Stand Firm

NPR Laments that more down syndrome babies are not aborted…

wow...there is an increase in Down Syndrome births because fewer pregnant women are choosing to murder their imperfect unborn babies…so we need to get more pregnant women to take diagnostic tests earlier in their pregnancies so they will be able to make the choice to murder their children before its too late and more Downs babies are born. What a bunch of Nazis

The question just hangs out there in plain view. If these children are being aborted simply because they live a life unworth living, then shouldn’t we be rounding up all those post-birth individuals who magnaged to escape the dragnet, and euthanize them as well? By definition, wouldn’t they be better off if they had never been born?

Or perhaps we should admit the truth; that the problem is not the quality of life of someone with Down’s Syndrome, but rather the expected quality of life of the parent. Really, we have become so arrogant that we expect perfect children who may reflect our own perfect selves. Each child must be beautiful, intelligent, strong, capable of fulfilling all his parents expectations. Otherwise, he will cause his parents to suffer social and psychological embarrassment. Imperfection is not permitted.

This is what we call “enlightenment.” We used to just call it “self-centered.” And parents were not praised for it.

The audacity of these parents to exercise their “choice” and love these wonderful children! Don’t they understand that Downe’s Syndrome babies place too much of a burden on the rest of us “normal” people?

We obviously need more government-sponsored parenting re-education programs so these parents won’t make these despicable immoral choices…like letting their children live.

I used to volunteer with Down Syndrome adults who are deaf and hard of hearing (and they used sign language - how cool is that!). I would rather spend all day with these wonderful people than anyone at NPR.

Weren’t the republicans in the mid 1990’s going to shut down NPR under the “Contract with America”? What a complete (if comparably insignificant) waste of tax dollars.
But, it may be a fairly faithful reflection of its targeted audience demographic.
What will the folks, who think flushing away inconvenient fetuses is good for career and wallet, do when mom and dad need a lot of care? Now there is an ugly little secret most of us don’t think about until confronted with the realities. You can’t abort mom and dad or euthanize them (at least not yet). What’s that? Toss them into a nursing home? Oh yeah, that combined $7,000/mo might pinch the wallet pretty good too. Stay tuned for a whole new NPR series on why euthanasia is really good policy because it saves scarce resources for those who are still productive, or some other drivel that will not make it sound so horrific.

Oddly enough here is one area in which science has been telling these people a truth yet they choose to ignore their diety of choice. The best time for a women to become pregnant is when she is between the ages of 18-35 with some leeway on either side of these numbers. But women were not designed to have their healthiest babies after they turn 40.

Here is news flash for some folks. Our eggs get old . They’ve been waiting for the fastest wriggler for decades now and they are tired and just ain’t gonna be doing their best work.

But haven’t you heard? Eliminating the weak and abnormal from the human race is one of the great ways to advance Christ’s Kingdom on earth! That was the line in the early 20th century at any rate, when the “philanthropic” work of the Rockefeller family gave a huge public boost to eugenics. Liberal christians of the day encourage prospective couples to undergo eugenic examination before marriage to ensure healthy offspring. At county fairs, there would be “fitter families” competitions to see which family was the most genetically normal. Winners got a medallion quoting Psalm 16:6 - “Yea, I have a good heritage.”

This is where abortion began! The issue first burst on to the national scene in 1962 when a TV personality named Sherri Finkbine discovered that she had accidentally taken thalidomide during her pregnancy. Faced with the possibility of a child with abnormal appendages, she traveled to Sweden to get a legal abortion there. In TIME magazine, she was quoted as saying “It would be the cruelest thing in the world to let my baby be born with only a 50-50 chance of being normal. And I am concerned about our other children. How would it affect them? [good question! - how will it affect them to learn that your love for them is conditioned on their having “normal” appendages?] Some people think that what I want to do is wrong. If it would make them happy, we would be glad to start again next month and try to have a normal baby [apparently, children are fungible commodities].”

And what did America do? It had great sympathy for this terrifying woman’s choice. And a decade later we got Roe v. Wade. And now with new technology that can detect down syndrome early on, abortion has come full circle back to it’s original eugenic purposes.

