Welcome to Gaia! ::

They're talking about doing it against the parent's will though. Not at the request of the parent.

It's the same kind of people who say things like, "Soon it will be a sin for parents to have a child that carries the heavy burden of genetic disease. We are entering a world where we have to consider the quality of our children".

We don't need to wait and see what will happen if it's legal. This all when on in the Netherlands...and now we can look over there and see what happens when this all becomes legal. I'd also like to point out that people who are pro-choice usually support euthanasia (the right to die), so I don't see a big uproar coming from that crowd.

There is a foundation. The foundation is the parties who support abortion also support euthanasia. The foundation is the Netherlands. The foundation is that a lot of doctors who supported this and were mentioned in articles about this are pro-choice.

And you know what? Thinking about it, I really don't see that it's more heinous than doing it in the third trimester abortion. There's not a big difference between a newborn and a fetus except one's in the uterus and one is not. So if your reason for having an abortion is there's something wrong with the fetus, go ahead and use infanticide. What's the difference, except that it's less painful to the baby? They're killing these babies anyway. They obviously don't deserve personhood if they're deformed. (Considering it's the only reason besides danger to the mother that's permitted in the third trimester, so they have less of a right to live). So go ahead and keep on perfecting the human species. Just roleplay Hitler and there you go (he started out with aborting deformed children and euthanizing deformed infants...)

Exactly..... It's common knowledge to anyone who knows anything about politics. Its kinda like asking someone to prove that we breathe air, there's no statistics or studies to prove it, everyone just knows it's true.

I tried reading up a bit on far-left politics, and I've found nothing so far that supports your view. And I don't see the point in insisting something is true when you don't seem to have anything to back it up.





What about children born with something that is definitely going to kill them soon anyway, and they are in pain because of it? Euthanasia to end pain from a terminal illness exists for adults, so why not babies?

If the baby is definitely going to die, and in more pain than if they were euthanised, what is the point in dragging it out and prolonging their suffering?

Scribble, I've never read it out of a book, I've never seen a study, I've never seen it directly stated in a newspaper. But most of my "evidence" happens in conversations I've heard between liberals and conversations I've had with liberals.
From what I've heard I can see a common link, liberals are among those who most vehemently oppose the Iraq war and those that most often call for Bush to resign and be tried for war crimes. There are very few conservatives who do the same. Also most liberals also favor abortion, easily seen by the adoption of legalised abortion on the platform of the Democratic Party's platform(or Liberal party should you be Canadian). Further euthanaisia is most commonly opposed by religious people, namely conservatives, while most commonly supported by liberals, an example is the Netherlands which legalized euthanasia in the same circumstances the topic is about. The Netherlands are commonly known as the most liberal country in the world.
Please don't play stupid anymore.

I don't remember saying anything about radical leftists not protecting human rights.




I think I misunderstood you when you said they support 'killing children'. You could have been more specific and said 'euthanasia.' The way you said it, liberals support going out and murdering kids. Some people may view euthanasia in this light, but euthanasia is still different from murder.

Murder is killing someone in cold blood. Euthanasia is killing someone for their own good (or at their request, if they can voice an opinion).

Killing disabled newborns is killing children, and with euthanasia, it's actively killing them.

If the standards for newborn euthanasia are the same for the standards for 3rd trimester abortion done due to fetal disability...which they should, in my opinion...then newborns can be killed for having cleft pallet or club feet.

How very humanitarian of them to get rid of babies that aren't perfect white wanted bundles of joy!

No, she describes what pro-choicers *think* the adoption system is looking for. The reality is quite different.

This falacy arose out of a rule that disallowed white parents to adopt a child of different ethnicity. Because more white parents adopt, a disporpotionate amount of white children were adopted. This does not explain everything, but it is a HUGE part of the issue.

I say perfect white bundles of joy because the people who are encouraged to abort the most are minorities, babies are aborted post-viability for things like CLEFT PALLET and CLUB FEET and it's legal since they're classified as "severe disabilities" when it comes to abortion, it's just plain social engineering at that point.

I'd also have to wonder how humanitarian it is to cut off life support and let a baby die drawn out and painfully or just inject them and let them die quickly. But cutting off life support is as actively killing on an infant as it would be to go into a hospital, find someone on life support, and pull the switch. Whether you are authorized to do it or not, the manner in which the death is dealt is the same, so if it's not actively killing someone to take them off life support, murderers should be dealt with differently if they're just going into random hospital rooms and pulling plugs, since they aren't doing any active killing.

In most countries, third trimester abortion needs to be done only in the case of the mother's health, which in the US extends so far as temporary depression from going though childbirth, or fetal disabilities, which covers treatable things like I mentioned. These are done on viable babies, and not just babies who will die if born, and not only if it will kill the mother or hospitalize her if she has them. It's freaking sick.

The adoption system isn't looking for white bundles of joy. It's looking for ANYTHING. At least in America. Because the more kids in the system, the more funding they get. Again, another thing that is sick. A lot of them are doing it to place children, but then there are a lot who don't give a damn about kids and WANT them to stay in the system because then they get more money. Humans are just dollar signs now. We don't matter. We have no worth as people, or as human beings. Just as commodities.