Religion – your views

[Tobbe]

Interesting indeed. Most babies born at around the 22nd week don't survive, and there's really no point in trying to keep them alive, since almost all of the ones who do survive will get serious complications. More on this near the bottom of the article.

[Cairnie]

What I don't understand is why it even happens. I would HATE to have a premature baby.

[Acarr]

Sonja had been in such distress for so long that the hormones she was producing actually helped Amillia to survive.

Ah, the beauty of Nature.

[spiraldoor]

Abortion is legal up until 24 weeks in Britain, so why would aborting, say, a 23-week foetus be acceptable, while killing a baby which was born at 22 weeks be murder, even though the 22-week baby's brain would be less developed than that of the 23-week foetus?

[Tobbe]

Dunno, there are probably medical reasons. Ask a doctor. And it's also for the good of society, I guess. In the end, the only factor when it comes to deciding whether something is moral or immoral is whether it is good or bad for the society.

I'd much rather live in a society where abortion is legal than in a society where it isn't *coughirecoughland*.

[spiraldoor]

Dunno, there are probably medical reasons. Ask a doctor. And it's also for the good of society, I guess. In the end, the only factor when it comes to deciding whether something is moral or immoral is whether it is good or bad for the society.

I'd much rather live in a society where abortion is legal than in a society where it isn't *coughirecoughland*.

It makes little difference here, what with it being legal in the UK and the fact that England is only several minutes' flight away. :/

[Xenon]

What right has society got to decide whether someone aborts a child? Such decisions should be made at an individual level, not a national level.

[Acarr]

I agree. But I'm not really sure how to explain my point...

[Tobbe]

What right has society got to decide whether someone aborts a child? Such decisions should be made at an individual level, not a national level.

wtf?

It's beneficial for the modern industrialised society to legalize abortion by request.

[Xenon]

What right has society got to decide whether someone aborts a child? Such decisions should be made at an individual level, not a national level.

wtf?

It's beneficial for the modern industrialised society to legalize abortion by request.

You missed my point entirely. Society should legalise abortion by request, but the actual decision to abort lies solely with the individual, not the nation's law system.

[Tobbe]

[Xenon]

Ditto.

[spiraldoor]

What right has society got to decide whether someone aborts a child? Such decisions should be made at an individual level, not a national level.

wtf?

It's beneficial for the modern industrialised society to legalize abortion by request.

You missed my point entirely. Society should legalise abortion by request, but the actual decision to abort lies solely with the individual, not the nation's law system.

I don't agree with this. People who are incredibly stupid or have genetic disorders shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.

[Cairnie]

So people who have aspergers - something that *could* be genetic - aren't allowed to have kids?

Wow man.

[spiraldoor]

So people who have aspergers - something that *could* be genetic - aren't allowed to have kids?

That is not what I said.

[Tobbe]

If people have diseases such as Huntington's, obviously they shouldn't be allowed to reproduce. But the last thing humanity needs is selective "breeding", since the human gene pool is already dangerously small.

[spiraldoor]

If everyone who has a genetic disease is prohibited from reproduction, then this time next generation there will be no genetic diseases. That would be good for society in the long run, would it not?

[Acarr]

What right has society got to decide whether someone aborts a child? Such decisions should be made at an individual level, not a national level.

wtf?

It's beneficial for the modern industrialised society to legalize abortion by request.

You missed my point entirely. Society should legalise abortion by request, but the actual decision to abort lies solely with the individual, not the nation's law system.

I don't agree with this. People who are incredibly stupid or have genetic disorders shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.

Well that's not very fair.

[Tobbe]

A few problems with that, though:

1) It's not good for society if society's dead from inbreeding.
2) The mutations causing the genetic diseases will happen again.
3) People can be carriers of genetic diseases without getting the disease, or they could start showing symptoms after having kids (like with Huntington's). In order to make sure no carriers of genetic diseases pass on their DNA to the next generation you would have to test everone. Testing 6.5 billion people for every genetic disease is impossible.
4) In industrialised countries, an even lower birth rate than we have today (which would ultimately be the outcome of your master plan) would be crippling for the economy. Lots of oldies and few workers is not good. If you want to solve the problem with immigration that would give the even bigger problem of Sharia courts popping up on every street corner.
5) The percentage of people who have serious genetic diseases is so low that it's pointless spending vast amounts of resources on exterminating them.

[Xenon]

The biggest problem of all is actually applying this rule. Already we have thousands of people who ignore reproduction law and give birth underage - what's going to stop people with genetic disorders from doing so if they see no problem, especially when this rule is discriminative?

Besides, you treat people with genetically inherited problems as if they're flies, who need to be squashed.