Quote:
Originally posted by marichiko
I hate to say it Lady Sid, but aren't you getting into a bit of a circular argument here? You are in favor of the government sterilizing people who are severely mentally retarded because its not convenient for society to take care of the child. OK, I know sterilization is not the same as abortion, but they are equally loaded questions in the examples you've been citing lately. So what's your stance on a severely mentally handicapped individual having an abortion, just out of curiosity?
|
I don't know about her response but here is what I find the central weakness of this statement.
In the instance of the State sterilizing profoundly retarded people, it isn't being done for the convenience of the state. It protects the retarded person from pregnancy, and from losing a child. Also it protects the retarded person's family from that burden as well.
Additionally it protects the State (in this context, it's citizens) from the burden of paying for all of this as well as the long term concern of caring for an additional unwanted, but preventable, birth.
Her pro-choice stance is predicated upon preventing late-term, convenience abortions. All she says is that if you're going to get an abortion is to get it early.
Now, all of that being said, we'll see what she says about my interpretation of her stance when she wakes up...