Seems to me that we were called crazy for bring that up. Amazing how the when conservatives say something is going to happen they get hammered as crazy. When it happenends liberals seem to forget things turned out exactly how we said they would and try to throw more money at the getting it right, which makes things worse. They just cannot get it that Government is seldom the best solution.

 

-----signature-----

This wouldn't be a new practice.

It wasn't an uncommon practice in ages past to dispose of unwanted newborns.

Clearly this shouldn't be an option for everyone, but there are definitely some scenarios where euthanizing, or allowing a newborn to die would save everyone(including the child) a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering.

It should never be mandatory though.

Also, if someone can look down at a healthy happy baby and want to kill it they are probably not a well adjusted individual and they should be checked out.

We are biologically programmed to love babies. If they don't their brains are probably not functioning normally.

but there are definitely some scenarios where euthanizing, or allowing a newborn to die would save everyone(including the child) a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering.


You probably actually believe that too. You people make me sick seriously. If anyone doesn't deserve the life they have its you. You coward

 

-----signature-----

I know someone who is disappointed

 

-----signature-----

You sound a lot like Jesus right now!



Like it or not God created all sorts of miserable conditions that little babies can be born with. A lot of them will only know pain for the small amount of time they are here. I do not see the harm in lessening that time.

@ Mastboro

 

-----signature-----

A friend of mine years ago had a son. His heart had two holes in it, his diaphragm was incomplete, and his lungs were immature. He had severe brain damage due to a lack of oxygen and had little to no awareness of anything going on. He lived in severe pain on machines for a whopping 6 hours after the surgical attempts to fix the problems they could.

What was the point? They knew from halfway through the pregnancy that he most likely wouldn't live (labeled as 50% chance, optimistically, at 4 months or so...dropped to 10% by 6 months in). They pushed on out of hope, but he died anyway. He was held by his mother for the last few seconds of his life, when they removed him from the machines. There's almost no chance he had any conscious activity anywhere in there...basically comatose his entire life.

Do the hardcore anti-abortionists even consider cases like this? How about ectopic pregnancies? Incest?

 

-----signature-----

What's the point of allowing people that are less than perfect a chance to live? Should we also off the ones that later become less than perfect? I say no.

 

-----signature-----

This isn't a new issue, ehticists and politicians have been having this discussion for decades in the EU. Gremany at one point was considering a law that would allow parents of children born with severe birth defects to terminate them up to 6 months after birth. It is a very interesting argument for both sides and draws out a number of stupid contradictory arguemnts so it's well worth having. One of the more entertaining is those that would argue that the government shouldn't come between a doctor and a patient are the first ones to cry the government should ban abortion and euthenasia. WTF, retards can't see hypocrisy when it's staring at them in the mirror?

 

-----signature-----