Question on abortion and homosexuality?

Question

I myself am neither an ardent proponent of being pro-choice or pro-life...I'm best described as agnostic in ways. I'm not sure what position I should take...but that's not the question. Please read and you'll understand my question.

What I know is that today many 'special' children are aborted because we have the medical technology to make women aware of this, and apparently some women chose to abort these children.

This question is geared towards the pro-choice people.

Say we genetically find out if a person will grow-up homosexual (which many scientist think we'll be able to do), and because of that women decide to abort those children. I'm assuming your pro-choice when it comes to women aborting 'special' kids, (ie you believe it's a woman's chose and their body)...would you also be pro-choice when it comes to individuals aborting homosexual kids?

I've decided to offer this question to this forum first...so that I may get your perspective on this. ps. I'm a straight male.

isotope-- since I can't privately respond to you...hopefully you read this.

you said:You err in assuming women abort a fetus that will be born disabled.

Not really an assumption. IF they know through things such as Triple test or otherwise, there's suggestions they'll likely do so. Not my decesion...just an outside view. sources...

"Although not considered a severe disability, a large, multi-institutional study published in 1991 showed that 92% of Down syndrome children detected prenatally have their lives ended by abortion."--Vincent et al., Southern Medical Journal, October 1991, Volume 84, Number 10, Table 1.
http://www.sma.org/smj/

Is that accurate or is that number an exaggeration? From what I've read it's fairly high (perhaps not that high)...although not all women have these test or follow polls.

ps...I myself would not want my spouse to abort a child based on being mentally-handicapped or homosexual. You assume the worst of me, and I don't believe I've earned that.

I myself do have personal fears of a eugenic society. I'm just stating that it seems as though we're aiming to both inform women and giving them that right. The question of coarse is: are we willing to live with any of these consequences? I remain unsure, but also weary.

" In 1994, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommended that every pregnant woman less than 35 years of age be offered this test during the second trimester of pregnancy (Down Syndrome Screening. ACOG Committee Opinion. 141, August, 1994).The Genetics Disease Branch of the state of California has implemented a statewide program in which Triple Marker Screening is offered to all pregnant women less than 35 years of age."

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/pcfh/gdb/html/PS/PSSEDMATold2.htm

Answer 1

It is a concern of mine that if we can determine pre-natally orientation that this situation could occur.

And I am pro-choice.

It is a VERY tough question. I do not know where I come down on it. I think it's inherently wrong to abort simply to avoid bearing a child with a trait the parent(s) don't want, but I am also averse to determining for a woman what she should do.

This is one of the better questions I've seen asked in this forum. I wish I had a glib answer for it, but I don't.

Answer 2

First off, I support pro-life people, and I would be pro-life myself if it weren't for poverty, people being too sick to have children, being too young to have children, or people who have been victims of rape and just couldn't stand to have a child that way.

So I guess I'm pro-choice, and pro-life? Either way, this is a great question and I chose to answer it.

Personally, if I were in any situation where I could tell if my child was "special" or a homosexual before I even had the child, I'd definitely wait until AFTER the period of time where you can still have an abortion. Not that I'd grow any dislike to the child at all, but I wouldn't want anyone ELSE telling me to get an abortion. I believe that is up to the person who is actually having the child.

I also believe that if technology became that advanced that you could tell if your child was going to be gay, you shouldn't be allowed to find out until after you choose not to have an abortion. If you're that homophobic, why should you even have children? There's always a chance that they'll be gay. In the case that someone only had an abortion because their child was going to be gay, I'd consider that full-fledged murder. It's the same thing as your child coming out to you when he's/she's 16 or so years old and then you killing him/her.

I'm only pro-choice when it comes to some issue where you absolutely CANNOT have a child. And about the situation where your child is going to be "special".. Well what's the problem with just putting them up for adoption? Some people only adopt special children. So, no, whether the child were "special" or gay or had any other problem that the parent's can be judgemental about, I would not support pro-choice.

Answer 3

It's a very scary question. Should it come to that, we'll undoubtedly see a number of Bible-thumpers change their position on abortion. At least one preacher has publicly stated that he would support the use of hormone therapy in such an instance if it might make a difference, knowing it may endanger the health of both the mother and unborn child to "play God" like this. Personally, I'm generally pro-choice, even though I abhor the use of abortion as a birth-control technique, and unless the fetus is found to have a severe mental disability.

The solution to this moral dilemma may need to come from the AMA, in the form of an amendment to the code of ethics that doctors are expected to abide by... perhaps a directive that genetic information discovered during routine screening that has nothing to do with the physical and mental health of the fetus, such as sexual orientation, will not be shared with the parents. And a prohitiion on screening for anything that is unrelated to the child's health. Even after birth, because there's the likelihood that many parents would either abandon the child or subject it to abusive drug and mental health therapy. Medical decisions need to be based on sound medical data, not religious opinion, and any doctor that would knowingly endanger a child by providing information like this to a parent should not be in the medical profession.