Matt et al, did you LISTEN to the piece? Or just go by the brief synopsis on the web site? A main focus of the report includes a mother of a Down’s child celebrating his accomplishments and hoping that other mother’s who learn they are carrying a Down’s child will take heart. The report emphasizes the many achievements that persons with Down’s syndrome are making and how much of the health issues are now correctible. I found the overall tone of the piece to be very supportive of individual’s with Down’s and very reassuring to listeners. The point was that the numbers of cases are less than expected given the significant increase in older women having children. To me this was part of the reassuring quality of the piece. No where did I hear a lament that more are not aborted. You are way off base, Matt.

nope I listened to it…i heard the entire thing on the radio first and was shocked enough to find the link and post it…and of course a pro-abortionist would come away with the impression you did. The last minute or so was especially chilling.

So why are people delaying childbearing until they are older and have increased odds of having a Down’s child? Isn’t it all a consequence of the sexual revolution and the birth control pill?

Wife & I were shocked at the consistent pressure applied by our recent OBGYN to screen for Downs throughout our pregnancy. “Why?” we would ask her every time. “Oh, ya know, so you can better consider your options,” she would say.

Dr.s are practically incapable of saying exactly what’s on offer, but boy do they offer it.

Doctors are afraid of getting sued by unhappy parents who want to blame someone (and by extension, make someone pay) for a less-than-perfect child. They are laying the groundwork for a legal defense against claims of “wrongful birth.” How degraded has a culture become when it invents a concept like “wrongful birth?”

I am not a pro abortionist, and I didn’t hear anything like the headline on this blog story in it. It seemed like a pretty straight up news story to me.

However - apropos of where the blog discussion seems to be heading: I had my last two children when I was 38 and 40. My doctor offered me the blood tests, and I asked if there was anything he could test for that was treatable in utero, and he said no, so I didn’t bother to get the tests. Did you folks know that the blood test for Downs has an 80% false positive rate? In other words, eighty percent of the positive tests are wrong. Anyway, I always get a level two ultrasound because of a heart defect that runs in my husband’s family (if any of my kids had suffered from it, I would have had to deliver in the hospital that has the better NICU). Anyway, the ultrasound doctor was dumbfounded when I told him that I hadn’t had the blood tests. It was almost as if my “I would not abort under any circumstance” was beyond his understanding.

Matt+, your paragraph doesn’t accurately describe the story. The story doesn’t say pregnant women need to take more diagnostic tests or take them earlier. It doesn’t advocate one way or the other what they should do with respect to abortion. In fact, on the whole, the story (I think) leans toward encouraging giving birth to a baby with Down Syndrome by highlighting their improving prospects. Later, it does hide behind the “these are difficult decisions” copout.

The research the story discusses seems conflicting. At first, it says Down Syndrome births are up because more people are choosing to give birth. Later, it says Down Syndrome births are staying steady but that the steady percentage is actually a decline due to the aging maternal population, and it suggests, without comment pro or con, that more women are choosing to abort.

I hope you will not attempt to dismiss me as a pro-abortionist. I am pro-life, and I’m all for criticizing NPR. But this is far from the story that your description suggests.

Hi DavidH, the recording is posted and people can listen and come to their own conclusions. Anne and I were pretty stunned and hearing it while making dinner and now hearing it for the third time, I stand by my initial conclusions.

On the day little Danny arrived
His father stared and his mother cried
They knew his name but they didn’t know why
He looked the way he did
This thing happens to other kids
How in the world are we gonna live
With a boy like that?

Doctor said, “Dan’s the first bad news
Second is his heart won’t make it through
It must be fixed unless you choose
To send him back where he came
Starve the boy from his name
Just six short days of pain
Or maybe less”

Chorus:
Danny’s Downs but Love is up
It’s been known to be more than enough
For more and more of us
Danny’s downs but Love is up

“I’m not that strong,” his father said
“The dreams are gone, the hopes have fled
Won’t be long after he’s dead
We’ll try again to find
The child we had in mind
Where the hell are those papers to sign?”
And the man broke down

In a private room Danny’s mother wept
As an old Jamaican woman swept
And not by chance their eyes met
(And she said)
“God’s gifts are only good y’know
And there ain’t no Love the Lord can’t grow
Aw honey, take that boy with ya when ya go
Back home

It’s been eight years since the surgery
His sister’s 5, his brother’s 3
He goes to school and he knows how to read
He takes the bus home by himself
Puts his lunch pail back upon the shelf
And he hugs his Momma till she melts
To the floor

They’re more than a home, they’re a family
‘Cause blood and bones are still souls y’see
And someone’s baby’s just another Danny
And in the guest room in the back
Lives this old Jamaican black
‘Cause when you give a gift
God gives it back again.

