Quote:
Originally Posted by deafdyke
Well you know.........................I think in SOME cases, this might be a good idea. I disagree with something like this if its targeted towards just deaf or just hoh folks. BUT, if it prevents a child being born with profound multihandicaps or a condition where mental issues get worse, then maybe it would be helpful.
I gotta say thou, that most nondisabled folks do not understand that being born with a disabilty, isn't that horrible. You can ADAPT to physical disablitiy.
|
You never have to accept other people's definitions, even if they do carry the force of law. For lack of better terms I will say there are disabilities and disadvantages. Having MS with uncontrolable siezures is a disability -- Having the mind of a five year old in a thirty year old body is a disability -- There is not a lot a person can do to get around these things.
On the other hand loss of a hand, arm, foot, leg, speech, hearing, smell, youth, are disadvantages that can and do happen to anyone at any age.
The question then becomes: "Should someone who carries a gene that makes an early disadvantage more likely be allowed to pass that gene on to future generations?"
Then there is the question that is always present: "How far should any government go in protecting its constituants? At what point does it cease to be protection and become persecution?"
I personally believe anyone effected/affected by a decision should have a voice in that decision.