Oh really? (warning, very long, but please read) (4.00 / 1) (#31)
by Kasreyn on Tue Jun 05, 2001 at 11:38:17 PM EST
There should be no law for this. It should not be illegal, in other words. There should be no questions of legality. A woman wants something done to her body, and it poses no potential harm to others, so who are we to legislate what happens to her body? Simply said, it is her decision, not ours
Ok, great!! Sounds good. Let's take it one step further though, and revive the practise of suttee, eh? After all, she'll die in about 12 years or so and she'll no longer be needing that "part of her body" - you know the one that walks and talks and laughs and thinks. Let's just toss that little lump of flesh on the pyre with her, because after all, it's part of her body.
Sorry to go berserk on you there but that's the same apologist crap abortion advocates always use to make themselves feel better.
(Similarly to abortion. I am not pro-abortion; I am pro-choice. We should not be allowed to legislate the actions of one's body. It is for that person and immediate relatives to discuss and decide.)
Quit using emotionally-charged rhetoric. You are FOR it or you are AGAINST it. Thus you are PRO ABORTION. When you get over it and can admit it to yourself then you will be a true abortion proponent. Until then you're only kidding yourself. Me, I'm an anti-abortion person. I would say pro life but I won't for 3 reasons:
* it is so emotionally charged it is impossible to discuss;
* it is the word used by the religeous right, whose guts I hate dearly; and
* EVERYONE should be pro life. I am simply anti abortion. Saying one is pro life says nothing.
I'm not angry at you except for your use of silly rhetoric and your refusal to accept the repercussions of your own position. I am not attacking you. We merely believe differently, to wit:
You believe a fetus (pre born human) is a part or extension of the mother's body. You apparently believe that the experience of being squeezed out of a vagina in an obstetrics room magically transforms the fetus into a human.
I believe it is a seperate and complete human being from the exact moment of fertilization. It is at this point that, to my layman's understanding of genetics, the child has a complete and unique set of genetic information. It is at this point that in my opinion and firm belief it qualifies as a seperate human being and thus entitled to the "inalienable" rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If my understanding of genetics or individuality were to change, then I might well change my viewpoint on this.
I do not approach the abortion argument from the viewpoint of its functionality in population control. Personally, I think it is laughably inadmissable as a means of birth control, because celibacy is always available and is utterly effective and proven (not to mention energy efficient!). I personally am disgusted by the thought of helpless children bearing the cost of their parent's irresponsibility. I am sure you, doubltess a moral and upstanding person, would be too, if you considered fetuses human as well. However, I will stop there so as to avoid dragging this post through tired old lines of rhetoric.
I want to stress the fact that I am not attacking you, and I do not hate you, like so many abortion opponents would. If I met you on the street I am sure you would not harm me. We both believe in not harming others - in affording protection and the right to life to other humans. We simply have differing beliefs on when that protection should begin.
Enough of this off-topicality! Sorry for the rant, but I saw a perfect chance to expound my beliefs. Besides, I feel I have to do my part to convert others to my way of thinking - or else what kind of abortion opponent would I be? =)
As to the actual childbirth, I see no reason it should be illegal based solely on age. I do, however, see that there could be tremendous advantage to having reproduction be barred to those who would make inferior parents - either that or mandatory relocation to adoptive (qualified) parents upon birth. So many of the modern woes of this race are caused by incompetent parents. The drawbacks in terms of freedom caused by such a restriction might well be outweighed by the benefits in reduced numbers of fucked-up kids.
Your last statement I agree with. Either she knew the risks or she did not. It is her doctor's duty to advise her of the risks. If she is incompetent to make this decision, a la senility, then of course she should not have children at all (see remark on bad parents...). However, IN THESE CASES, I would see it as neccessary for the woman to sign a waiver or legal document stating that in case of complications involving the possible loss of either her or the baby, that she be sacrificed to bring the baby out alive if neccessary. She should NOT be allowed to make this decision and then wind up simply killing the new human because she is physically and perhaps morally incapable of carrying it out to its conclusion. If it then comes down to the baby or her, the baby MUST be chosen.
Personally, I think it's a really lame and despicable thing to do, on her part. A child needs good parenting. If it were taken from her immediately and put in foster care it might do well. Rather, its formative years will be spent in hospitals watching its mother die. It will have the happy memories of watching its sole parent probably die a gruesome withered death of cancer or whatever. And then it will be alone, and THEN it will go to foster care, and be severely fucked-up to boot. If I were a child welfare worker in this woman's area I would do all in my power to take this child away from her PRONTO. As someone posted earlier, I think she's doing this just for the "unconditional love" kick, which is a monstrous reason to create a human life. If she just wants to experience pregnancy and labor, well that's a valid desire but still not a valid reason to create another human.
I know what I speak of - a friend of mine's mother is extremely old (she was adopted at birth, sadly to a parent too old), and her formative years were ones of fear and loneliness. Her mother and her mother's friends were all old enough to be her grandmothers. She had no friends her own age in her own neighborhood. All through her childhood, these friends of her mother kept dying. She spent a lot of time in hospitals watchin them wither away. Consequently, my friend is one of the most fucked up people I know. Her life, at least her emotional life, has been basically trashed by this experience. So, I would personally prefer this woman not be allowed to keep and raise the child. But if there were a large and interconnected family involved - so that she could continue to be raised by her siblings and grandchildren - then this family experience might be wholesome enough to offset the trauma of one's mother dying of old age when one is 12 years old.
"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."
R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]