial to the patient? End it. Patient goes away under a sheet; problem solved.
You're depressed and suicidal? Go ahead: kill yourself; it's your right, and who are we to interfere?
Infant has severe disabilities? Kill him.
Note the progressive devaluation of life. Soon enough none of us will be safe from the medical death squads.
The US will probably see some form of nationalized health care. However, this will be the flip side as the drive begins to keep health expenditures as low as possible and prevent "disproportionate" use of medical resources.
Thanks for the warnings, Wesley.
Powerful K-man. And some deny we are developing a culture of death.
I say the culture of death is a product of the fast-food generation - everything comes at us fast and easy, and if something is hard, then it must be bad. People kevetch about having to wait for food in crowded restaurants as if the restaurant was to blame for the crowd, or they complain when they don't get that promotion they want right away. My best friend Mike is upset because he is looking for a job that pays $15 an hour and he cannot find an opening that starts above $12. He doesn't understand that if he takes one of those jobs, in a year he'll have more than $15 an hour, if he's willing to put in the work for it. But no, everything has to be now-now-now.
So if you have someone in your life who is inconvinent, get rid of him or her because he or she will keep you from whatever goals you want to achieve. Don't like your boyfriend 'cause you have to work to make the relationship good? Get rid of him. Don't like having to visit your mom in the nursing home and pay for her care? Get rid of her. Save the money for yourself and be free to have fun!
"Seriously disabled children should be considered non-persons and would be better off having been aborted, according to a Peer speaking in the House of Lords Tuesday"
Can't we just declare that holding such opinions disqualifies someone from being a full person and use them for organ transplants ? Obviously anybody who would make a statement like this is far more brain damaged than even the worst PVS case, after all.
It would have the effect of making such idiotic advocacy more circumspect as well ;)
I'm disabled and to be honest the way we are going under new labour and the Tories, it would be best to put us down at birth, I'm tired of people looking at me as a thing.
I'm tired of reading about benefit frauds workshy lazy worthless. I a human who is treated less then an animal either take us for what we are or get rid of us.
New labour are good at telling us whats good for us without asking us.
I'm slowly getting to the point in which my life is ending and ending fast
Robert: The good news is that there is pushback against such crass attitudes. You are a fully human being, and those who look at you as a "think" dehumanize themselves. Hang in there and thanks for contributing to SHS.
Post a Comment
<< Home