Hello everyone ---------------------------------------- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 12:27:52 -0400 > Subject: Re: [MD] Morality, Abortion and the MoQ > > > Dan: > Our medical advances are a wonder to behold. However, the screening > processes are far from infallible. According to your logic, Ham, when a baby > like Fred is born, we should immediately end it's "ill-begotten" life. > History is full of "ill-begotten creatures" who have added an immense value > to our world. Don't you know that? > > I have to say, you're a cold man, Mr. Priday. > > [Krimel] > I feel the need to bathe every time I agree with Ham on something, but fresh > from the shower I must say, no one is talking about infanticide here. Your > example of Fred is a classic case of seeing the issue from the Top Down. Dan: You make my point for me, Krim. We HAVE to see the issue from the top down unless we're somehow able to hop in a time machine and zoom forward. Who's to say a poor misbegotten creature like Christy Brown is going to grow up to be a wonderful poet, artist, and author? You? Ham? Why do you guys have the right? Give me a break. Krimel: > Fred would not be here if this or that had been otherwise. The fact is none > of us would be here if this or that had gone otherwise. The odds against the > chance combination of sperm and egg producing Dan Glover are astronomical > and yet here you are. No one is talking about retroactive abortion. Abortion > decisions are made from the Bottom Up. Speaking about the "potential" of an > unformed human life is meaningless. It could be Jesus, it could be Hitler, > it could miscarry and not even be noticed. All are potential at conception. Dan: I thought I qualified my statement in a clear way but I see now I did not. Personally, I am pro-choice. If prenatal screeening makes it clear that the fetus is severely deformed then I think the parents have a very personal and difficult decision to make. However, the potential you refer to so blithely is not so clear. In fact, no one can predict the future. I think we can agree on this much...
>Krimel: > Until about 30 years ago everything involved in reproduction was left to > chance. Today we hanging 4D sonogram portraits of little Johnny or Janie on > the refrigerator and color code their nurseries. Dan: Even so, I am sure you'd agree not all mothers receive the best that prenatal care has to offer. >Krimel: > On average every adult male is producing about 50,000 sperm per minute. > Woman are born with about 1 to 2 million egg cells. All are potentially > human. Monty Python said it well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8 > > > "Every sperm is sacred > Every sperm is great > If a sperm is wasted, > God gets quite irate." > > This notion of "potential human life" is as absurd as Jains and their gauze > masks. Dan: But it's not nonsense to the Jains. I'm not saying I agree with that particular school of thought but neither do I feel I have the right to call it nonsense. Krimel: Your friend Fred is potential realized and I have great admiration > for all who succeed and find joy in the face of adversity. But many years > ago I did some observations at the Georgia Retardation Center. It was a > place that smelled of Lysol and urine and the people living there ranged > from being in near vegetative states to having profound behavioral problems. > In all cases the families of these people could not cope with either the > emotional or financial strain of caring for them and they had become wards > of the state. That too is potential realized. Dan: Years ago it was quite common to steer those with birth deformities to institutions like the one where you observed. Today, not so. It's my understanding that today those in charge of such things prefer to mainstream kids who years ago would have been given no chance. Sounds to me like you're still back there observing. >Krimel: > As prenatal tests are more and better able to identify the potential for > such defects I for one am not willing to condemn a couple that decides not > the take on the kind of hardship raising a special needs child demands. I > believe with Down's syndrome, which has been detectable through screening > for many years, as many as 80% of couples elect not to carry through with > the pregnancy. Dan: Again, that is a personal choice the parents have to make. I am not advocating forcing parents to bear deformed children. But neither should we unilaterally declare what's best either. Each situation is different as evidenced by the 20% who elect not to terminate the pregnancy. >Krimel: > I think this is a case of intellectual patterns being able to guide and mold > biological patterns. Dan: I tend to agree. Still, I think it's important to understand the value that people like Fred and Christy Brown and many others add the to world. Intellectually, it might have been better if they were never born. Luckily, we're not always guided by intellect, however. Dan _________________________________________________________________ Get quick access to your favorite MSN content with Internet Explorer 8. http://ie8.msn.com/microsoft/internet-explorer-8/en-us/ie8.aspx?ocid=B037MSN55C0701A Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