I think that the very fact that NPR took it upon itself to mention in the last 15 seconds of this spot that there are more diagnostic tests available so that women can choose to murder their unborn children is the crux of Matt’s criticism. The report itself was fairly straightforward after first listen, but that last comment was the one that was unnecessary. They had to get their pro-abortion slant in there somewhere.

I’m sure I was biased by the headline, but I also felt like the tone of the interview of the mother with a Down’s Syndrome son was somewhat along the lines of “oh well, I guess we better say something nice about one of the success stories. We don’t really want to, but here goes.” Again, probably my bias, but that was how I heard it.

I think the one of the things that Ted Kennedy did that I admired was his support for a bill that would require doctors to fully explain (as in including the positive) what it meant to have a Downs Syndrome or otherwise disabled baby. I am not sure what ever became of this bill. I assume this came out of his witness to his sister’s work with the mentally disabled as well as his own family history.

#10 - Underground -
Sometimes people delay having children becs they’re not married earlier, and not necessarily becs they’re focused on a career, either. Sometimes they need healing of wounds from their own childhood bef they marry or bec parents.

I got married in my early 30s, still unsure about the question of having children, though by then I knew their childhood wdn’t have to duplicate my own. My first was due on my 36th bday; I miscarried betw Mothers Day and my 39th bday, and gave birth to our second child a couple of wks after turning 40. After m/c and being pg again at 39, they suggested various tests. I declined anything like amnio, which perforates the amniotic sac and rarely, but sometimes, causes m/c, (and, as has been mentioned, is inaccurate quite often) but I was open to any blood tests that might show “an abnormality” becs it wd give us time to learn about what we’d be dealing with and how to prepare. EG: A sonogram showed a hole in the heart of my best friend’s baby, which is often present in Down’s babies; further tests showed the baby did indeed have Downs, and they had a few months to learn about it (while adjusting to the dx of their older child having not allergies, but CF).

I’m surprised no one’s mentioned a famous Ann Landers column about having a child w/ Down’s. The parent compared it to planning a trip to Italy, having sites/sights picked out to see, studying the history to appreciate things better, etc. Get on the plane, and the plane lands in Holland. Huh? but we were going to Italy, what are we doing in Holland? But Holland has a lot to offer, as well, and the trip, while different, can be an enjoyable one, not a horrible waste of time.

Very sad situation: my father’s aunt and uncle had 2 children, one w/ some kind of mental retardation. I knew he existed, and that he was in “a home,” and assumed that he was basically vegetative. Turns out he was w/in a half hr of our house, but my parents never went to see him. He’s now 70 and has cancer - if the retardation had been severe, he’d have died long bef 70. My bro shares his name, and works as a radiation tech. His co-workers got a start when his name was on the list of pts for the day - turned out to be our father’s cousin. My bro had a good conversation w/ him; talked w/ his sister afterwards, and she wishes her bro wd just get it over w/ and die, stop wasting time and resources. How was she raised? The old “put him in a home and forget you had him” approach seems to have been taken literally in that family… She doesn’t believe in God, but reincarnation…. V sad.

For the record, Matt, I am NOT a pro-abortionist. I believe that abortion is ending a life. I stand by my opinion of what I heard which was a news piece about a study presented in a way that encourages women to carry their Down’s Syndrome children to term.

I did hear a pro-abortion bent, but I also do not think that the headline of this post accurately describes the piece. Matt, could you please provide some specific quotes that caused you to say that NPR “laments” that more down syndrome babies are not aborted?

Hi Utah Benjamin…nope, but you can listen to it for yourself. If you disagree with my characterization of the piece, that’s fine. But I think what I posted is a correct representation.

We have a 3 yr old in our family that has been diagnosed with PCH2 and “probably” Athetoid Cerebral Palsy. I am not sure she has been correctly diagnosed, but that is another long story. She can not talk, sit up or walk and we were told she will probably not live beyond age 10. There are still LOTS of things she can do. She knows what we are saying when we tell her we love her and we know what she is saying when she responds in her very own special way.