Answer 4

You err in assuming women abort a fetus that will be born disabled. If that were true why do we have such a large population of disabled people?

I also deeply resent your attitude that is quite acceptable and expected that women abort babies with birth defects.

In order to know of potential birth "defects" a woman has to have chorionic villus sampling, amniocentesis, or percutaneous umbilical blood sampling. Ultra sounds can detect a very limited and only extreme birth defects in a developing fetus.

These tests are not available to anyone and everyone.

They are offered primarily to couples with an increased risk of having a baby with a genetic abnormality (particularly neural tube defects) or a chromosomal abnormality (particularly when the woman is aged 35 or older).

If a person wants a "perfect" baby they shouldnt have children in the first place. There is no such thing as a perfect baby.

A person can be without physical or mental disabilities and still have a personality disabiliity as can be seen by a lot of posts on Yahoo Answers. Pity they cant detect that, your mother would have had options.

As someone who has worked as a Youth and Family Counselor its really quite funny to read these kinds of "questions" from people who consider themselves "normal". And at the same time very frightening to see how screwed up people's thinking has become.

There is no "hallmark" to measure or determine "normal" It doesnt exist. Clearly the absence on a visible mental or physical disability doesnt establish a state of "normal".

As for your question about aborting homosexual babies I wouldnt dignify it with an answer. A good therapist could help you explore the reasons for you being so homophobic. Perhaps something from you past that you have buried in your subconscience.

Answer 5

I lean toward the pro-life side of the debate, not on religious grounds but on a respect-for-life platform.

But if a detecible gene is found that causes homosexuality, how could that not result in some abortions on that basis? If a person/couple can abort a fetus because of a genetic physical disability - and homosexuality is found to be genetic and a person thinks that it's a disability - why wouldn't they have an abortion?

There's an interesting play - which became a movie - called "Twilight of the Golds." It's set in the not-too-distant future and deals with this very scenario.

Answer 6

I’m not quite sure what you mean when you say “I'm assuming *you’re* pro-choice when it comes to women aborting 'special' kids” because ALL children are special!

Not all disabled people are born disabled. One of my good friends is paraplegic and uses a wheelchair because she fell off of a balcony when she was 20 years old and broke her back. Should we kill her off because she’s disabled? Is the rest of her life going to be a horrible hell because she has a disability? I think NOT. Sure her way of life has changed, and sure she deals with difficulties everyday, but that is primarily because our society is not accepting of, nor prepared to work with and across differences.

What a bloody BORING and uncolourful world this would be if everyone was the same. Don’t you agree??

I am ABSOLUTELY pro-choice. A woman should be able to have say over her whole body.
I expect that when I have children, I will be able to custom design my lil’ babes. I want them to have blue eyes, blonde hair, boy will be 6’1, girl 5’6 ect ect. If I find out they have green eyes, ABORTED (I have blue eyes).
Now doesn’t that sound ridiculous? I think so…it’s pathetic, weird, ect ect…which is the same for your question of whether one would abort if they had the option to find out if their child was going to be homosexual. SO WHAT? That is just one wonderful part of a person, it’s not the be all and end all of a whole person.

WHY ARE PEOPLE SO SCARED OF DIFFERENCES??

Peace be with you.

Answer 7

I believe that abortion should be legal and accessible. However, I also believe that abortion should never be used as a form of contraception, or as a form of determining who comes into this world based on the personal preferences of the parent(s). I believe there are limits to the ethical use of genetic testing... we cannot determine the future based on what the genes say.

What if a child is predisposed to being gay, is hated by his/her parents for it, is terribly abused, and grows up to be the finest advocate for child rights the world has ever seen - changing people's lives for the better because of his/her involvement and life lived?

Answer 8

I am all the way pro-choice. You know what I'm not going to be the one who has to tell a pregnant woman that she must give birth to the child. Why would we want more retarded kids, abort them. As for homosexual kids I really don't get why the mother would care but she still has the right to abort as simple as that

Answer 9

While I would prefer that women not use abortion as a contraceptive as many do, I support a woman's right to choose. The same goes for knowing the genetic disposition of the baby before birth. I would rather that the woman not choose to abort a gay baby or a green eyed baby or a female baby, but I would still support her right to choose. It goes hand in hand with freedom of speech. If you support it, you must support it even for hate mongers (and the trolls who inhabit Yahoo! Answers).

Answer 10

i stand pro-choice on this issue .

reason: people will abort thier fetus if they find it will be blind,deaf,mute,and if it has any sort of gene that can be dealt with easy. will most?no. most people abort the fetus when they have a serious problem that cant be easily dealt with and would make the childs life harder to more extreme levels.

i support the choice because i believe that my opinion should not rule another woman's life.