Penny

Grim Galaxy: Shots and Chances

Sayeeda tapped experimentaly on the door they had entered through, her sub machine gun muzzle woke a soft metallic clang from the hatch. A moment later there was an answering clang from the otherside. Grinning maliciously she began to tap out a series of long and short clangs on the panel.

B Y E

A moment later came a series of bangs from the other side.

F U C K Y

chuckling to herself she stepped down the stair to where Neil and Drake were pulling themselves to their feet. She observed Neil's tattoo and resolved not to touch anything herself. It was unlikely but not impossible that the Terrans would be able to gain entry, somehow she doubted cutting bars or blasting charges were going to cut it. Now if they had time to bring up a plasma cannon...

"We should probably get moving," she said in a neutral voice and headed towards the circular corridor.

"And as much fun as anthropology class is, I don't see much to justify the effort so far," she said to Drake. The scholar coloured as though about to snap back at her but clearly though the better of it.

"You wont be dissapointed, it will all be worth it you will see," he said, striding forward. Maybe it would to Drake, but Sayeeda didn't have much use for a buried ruin she couldnt take with her, and the interest that people were showing in this place and in Drake was starting to make her a little uneasy. She wondered if his father had an idea of what he was doing and wanted him back for his knowledge. With a metallic rasp she stripped out her half empty magazine and fitted another tube of rounds. One problem at a time.

@POOHEAD189

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

Moving along.

Identity politics are totally fine

@mdk

I assume he is suggesting that a gay black man faces more discrimination than a straight one and so on. Seems fairly intuitive.

Buccaneers and Blades (Fantasy, High Casual)

Why do this to me?!

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

Not just the gene therapy trials, but anyone that refuses to reproduce with someone who bears a striking resemblance to Sasquatch.

@catchamber

Oh noes, my preference for the handsome and college educated makes me a eugenicist! Or it would if I ever intended on having children.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

<Snipped quote by Penny>

You're right, it's just.... it's hard for me not to connect this dot back to myself. If a baby is born with one leg, well, that's gonna cost you money, better just kill it. Hard for me not to react to that. And like I said, I'm not talking about a ban on abortion in general -- just with regards to this post-birth murder concept. Sparta used to do that

<Snipped quote>

Indeed. And it's a very specifically-targeted list which basically amounts to a mercy kill -- again I don't think anybody's happy about that, but it's reasonable.

<Snipped quote>

You borrow it from JEBUS. Naw, again, I'm talking about actual born babies which are alive. I think people who kill their pets because they're too expensive are assholes -- people who kill their actually-born living human baby, because of money, I mean..... I'm having a hard time characterizing that beyond "monstrous."

<Snipped quote>

I dunno, once it's actually born, I don't think it's up to the mother anymore. Everything up until that point, there's a legitimate conflict of rights between the fetus and the mother, and legally speaking you can make an argument either way -- but once born, that conflict goes away. We owe that baby the world and everything in it, and no one should be allowed to just kill it (barring that honestly pretty reasonable Netherlands standard of "Suffering forever with no hope of improvement").

@mdk

Shockingly I actually agree with everything you say here. I'm sure that a baby being born with one leg wouldn't qualify under the standards the Netherlands are using. That being said if the first ultrasound at ten weeks showed a baby that wasn't developing normally, I don't think it is unfair for the mother to consider aborting.

The point the authors are making is it is a little trite to say 1 day before birth you can terminate and one day afterwards you cannot because there is functionally no difference. That is a fair ethical argument to have. Most of the article is spinning out the ethical implications of existing norms rather than any sort of recommendation.

They explicitly don't consider adoption because it isn't really relevant to the question at hand.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

I guess I'm glad I'm the one likely to be counseling a sixteen year old with an unwanted pregnancy.

No one, not even the writers of the article, think late term or post birth abortions are a great options. Its very unlikely that any mother is going to bear a child and then have it killed because she thinks its going to be to expensive. She is (hopefully) going to know its expensive beforehand and abort, like many women currently do at early stages.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

So basically being of childbearing age means accepting responsibility in the case of being raped? I mean you were walking around with a womb, what did you expect?!

I'd much prefer women have control over their own bodies, much like people have control over their own cars in all these weird driving analogies.

As for the post birth abortion bit, it does make me a little uncomfortable and I'd much rather discover the problem early and terminate. Lets use anencephaly as an example. If you detect it (and frequently we do) its almost negligent to allow the mother to give birth. It is her decision of course but I would strongly counsel termination. I suppose you might make an argument that its organs might be useful (not you but someone) but I wouldn't risk a patients life on it.

Pregnancy can be a mistake, if its early enough I don't have an ethical problem correcting it. The patient doesn't lose rights or autonomy in my mind just because she gets impregnated. She dosen't need to be 'made to live with it' when there is an easy safe and ethical solution to hand.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

@The Harbinger of Ferocity So if a child is going to be born with lets say:

According to the article the Netherlands alreay has such a list:

the neonate’s suffering must be unbearable or the fetus must be suffering or be likely to suffer after birth;

there must not be a prospect of improvement, and in the case of a late-term abortion, the fetal disorder must be so serious that medical experts believe that medical treatment after birth would be futile;

the parents must have been fully informed of the diagnosis and prognosis, and both the physician and the parents must be convinced that no reasonable alternative exists given the situation of the child or the fetus;

at least one other, independent physician must have examined the child or fetus and given a written opinion on compliance with the due criteria of the kind listed above;

and the termination of life or of the pregnancy must be carried out with all due care. (Euthanasia and Newborn Infants, Government of the Netherlands website (last visited Jan. 13, 2015); 2007 Directions, 2.3(a & c-e) & 4.6.2 (a-b & d-f).)

@Penny

Termination cant even be considered? Sounds super moral to me, that dammed mother should have known before she got knocked up that her baby would have a neural tube defect or what have you.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

At that point you could invent any explanation you deem fit that is "too difficult" and thus making it fitting to abort the child.

@The Harbinger of Ferocity

You mean like people currently do? I've had an abortion because I didn't want to have a child (it was very early in the term). The problem was solved!

All these researchers are doing is pointing out that there is little functional difference between a late term abortion and an early post birth abortion and it is somewhat arbitrary to pretend otherwise.