Date: July 14th, 2009 12:10 AM Author: aphrodisiac magical piazza
Depends on the level of severity. I mean, I can see where you're coming from if you're talking about the type who can never function without supervision. But aside from that, I think that "I don't want to give birth to/raise a retard" is an incredibly selfish, elitist attitude to have.
Date: July 14th, 2009 12:10 AM Author: Snowy godawful shrine blood rage
It's got nothing in particular to do with xoxo, I was reading an article the other day that said about 85-90% of fetuses which test positive for Downs are aborted.
Date: July 14th, 2009 12:20 AM Author: aphrodisiac magical piazza
Okay, I'm thinking about it, and I've come to this conclusion: I admit that I wouldn't want to raise ONLY a kid with Down Syndrome. I'd like to have at least one "normal" kid, too, because I'd like to have the experience of raising someone with more potential. But I would never abort a child for the sole reason that it was going to be retarded. If the severity and accompanying health problems were such that I couldn't foresee the kid having anything but a fucking miserable life, I'd abort.
Date: July 14th, 2009 10:34 AM Author: anal passionate ceo
I think what you need to realize is the lifetime of care necessary to raise a downy. Some Down Syndrome people end up in group homes after they finish "school" but those are usually pretty gross and if you're going to have the child, I'd expect you'll want to care for him/her too. If that's the case, you'll essentially be caring for a mental three year old until you die. Oh, and this three year old may eventually be 5'10" 250 pounds, and have no conception of its own strength. That is a very difficult decision to make. I think many of the people who decide to carry a retard to term don't consider this (aside from the people who are categorically against abortion).
Date: July 14th, 2009 11:03 AM Author: anal passionate ceo
"Many". Ok, but I wouldn't say most. Too lazy to go look for such a statistic. It's probably easy enough to find, though. The fact is you won't know when you make the decision to carry it, and so you have to be prepared for the likely, or even the worst-case scenario.
Date: July 14th, 2009 11:06 AM Author: thriller messiness legal warrant
I have a brother who's pretty high-functioning and still needs quite a bit of help, holds some 10-hour a week job that the government subsidizes, needs to have his money and pretty much everything managed for him, gets into random trouble with people on the street picking on him. I'll probably be supporting him quite a bit within the next 10-15 years.
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:44 PM Author: aphrodisiac magical piazza
I may be assuming a level of knowledge that is beyond our current capability. As I said above, I would understand the decision to abort a child that will never be able to function without supervision at all times and/or would lead (what I deem) a miserable life due to the severity of the retardation and its accompanying health problems. But it's quite possible that there's no way of getting a precise idea of the level of severity before the point at which the decision would have to be made.
For the record, I'm pro-choice in ANY scenario; I'm just talking about what my personal ethic code would dictate. I'm not flattering myself so as to think that my opinions MATTER -- but I do have a right to express my opinion that "x is an elitist attitude" or "y is a selfish decision."
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:30 AM Author: wine weed whacker
We're only going to have one, and that one will have the best of everything. I suppose I can see where you're coming from, but it just wouldn't be for me.
Date: July 14th, 2009 12:19 PM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
God that kid is going to be fucked up. Nebbish, geriatric Jewish father with a whole other family + shrewish introvert/autistic mother with shady slut past and no friends. You should consider yourself lucky if he's not torturing small animals and collecting women's hair and nail clippings before the age of ten.
Date: July 14th, 2009 2:09 PM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
His dad will be an old man, and his mom a borderline whack-job who writes arm-breaking fantasies and then posts them on the interweb. He'll be an only child and his education won't be anything special. He'll be physically pwned with your white trash fat genes and dad's tiny weak Jew genes. Fuck, poor kid.
And Jesus, lulz at your poorsville excitement over being able to provide a normal life for a kid. If you think having standard opportunities and the modest affluence you two will provide is some kind of surefire avenue to good development, then you definitely have never spent any time around people with money.
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:07 PM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
his daughter is with another person - your white trash genes are fusing with his tiny jew dwarf genes - not a good combo. bad at sports, small, possible lardass genetics from you, and the IQ will regress to the mean i.e. more like mommy, who isn't all that smart.
you miss my point about resources - nurture only goes so far. only a poortown upbringing like yours would make you think the kid's life will pwn just because you're able to spend some money on him. you have no concept of what this is like, so you don't really know what you're referring to. great education could still mean the best he can do is some shitty LAC and working at starbucks while he blows glass on the side. which will be fine for him, but ultimately disappointing to a nuclear striver parent like you.
old dude is upper middle class, probably, nothing more. since he has kids that don't live with him, he probably got his ass pounded in the divorce, and it's not like he's been pulling down millions for years as a law prof. he makes okay money, got shat on in a divorce, and is probably intensely conservative with saving and spending. he'll shell out a little to keep his young sex toy wife happy, but the only reason you feel like you're about to enter a world of decadence is because you're clearly a poor and easily impressed. your other posts on this show that you're foaming at the mouth for what he can 'provide,' which is basically just a stable lifestyle.
