"Liberal values" on collision course

[dizzle]

Two “liberal values” are on a collision course. The first is, of course, the right to terminate fetal life at will. The second is the freedom to abort children on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, disabilities, intelligence, and future illnesses (certain cancers and arthritis) when the liberal mantra is supposedly “pro diversity.”

http://www.drlaura.com/blog/2007/06/05/a-moral-and-ethical-dilemma-for-abortion-rights-supporters/

[TuckEverlasting]

I'm terminating my children if they don't have opposable toes. I want them to have all the advantages I didn't have, dagnabbit. :rant:

[LostSheep]

Watch the liberals not agonize too much over it.

[Wyzaard]

Watch the liberals not agonize too much over it.

Well, there's no reason to, really:


Two “liberal values” are on a collision course. The first is, of course, the right to terminate fetal life at will. The second is the freedom to abort children on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, disabilities, intelligence, and future illnesses (certain cancers and arthritis) when the liberal mantra is supposedly “pro diversity.”

Aborting for gender is not much an issue in the US... China and India are the hot-spots for this practice. Sexual orientation and intelligence aren't things you can simply check for prenatally. Some disabilities are practically terminal, so aborting such fetuses would be the merciful choice anyways... and 'future illnesses' may be gene-therapied or prepared for depending upon the specific problem, unless it's again something practically terminal and the choice is clear.

So... nope, not much of a 'problem', feux-dr Laura.

[Petragon]

Yeah, more fragrance than substance in this one....

[Wyzaard]

Yeah, more fragrance than substance in this one....

Like day-old taco-meat.