The Abortion Debate No One Wants To Have

I will always vividly remember the day my wife and I found out that our baby that she was carrying in her womb was a Down's child. The doctor immediately began to talk in veiled terms of ending the pregnancy which we of course ignored as to us a child is a child no matter what. The debate over life in this country is not just unsettled, it is one that we haven't really had as is the case in this article. Like with Terry Schiavo, the question that should concern people is one of "others" (including the state) determining which lives are worth living. For instance, what will happen if a "gay" gene is really discovered and parents want to then start testing for that disorder in order to abort the imperfect baby? Does homosexuality then become a protected disability while a Down's child is not? Who decides? How about a very old person whose constant need for dialysis seems a poor use of resources given she will statistically probably only live another five years and has had a good life already? Once again who decides? I think the only truly defensible position is that life, all life, should be valued and protected.

Prenatal testing is making your right to abort a disabled child more like "your duty" to abort a disabled child.

By Patricia E. Bauer

Tuesday, October 18, 2005; Page A25

SANTA MONICA, Calif. -- If it's unacceptable for William Bennett to link abortion even conversationally with a whole class of people (and, of course, it is), why then do we as a society view abortion as justified and unremarkable in the case of another class of people: children with disabilities? Please read more of this article.