Is it wrong to euthanize the retarded?

Is it wrong to euthanize the retarded?

No

No. They're only a burden on society.

Abortion of a disabled child is an ethical problem, one that should be left to the individual, the Icelandic consensus is that it's less cruel to abort a child with a severe illness than it is to make them go through a worse life, which is fine, it was their choice.

Involuntary euthanization isn't fair, murdering the already alive disabled people is an affront to basic human rights, and a mother should be able to choose if she feels she would be able to deal with the massive strain of raising a retarded child, and pre natal regulation of childbirth is troubling on a basic human level, why should a third party intervene in something that has in almost every society been a rather private affair (the raising and creation of one's family)?

Look I believe in eugenics (not the Aryan aesthetic way, but the breeding out of harmful diseases and mental disabilities) so I fully support this.

Is it morally ambiguous? Yes. You can argue that it's morally corrupt all day and night that it's right or wrong, each side has exgremely valid points.


I think of it as more of a subjective than a objective debate.

Abortion =/= euthanasia.
And yes it's wrong, you could be the next on the list.
Also

By common sense? No. By todays standards? Yes.

This is ethics, not politics, retard. Unless you mean EUTHANASIA? OMG NAZI!!!!! GO BACK TO POL MY SAFE SPACE HAS BEEN VIOLATED

>this is ethics not politics
>implying ones ethical thoughts don't naturally develop into political leanings
Nigga you dumb.

>Veeky Forums should just be toy soldiers and LARPing about empires

Maybe

Is it wrong to select the healthiest female and male, select the healthiest eggs and sperm and then select the healthiest fetus?
No. It's a moral duty to do so.
A world with a population of 100.000.000 blue eyed, blond, intelligent, peaceful people is a perfect world. (we can also have some Asians, don't want to be called racist)
t. brown eyed guy

How long does it takes to detect this syndrome? it is one of my biggest fears.

Thank God I was born before rampant Atheism

absolutely not

This. Why do we give a person with poisoned genes, who only pass on diseases like autism, the same rights to reproduce as a healthy family?

No, they're useless potatoes that just eat up money and waste resources.

Don´t worry, it can be detected on time for abbortion.

would you have been in danger of being aborted due to your down syndrome?

Euthanasia means assisted suicide, taking one's life with their consent because they find death a better solution than suffering and pain.

Killing the disabled because they're "burden on society" is no different than a cold-blooded murder, only it's even more despicable since it's just murder of someone who is weak, can't consent, and can't defend against you. It's Social-Darwinism at its core, complete lack of empathy and further more it's based on completely shaky grounds. You're giving someone an authority to decide whether another human being is unworthy of life simply because it was born in a certain way. Needless to say it's ugly and nauseating.

The Romans would wait until a child was 1 year old before officially deciding whether or not it was worth keeping. Up until that point, it was perfectly legal to throw an infant with any apparent defects into the garbage, literally.

No, but this is only step one. Designer babies soon, user.
Would your mom have kept you if she knew how you turned out?

First it has absolutely nothing to do with history and humanities.
Second OP quotes an article speaking about abortion and asks about euthanasia, which is retarded enough to deserve a ban or why not an euthanasia.

fucking rekt

I'm currently going through charges of multiple counts of first degree child rape, and I asked that exact question to her a few days ago and she said yes.

Your move.

Ethics are part of humanities.You realize, all you're doing is bumping this thread that's triggering you?

What a horrible world where I would have good genes. Luckily I live in this wonderful world blessed by Jesus Christ, our lord and Savior, so I can enjoy the advantages of being born ugly.

Having healthy, beautiful and intelligent babies will be normal and there is nothing you can do Christcucks.

You do realize that you're you, and not someone with good genes, right? You would not have been the Chad your hypothetical replacement would have been.

I have a disabled sister. She's pretty much a 1 year old baby on the body of a 10 years old. Speaking seriously, she's a burden, has been, and will always will. My mom once broke down on me and told me that had she know she would be like this she would rather had not have her for both her sake, because that's simply no life, and ours, so as to not carry such a burden the rest of our life. I couldn't help but agree with her.

