Re: Cheating Destiny (book excerpt)
[ Follow-Ups ]
[ Post Followup ]
[ The Islet Foundation Message Forum ]
[ FAQ ]
Posted by Marie on 02:30:22 2006/07/11
In Reply to:
Re: Cheating Destiny (book excerpt) posted by klausen
~snip~The whole world condemned Michael Jackson for shaking his child a few years ago over the balcony of a Berlin Hotel. Let's suppose -- what seems reasonable -- that this increased the risk of the child having an accident which would make it as disabled for life as a type 1 diabetic is. Should the world withdraw its objection on the grounds that every child will die of something some day? Or on the basis of the fact that every child brought into this dangerous and difficult world is subjected by the person producing it to some risks? The issue with diabetics having children is that they know of the abnormally heightened risk in advance of their future child's suffering and decide to take it for the child -- without being able to consult him or her -- regardless.~snip~
I suppose I have to stopp to answering your question with a question. Would you rather the child never have been born or put in protective custody?
In the case of diabetes the question would be posed as this: Would you rather *potentially* diabetic children never be born or for science to develop a cure for the damn disease? There are thousands of diseses that cause suffering. Should we make sure no person is ever born with potential issues or fix should we continue to fix the issues?
Honestly, if the genetic factor were the main issue when it comes to breeding then most people would be disqualified. Do you know *anyone* with *no* family history of *anything*? (Heck, every native american would be out in the cold on the basis of T2 diabetes if nothing else.)
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
[ Follow Ups ]
[ Post Followup ]
[ The Islet Foundation Message Forum ]
[ FAQ ]