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:18 PM Author: wine weed whacker
Pretty sure nobody could consider my upbringing poortown white trash. why would you assume that? You do know sexual abuse can happen to anybody right?
Our child will be raised by a wealthy academic in a culture that values academic achievement. If the kid want to do something else with his life that's his choice and not something I can control. I realize that.
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:45 PM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
"why would you assume that?'
mixture of your intense striving, excitement over the prospect of having some financial means from your husband, and the fact that you lost your virginity to a fast food worker a decade older, who you felt it was a wise choice to date in your early teens. not a common choice for kids from privilege. at best you have a lower middle class background, in which case you still really don't know what realy money privilege looks like.
"Our child will be raised by a wealthy academic"
lol, you mean by a TTT law professor with a little bit of savings, and hopefully some income when he's not dishing out child support and alimony for his other family? not exactly the zenithy of the world, but still a huge step up for you, which explains your excitement.
"in a culture that values academic achievement"
oh yeah, you're right, this always works out perfectly! it really just gives the kid a fighting chance considering how weird his home life will be, but all the same, certainly do emphasize that academic achievement.
"If the kid want to do something else with his life that's his choice and not something I can control. I realize that."
something else? you already have plans for him? like is said, if i were you i'd be worried about not raising a complete basket case, let alone what his career path will be.
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:50 PM Author: wine weed whacker
Every parent has plans for their child. More often than not they choose a different course, I'm sure.
I'm more excited about being provided for as I work in a job I like and still have time to spend with my child and husband. That's not something that can be taken for granted by anybody. I did have undergrad and law school paid for by my parents, though, which is good. So I'd have some flexibility either way.
Date: July 15th, 2009 5:07 AM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
"Every parent has plans for their child"
so you actually do have plans for a kid you haven't even conceived yet? yeah, no chance this kid isn't going to be severely fucked up by his parents . . .
"I'm more excited about being provided for as I work in a job I like and still have time to spend with my child and husband"
uh, yeah, you mean the situation of like 85% of all working mothers? congrats. you'll never have a serious law job, by the way, but i'm sure doing some admin shit for a tiny city or whatever you manage to get with zero experience applying years after graduation will be deeply rewarding.
"I did have undergrad and law school paid for by my parents, though, which is good"
funny, before i remember you posting about how you have a horrible relationship with your parents and they give you no assistance. now they're awesome and picked up the several hundred thousand deep bill for school? sure thing, dude.
"So I'd have some flexibility either way"
huh? one second you're creaming yourself over the idea of being 'provided for,' and the next you're asserting that you have financial independence and it was never an issue? try to keep your bullshit straight, please, this was too easy.
Date: July 15th, 2009 8:39 AM Author: wine weed whacker
Why do you find it impossible to believe parents want something for their children? Explain your line of argument. All parents have hopes and dreams for their kids, it's tough to imagine why you'd think otherwise.
I'm hoping for a particular federal agency and I foresee no difficulty getting a job there. I have an SA job now but I really don't want to work there after graduation.
they gave me no assistance concerning the rape because I never asked for any. they're emotionally distant in general. however they've financially supported me very well. Husband will be better becasue he's emotionally supportive as well..
I'd rather have the option to not work at all if I don't need to. to be frank, the idea of being independent was a little frightening but it would have been doable.
Date: July 15th, 2009 4:11 PM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
"Why do you find it impossible to believe parents want something for their children? Explain your line of argument."
want something for the children =/= already has a plan for what they will be or do, which is what you indicated. you don't want it for the kid, you want it for yourself in that it fits your idealized version of your future life. this, in general, fucks kids up because they're raised as an extension of the parent's ambition. you already sound pretty emotionally unsophisticated on this subject, which isn't surprising.
"I'm hoping for a particular federal agency and I foresee no difficulty getting a job there"
if you take time off to get pregnant, have the kid, and spend some time it until shoving it into daycare/nanny/preschool so you can work, then it will be insanely difficult to get some kind of fed job. i know you feel like you escaped the TTT ghetto by gunning into MVP, but you're still academically unremarkable and aren't going to me much of a candidate for anything federal when you try applying in a few years. not sure you understand how federal hiring works. having an SA gig right now matters for just about nothing.
"however they've financially supported me very well. Husband will be better becasue he's emotionally supportive as well.."
eh, this is completely inconsistent with what you used to say about this, but i'll leave it alone if you're clearly willing to bullshit about it. i will just say that the crazed excitement over marrying a divorced law professor - which apparently is an income level you identify as "wealthy" - indicates that you didn't grow up with much, as does the fact that you started banging fast food employees while you were in middle school, but this is all tangential to the point.