People who say otherwise are people who don't know what it feels to live like this, or how it feels to know someone who lives like that.

i think its a good thing phenotypes like green eyes only make up 2% of the population.Designer genes would halt the homogenization of are species.All races would potentially have more varied phenotypes.

not to mention wiping out genetic illness and making a better next generation smarter and stronger.

Does that mean you're good with being euthanized?

Yeah, and that's not Down's Syndrome. Your sister's condition was most likely not as detectable as something like an aneuploidy.

The real issue here is whether or not Iceland is saying you have to have an abortion if you're pregnant with a Down's child.

why would actively want a downs syndrome child?

It doesn't trigger me, the topic could be interesting (if properly submitted), but it obviously doesn't belong to this board.

Münchhausen by proxy

Because Down's Syndrome is not completely debilitating, and Down's children can grow up to lead perfectly fine lives. Unless you're saying, everyone under 80 IQ should be sterilized/aborted. If that's the case, I'd like to rev up some infographs for you, pal.

No. They are just a burden on the family and on the state and will spend their entire lives drooling and shitting themselves like babies. Euthanasia is the right thing to do.

Who's going to tell him?

rev them up senpai

>Because Down's Syndrome is not completely debilitating
It's still debilitating. Any sensible person would abort and try again for a healthy child who will be able to contribute to society and amount to something more than a shelf stacker at Walmart.

>I'm some special snowflake
No, I'm not. I shoot a million special snowflakes into a Kleenex every day.
Do you think your mother wanted some pseudo christians weeb who wastes his time on Veeky Forums talking about Euthanasia?

It's because people are forced to love disabled people, especially if it's their child. They don't care that it effectively destroys the life of multiple people. I also have a disabled person in my family and there is some old grandma who has to take care of the guy. He's "nice", I don't want to be the asshole who dislikes a disabled person, but I'm glad I can avoid contact. At least for me it's hard to be around these people, but maybe others honestly think and feel differently.

Iceland proving Kaiser Rudolph was right

>Perfectly fine lives
Maybe by your standards NEET.

>I don't want to be the asshole who dislikes a disabled person, but I'm glad I can avoid contact
I wish I could avoid contact with retards, but here I am

It depends. If a condition possibly necessitates a caretaker and the afflicted cannot ever live an even remotely independent lifestyle, then they should be aborted. If they develop a congenital disease later in life that was undetected, they should be allowed to die with some grace.

The state doesn't have the right to end the life of any of it's citizens without due legal process, and if you don't live in a shithole, then the death penalty is illegal, meaning that such a sentence for the "crime" of being disabled would be illegal.

From a legalist and a moral perspective:
Stop trying to murder other human beings you sick fuck.

DEE DEE DEE

It's wrong to do it if they're adults, yes. If it's a fetus it's up to the parents of the child to decide it (their kid, their rules). Euthanasia might not be the correct term, as it implies consent by the assisted in commiting suicide, something a retarded guy might not be able to give.

Why do you love abominations user?

As someone with a congenital disease, I'm glad that modern science was able to fix me and not kill me, like some kind of retarded Sparta.

Well, you see, you are forcing me to like handicapped people. Next argument you bring is that parents who have disabled children love their children so we don't need to try to improve the gene pool.

We can also be nice and loving to the disabled, this does not necessarily mean that we can not actively improve the gene pool by selecting sperm and eggs of the most healthy.

They're still people, you fucking weirdo, should we murder feral childeren? They're never going to be able to reintergrate into society so fuck it, might as well just end em.

>selecting egg and sperm of the most healthy
You've never fucked a person.

Because it's detestable to me. I can't explain it, but it is, as is abortion.
There has to be some ceiling to this utter moral void. Why does everyone want to destroy everything? Who cares if it's an artificial system, if that artificial system keeps us from living in the bush with the beasts.
This is savagery in the guise of progress. This is Naziism