posted
Well, that does seem strange to me.... As a person going deaf I couldn't imagine why anybody would want that for someone, especially their child.....
These people were right to be turned away from places....
I will conclude with, THOSE FUCKING IDIOTS!!!!!!!
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes.... and being that nasty, to wish something like that on your own child...... Something that I wouldn't even wish on my worst enemy's child....
So if someone decides to have a child that, say, has no arms, would be okay also..... or if the error doesn't occur then we can just chop the arms off???
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
Intentionally creating a person that you know will have problems... more like a mad scientists thing than a looving parent.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It seems to me a sad proposition all around to purposefully deny a person a "sense" and the human pleasures that that person can derive therefrom.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, I'd tend to agree. But then, I can hear. To stretch the concept to an absurd end, what if, in 25 years, parents can choose to extend the visual range of their children into the infrared or ultraviolet. Would failing to do that constitute child abuse? Is it incumbant upon parents to do everything possible to ensure their children have the best life possible? Do they have to educate them? Sure, I think we'd say. Do they have to see to their health needs. Again, sure. Do they have to, if possible, ensure they have a "normal" genetic code? Do they have to ensure they have a super-normal genetic code?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't say that deafness is necessarily a bad thing. It is no longer the "handicap" that it was once thought of and it certainly doesn't diminish the person as a whole.
And I'm sure that there is a highly deveolved community and culture amongst hearing impaired people.
However, in the case you put forth, the infrared or ultraviolet scenario, what your talking about is the addition to a developed sense and not the willful denial of a sense.
Its one thing to feel part of a special group due to the way you were born as a human, using lack of the sense of hearing as an example. It is another thing altogether to deny a natural human sense to another human being from the get go.
[ April 12, 2002, 08:17: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
These people have an agenda. I skimmed the replies here while the linked page loaded, and thought "surely this must be some pro-life stunt? After all, you can't do anything if the baby is going to be born deaf, so they're out to show that if they'd shosen to terminate the baby, etc., etc., etc. . ."
Silly me. The reality is actually far sicker. I prefer to avoid bringing their sexuality into it, because it likely has nothing to do with it. But what you have is this couple who have chosen to make an unfortunate affliction, their deafness, the basis of this drive to set themselves apart from normal human society.
Argh, how to put this? There are constant attempts to add and improve to ways in which the disabled interact with the rest of the world. Induction loops, wheelchair ramps, "blind-friendly" pedestrian crossings. We shouldn't expect gratitude, these are good things to do, things which should be done. But this is just throwing it back in our teeth. It's paramount to some poor guy in a wheelchair ignoring the ramp, going to the foot of the stairs, throwing himself out of the chair and demanding he be carried up.
Enough of that, people will soon say: "Deaf culture? Fine. Be deaf. Insult us in sign language you know we can't understand, we'll just do the same, out loud, behind your backs where you can't read our lips. Oh, and by the way - watch out for that bus? Hello? Oops. Too late. Maybe your son might have been able to warn you if you hadn't decided he should be deaf too."
posted
One of the most important distinction between human and other species on earth is our advance understanding in complex communication.
I think to lose the ability to communicate is far more serious then losing a limb.
Proper or accepted forms of communcation has always been defined the the vast majority of a society, so even if the kid can communcate through other means (sign language, lips reading, etc), it's still gonna be a huge disadvantage on the kid's part, because he simply can't communicate with normal people who made up the vast majority of our society.
If the couple had adopted this child, then sure, it's their freedom of choice, but in my personal opinion, a dumb choice.
But they choose to "make" this baby with intentional genetic defects by selective breeding, then I say this couple is evil, sadistic and derserve to be shot for the sake fo the children, and for the sake of moral standard in our society.
This couple is no different then the scientists performing questionable genetic experiements, but at least some of these scientists are trying to do some good by bring out the best of humanity, where the couple is trying to bring out the worst.
[ April 11, 2002, 17:19: Message edited by: BlueElectron ]
-------------------- "George Washington said, 'I cannot tell a lie.' Richard Nixon said, 'I cannot tell the truth.' Bill Clinton said, 'I cannot tell the difference.'"
-- comedian TOM SMOTHERS, from his latest stage act with brother DICK SMOTHERS.
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh, look! It's a genuinely new issue in the Flameboard! Will wonders never cease?
Hmm... well, it's generally accepted that it's OK for people to go to a sperm bank and try to obtain sperm from donors with desirable characteristics, so I don't see much of a problem there. And I suppose that LEGALLY speaking, they have the right to conceive a child however they please, so long as both genetic donors are agreeable. My problem is that the parents attitude seems to be that THEY would love to have a deaf kid. They don't seem to consider the CHILD in this. I'm also forced to wonder what they'll do if the kid ISN'T born deaf...
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