"to be frank, the idea of being independent was a little frightening but it would have been doable."
lol, a ways back you stated that you didn't know or care if it worked out with gross old man, now your line is that you never really wanted to work or have a career anyway. you seem mentally and emotionally underdeveloped given how flaky and inconsistent you are on all this. hopefully the old dude has the parenting skills and maturity you clearly lack, but since his first marriage collapsed after years and immediately started lusting after students half his age, it's questionable.
Date: July 16th, 2009 8:58 AM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
"no, I did not "indicate" that."
sure you did - it's right there in the posts, plain as day.
"Also, I'd be applying to the agencies now, having the kid after about a year, and working with the kid in daycare"
uh, so you're not actually going to raise the kid? you realize even federal maternity leave isn't that long, right? so you're going to be a pushy, detached, controlling, absentee parent? and his dad will probably be confined to a wheelchair with old age as he approaches the end of high school? what a sweet life!
like i said, i wish nothing but the best for this kid - he's going to need all the help he can get.
Date: July 16th, 2009 9:22 AM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
sounds about right. i've never heard her deny her poortown roots before this thread, as if they weren't obvious from the fact that she considers the income of a law professor to be "wealthy."
Date: July 15th, 2009 4:20 PM Author: sick provocative space voyeur
seems plausible. his sperm is old and corrupt, and she's much more likely than average to produce an autistic kid. no testing in the womb for that, i believe, so sucks for them when little rain man starts manifesting at age three or four.
Date: July 14th, 2009 10:47 AM Author: anal passionate ceo
I was surprised in the opposite way.
If you went out on the street and asked a random sample of Americans, I would bet you'd find a larger percentage of people will tell you they are categorically against abortion. The wikipedia page says 22% are in favor of banning all abortions.
Another CBS Poll in the wikipedia article had 4% of respondents say abortion should never be permitted, but 16% said "only to save a woman's life" and another 24% said "only to save woman's life, and cases of rape or incest." Now, of course, I don't think the study specifically asked about abortions due to damaged fetuses, but still, a staggering 44% in that study, if they had their way, would effectively outlaw aborting based on retardation.
However, when asked specifically about aborting based on the health of the fetus, that 22% number categorically against abortion, or 44% of people who think it should at the very least be illegal except for/health of mother/incest/rape turns into 10-15%.
It's not earthshatteringly surprising that people don't think every scenario through when taking the other polls, but the fact remains that, given the religious/ideological makeup of this country, in order to get you to 85-90% of people choosing to abort a downy, you probably have to have some bible-toting anti-abortion people saying they'd do it.
Date: July 14th, 2009 10:53 AM Author: thriller messiness legal warrant
I agree.
I have a cousin who had four kids in her 20s, got pregnant again twice in her 40s for some reason, knew full well they were downies, and kept them. I think there's a lot of people like her, especially in certain parts of the country.
Date: July 14th, 2009 10:57 AM Author: bonkers love of her life
Who cares about the random sample--all that matters is what happens when the girl is confronted with the fact that her OWN baby is going to be retarded.
Most people don't actually have categorical principles, despite what they claim.
Date: July 14th, 2009 11:08 AM Author: anal passionate ceo
"Who cares about the random sample"
"Most people don't actually have categorical principles, despite what they claim"
The second part of your post was my point, and THAT's why I care about the random sample. Many Anti-abortion people claim to be ardently principled when it comes to this particular issue, but the statistics make a pretty strong argument for the fact that at least some people who claim to be categorically against abortion really aren't.
Stop trying to be the typical xoxo Contrarian and read what I wrote, and you'll see that you actually agree with me.
Date: July 14th, 2009 8:08 PM Author: Bateful Black Woman Tanning Salon
"It's not earthshatteringly surprising that people don't think every scenario through when taking the other polls, but the fact remains that, given the religious/ideological makeup of this country, in order to get you to 85-90% of people choosing to abort a downy, you probably have to have some bible-toting anti-abortion people saying they'd do it."
This has always been true though of abortion. I seem to recall that a significant amount of pro-lifers end up having an abortion anyway. Didn't even Bush help a friend get an abortion? Its one of those things - let someone else pay the price for my shiTTTy policy.
Date: July 14th, 2009 12:08 AM Author: Avocado Violent Locus
Did you see my post about old men producing sperm with lots of mutations, and consequently having children with a much higher incidence of schizophrenia and other neurological diseases? you might be in trouble. y not find a young dude to creampie you when it's time?
Date: July 14th, 2009 11:08 AM Author: shimmering comical double fault
Because I don't think chicks should be made fun of for having abortions (unless they are chicks I don't like) and because I think aborting retarded babies is AWESOME?