Quality of life is a hard thing to determine. If there was any way to stop or reverse the atrophy of her brain, we would do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to do that. At the same time we love her just the way she is and are very thankful for her. She has brought a very special quality and blessedness to our lives that we would never have known without her.

We are just as proud of her and her accomplishments as we are of her brother who makes the best grades in school. I could expound for pages on the difficulties encountered on a daily basis, but could you not do the same in raising any child.

Do I wish things were different for her? I did at one time but not any more. I believe our little girl does enjoy life, she smiles a lot and is rarely fretful. She has progressed far beyond what the doctor’s predicted and she may have a lot more surprises for us.

It is not the easiest life for her parents nor the rest of the family, but we are very thankful that she was born into our family. As with very child, once they are here, you can not imagine life without them. I suspect when all is said and done, this child will end up giving us far more joy and far less pain than any of our “normal” children. An awful lot of my blessings have come in disguise…not what I thought I wanted or asked for, but what ended up being the perfect gift from God.

Those who try to live life by avoiding all pain, will miss the greatest joys of life, and unfortunately will still probably experience greater pain than the thing they tried to avoid by trying to change God’s good and perfect will.

Matt:
I realize that a discussion on a headline usually does not warrant more than a few comments, so let me close with this: a tactic of some in the main stream media and many liberal editors is to inaccurately portray a story by utilizing a sensationalist headline. An example of this was rightly criticized by Jackie in a post today. Doing this detracts from otherwise valid points (in this case, the point that any suggestion that a disabled child deserves to be born less than others is evil), and it ought to be at the very least pointed out when it occurs.

I’m quite open to being shown wrong by Matt or others. I often need a few doses of humility each day to bring me closer to Jesus.

Thanks for the conversation.

Thanks so much for the song David Wilson (#18), and for your comment 7Light (#26). Both have started off my day quite nicely.

I’m 27 with no marriage prospects, and not because I’m focused on career above God, but because I’m a natural introvert that doesn’t easily form close relationships, and because I’m finding it very hard to find a woman that is Christian, romantically interested in me, and I’m romantically interested in here. If I ever do get married though, whether or not the woman is still in the prime of her breeding career is probably not going to be among the top of my lists of concerns.

I must say, however, that one thing about Paula’s statement particularly puzzles. Surely, as a devout Roman Catholic (if I’m remembering correctly) she thinks that it is wrong for an older couple to use birth control or surgury to prevent pregnency even when you are past your physical prime. While there is always “nautural family planning,” my understanding is that it is not exactly 100% reliable.

And one can see Matt’s point. It is the clinical nature of the last statement that arrests the attention.

For what purpose? That is left unstated, but we all know. There is no treatment for Down’s Syndrome. Unless ripping a body apart is considered treatment.

For what purpose? Again, it is left unstated. And did you notice the slight-of-hand? The pregnant women does not get tested for Down’s Syndrome. The unborn child gets tested. But simply saying such an obvious fact admits something about the humanity of the child that is best covered over. The statement should read “Doctors now recommend that all unbprn children get tested for Down syndrome, not just the children of older women.” But then it’s clear that we aren’t ‘treating’ the mother at all. We are testing for a birth defect so that the defect in the child can be ‘treated’ with death.

Technology marches on. We are developing new ways to detect this condition even earlier so that it may be treated even earlier. Except the only treatment is death.

But the statement leaves unanswered questions. “Easier for whom?” The mother? The abortionist? “Easier in what way?” Less attachment for the mother? Less mess for the abortionist? Is this how engineers spoke of the ovens?

Did NPR “lament?” Perhaps not. But what I read was worse. It was the de-humanizing way in which they treated the children so affected. Almost like one would discuss putting down a dog. And the inclusion of the prior statements from parents of children with Down’s Syndrome did not mitigate the impact. It made it worse. NPR admits these children can lead meaningful lives. But it still ends its report by recommending that all pregnant women get tested.

And actually, when normal human beings discuss putting down a dog they do so with much tears and feeling and turmoil.

The truth is that normal healthy people would not even do to a fetus puppy in the dog’s womb what is done to fetus humans in the human mother’s womb. We would be—rightly—utterly repulsed and would not soil our hands with such activities.

That’s a great point. We have spent the last four weeks in the hospital with our newborn, and I have seen many parents with their wonderful, disabled children who are receiving treatment or recovering from surgery, and it breaks my heart that some parents do not even consider these kids worth the effort to carry them to full-term (or as close to as possible in some cases) and then allow them to be adopted, let alone allow their lives to be changed and raise them as their own.

