Kathy Petersen’s Blog

Life Goes On

Posted in abortion, politics by Kathy on September 18, 2008

Since Gov. Palin was tapped to be the Republican VP nominee, much attention has been paid to her youngest son, who has Down Syndrome, and was diagnosed with it prenatally. Many people who call themselves “pro-choice” have criticized Mrs. Palin for her choice to carry baby Trig to term, rather than killing him before he ever saw the light of day.

Abortion advocates place much emphasis on the term “pro-choice” instead of “pro-abortion” because, they say, nobody (or almost nobody) is actually pro-abortion… rather, they are merely pro-choice — that is, that these people think that the woman should have the right to choose to kill her child or not as she sees fit, and that no one should interfere with that choice. Bull. Total and complete and utter bull malarky!

I have seen more than a few people post comments on various articles and blogs about Trig Palin, in which they say that Mrs. Palin should have had an abortion. They do not respect her choice to carry her baby to term, but instead prove that they are, in fact, not pro-choice, but pro-abortion.

Liberals, in addition to being champions of abortion also claim the mantle of promotion of “diversity” and being against “discrimination.” As long as the “diversity” is limited to men sticking their penises into other men’s rectums, or women fisting each other, then they’re all for it. But when it comes down to discriminating against fetuses with genetic disorders or congenital anomalies, then all their fine-sounding talk goes up in smoke. Then it becomes obvious that society is only allowed to be diverse or non-discriminatory within the parameters that they have chosen. Parameters which do not allow imperfect babies to be born.

One of the saddest comments I saw was from a man who said that if he knew his child would be less than perfect (have some disability or a genetic defect of some sort), then he would try to coerce his wife into an abortion, and if she refused, he would not love his child. It made me wonder what might happen if his child were born perfectly normal and then became abnormal or had some sort of mental or physical disability. What might happen, for example, if his “perfect” baby was dropped on her head when she was six months old, and became paralyzed or suffered from a learning or developmental disorder? What if he was one of the (currently) 1 in 166 children that are diagnosed with autism? What if he suffered from cerebral palsy? Would he stop loving his six-month-old baby or his 3-year-old toddler if something like that happened to him or her? Would he advocate for his or her death at that point, the way he would advocate for his or her death if the disability had been known prior to birth?

Do you remember the TV show that was on in the 80s or maybe early 90s called “Life Goes On”? One of the children in this TV family had Down Syndrome (Corky, played by Chris Burke). I watched the show sometimes, and most of the episodes did not focus on Downs as such, but only as it interacted with other facets of life. This young man was presented as normal. To hear people talk about Trig Palin, you’d think that having Downs turned a person into a monster. That to let one baby “slip through” that had an extra chromosome was tantamount to the reincarnation of Hitler.

At the time of the TV show, I was probably in my early teens, so you may forgive my half-formed opinions and ignorance of the time. But I remember thinking that it was a mark of how advanced we as a society in America had become, to have Down Syndrome accepted as a variation of normal, and made part of a fairly popular TV show. I remember thinking of how children with disabilities were frequently placed in institutions in the 50s and 60s, and their parents were encouraged to do so, and discouraged from keeping them and taking care of them — told that it would be better for everyone involved if they just forgot about their less-than-perfect baby and went on with their lives and pretended that this never happened to them. I remember thinking that this was one thing that liberals got right. I was wrong.

Now, instead of replacing institutionalization of certain babies with acceptance, it’s been replaced by their murder. So much for diversity and non-discrimination.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: