A state tries to protect the lives of Down syndrome babies and others from selective abortions. Liberals want them wiped out.
It is really good to talk about Down syndrome children and abortion because it causes Liberals to show what sociopathic Nazis they really are. A Down syndrome child used to be an understood fixture of a few families. Now, a Down syndrome child causes shaking of the head. “What kind of parents don’t get tested these days?” And: “Surely they would have gotten rid of it if they had known.”
Am I exaggerating? I don’t think so. I have already posted one story among many possible stories about people being quite open about the need for parents to kill defective offspring. Now here is Amanda Marcotte joining the blood-soaked chorus, at Slate:
No one is well served when children with disabilities are forced on families that know they don’t have the emotional or financial resources to help them.
The children are already part of the families. If they didn’t exist, then there would be no one to medically test.
Marcotte is upset because it is now a felony in North Dakota to abort a child due to a birth defect. In Marcotte’s world it should be illegal to “discriminate” except for babies in the womb. Then suddenly discrimination is OK and anyone who tries to ban it is “forcing” a child on an unwilling family—as if outlawing homicide is the same as abandoning a child on a doorstep and legally requiring the family to adopt the strange baby.
As Cassie Fiano writes at LifeSite.com,
Here’s something that Marcotte obviously doesn’t think of: what would these families do if there was no prenatal testing available? They wouldn’t have the option of killing their babies beforehand, because they wouldn’t know about it. And it has been proven in studies time and time again that families of children with Down syndrome are overwhelmingly happier, that they love their children with Down syndrome, and that their children bring them closer together.
Yet pro-abortion extremists like Amanda Marcotte would instead follow in Richard Dawkins’s footsteps, saying that babies with Down syndrome should be aborted, and all because they find these disabilities inconvenient. They relentlessly beat into the heads of women that a child with a disability will ruin their lives, because God knows that if people knew the reality of raising a child with Down syndrome or another disability, people wouldn’t be as quick to abort them.
So it’s all scare tactics and fear-mongering, talking about these babies as if they were unwanted burdens who would be hated and resented because these poor, poor people wouldn’t have the chance to snuff out their lives anymore.
But Fiano points out that Marcotte’s reasoning is even more perverse because she pretends that there is no such thing as adoption. Down syndrome children get adopted all the time. So there are no poor families getting “forced” to have defective children. Others will take the burden.
Which leaves nothing to Marcotte’s argument except a desire to exterminate babies who don’t seem ideal.