Date: July 15th, 2009 4:24 PM Author: titillating site fat ankles
It must be a horribly hard decision to abort a child, even if they have down syndrome, but it was a decision that was made and is now over with. It is cruel to create a thread bashing someone for this.
Date: July 16th, 2009 9:37 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
For a criminal defense case I sat through the autopsy of a newborn baby. It was the most foul thing I have ever seem, I vomited no less than 3 times. The doctor performing the autopsy was irritated at me because my puking made the autopsy take longer than he wanted.
The worst part was when they cut the head in half and removed the brain. It was horrifying, and the image will haunt me until the day I die.
Date: July 16th, 2009 9:44 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
I can't help this case shape my opinion on abortion. The child was a beautiful little child before the autopsy, and you can imagine what it looked like afterwards.
In my case, mom killed her newborn baby. While we were working on the case, it was a common theme that if she had just gone to the doctor a few days before giving birth and had an abortion, she would have been in the clear.
We won the case by the way.
At one part of the preparation of the case, I had to stop my the morgue and pick up some of the guts of the baby to deliver to an expert for analysis. So, I was driving around with the guts of this kid in my car - it was totally fucked up.
Date: July 16th, 2009 9:53 AM Author: ruddy bespoke nursing home mediation
Sorry. Were you so grossed out because it was a baby? Would you have responded the same had it been an adult? Just curious. I was premed so I've seen things like that. That's a pretty violent reaction, though I had a male friend completely pass out.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:04 AM Author: ruddy bespoke nursing home mediation
Huh?
The murder is disgusting. Where did I say it wasn't? I've never seen a baby autopsy. I'm just wondering if he had a hard time watching because a baby was being hacked into or if he would have been just as troubled by an adult.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:40 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
I would have been grossed out if it was an adult, but the fact that it was a little child made it worse. Not to be gross, but the blades cutting that very delicate skin was revolting to me. I had never seen a dead body up close before the autopsy (i.e. not pre-med), so I was nowhere near prepared for it.
Ehh, whatever though. I can see how this would not gross some people out, but it was shocking for me.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:41 AM Author: ruddy bespoke nursing home mediation
I think it would gross me out. Most cadavers I've seen were old people so there's a sense of it being natural that they're dead. It'd be weird to see a little baby - not sure I could disconnect from that.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:46 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
I'm sure the situation also contributed to the level of revolt I felt. I was part of the defense team and I was there to get the person responsible off the hook. Strange, but that was one of the few cases I've had where I had a very difficult time professionally detaching from the situation.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:52 AM Author: chartreuse cracking state volcanic crater
are old people's bodies like kind of defective?
serious Q, btw. like have things started to sag or move or degenerate and are in different places than they might be with an adult or in the textbooks?
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:54 AM Author: ruddy bespoke nursing home mediation
In my limited experience, no bodies are like the ones in textbooks. Sort of like the "average" cell you see in a bio book - none really exist like that. Plus the drawings never translate correctly.
But the locations of stuff, not that I'm aware of. They're just in worse shape. I haven't seen a ton of bodies though - my anatomy class used dogs (sorry!).
Date: July 16th, 2009 11:01 AM Author: Lemon Range Trump Supporter
would you consider someone a whore who claimed she was going to suck wrinkled Jewish cock in exchange for what she believes is a wealthy lifestyle, but which is in fact a laughably lower-class one?
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:50 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
As a dude I try to not have any strong opinion concerning the legal status of abortion - this makes for bad dinner conversation. Also, I understand that there are plenty of circumstances one could think of that would compel a reasonable person to have an abortion (age, rape, mental retardation, etc.).
However, I would never have one under any circumstance.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:52 AM Author: Lemon Range Trump Supporter
You should have a strong opinion, or else these bitches are going to kill anything they can get away with. Would you stand up to a woman that wanted to abort your baby, or would you back down and say it was her choice?
A life is still a life, regardless of rape or retardation. Surely you see the inconsistency in your stance.
Date: July 16th, 2009 10:58 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
It's a cold world out there, and innocent people get killed all the time (i.e. war, wrongly accused, unsafe workplaces, etc.) I usually find moral relativism to be intellectually dishonest, but on abortion I go right there. Again, I don't like it, but it's a cold world out there and life is probably better with some form of legalized abortion.
Date: July 16th, 2009 11:07 AM Author: Hairraiser filthpig
1) I wouldn't seriously date a woman who would do this.
2) If this was a woman who I was casually having sex with, then wouldn't you agree that it is partially my fault for sleeping with skanks? Don't you think this is a risk that you take if you choose to sleep with people you don't know well?
3) Theoretically, things go wrong and it happens. Plan A would be to go "Fools Rush In" and marry the girl. Plan B would to do my best to convince her not to have it (i.e. abortion) by any means necessary, including paying her money and child support and the rest. If none of these things work, after the abortion I would work tirelessly to ruin this woman's life in the most vindictive way possible.