When doing research on special formula our daughter will need for her condition (congenital chylothorax), I came across this blog about a family who gave birth last year to their daughter who has down syndrome. If you have time, it’s fun and touching to read it from the beginning when they discovered they were pregnant all the way to where they are now: teenytinyhopkins.blogspot.com. Their entry for Thanksgiving Day: “This year, we are most thankful for our daughter, Lucy, who has shown us what the true meaning of life really is.”

Great comment, Carl - especially this catch: “pregnant women get tested for Down syndrome.”

I don’t listen to the liberal drivel on NPR any more than I watch the liberal drivel on CNN. I feel the richer for ignoring both.

None of my children have Down’s but the children of two friends do. What a light they are in the world…much more so than anyone who would advocate their being scraped out of a womb by misdirected, unethical butchers.

Sarah posted this from Dr. Bush, who works with special children all over the world, months ago, but he nails some great points in a very poignant, academic, yet whimsical way…it’s highly worth a re-read, and says it all.

To begin, I am assuming that you are familiar with the legal term of art breach of contract. If I am incorrect you might try Googling the phrase.

But my main point in replying to your comment is simply to point out that the “shutting down” of NPR, or even the simple removal of any public funding, is but one of a great multitude of items in the contract which was breached by the Republicans. IMHO, with the exception of Ron Paul, and perhaps a few of his colleagues who hold to similar standards and principles (of the existence of whom I am not aware), the Republicans in the House and Senate are mostly just Democrats Lite™, aka “the lesser of two weevils.”

In the final analysis the Contract with America served the purpose of getting them elected to a majority position, and that was its principal purpose. Thank you, Mr. Former Speaker (now retired) Gingrich.

The problem with “Contract with America” in part had something to do with having president not inclined to cooperate with their agenda.

I must admit, however, for all the whinging about NPR’s politics, that I very much enjoy the local NPR classical music station and programs like “From the Top” and “Car Talk.” I even enjoy “Prarie Home Companion” inspite of Garrison Keilor’s political views.

The only commercial radio statio in the DC area died, so I’m not exactly eager to replace 90.9 WETA with yet another station blaring obscene rap and pop music.

Me too, AndrewA - it’s the only radio I listen to anymore. I love the classical and jazz programming and the programs you mention, too.

Oh dear AndrewA, just when I was about to run with hope to my unmarried 27 year old daughter you end with your snarky remark. I guess it is back to the drawing board.

I was speaking to the secular support given to later childbearing which often is encouraged to unmarried woman as well as to couples. The reasons given are generally ones that are not put forth by Christians. Arguments such as fear of losing chances of advancement in a career or having to delay other life plans. At the center of these reasons is the assumption that children somehow, if not planned to fit exactly into a preconceived notion of how your life should be, are not a blessing but a burden. Yet this attitude fails to admit that nature does mean women to have their healthiest children at an age when most probably will not have finished with all there pre child life plans.

It has also not passed my notice that many secularists have the attitude that we have a right to have a child. Not only a child but a perfect child. Somehow the disabled child just does not go with the rest of the lifestyle.

God’s plan for us is very different. He tells us children are a blessing. Even when circumstances mean they arrive later in our life. We are also taught that children are a gift not a right. And that even a child who is severaly disabled is a full person with the right to life. We do not view the unborn child as a “product of conception.” No impersonal labels that put the child’s existence solely in terms of his or her relationship to us. Such labels make it much easier to justify aborting the healthy as well as unhealthy preborn child. Just a product oh to hell with it then.

And NFP is not 100% effective. Nor is any other method of birth control except for full abstinence or sterilization. And yes Catholics are forbidden to use artificial birth control. And practicing NFP and being open to life may mean a Catholic mom will have babies in her 40’s. Which does increase the likelyhood of having a Downs Syndrome baby. One to be loved and cared for as the gift he or she truly is.

OK, so this is totally off topic, but what is this word ‘whinging?’ I can’t even conceive how it would be pronounced. I have gotten used to seeing it at Fulcrum and other British sites, but now its showing up at SFIF. (I think David Ould uses it as well, but that hardly counts.) Is this one of those British corruptions of the English language? “Whinging” is to “whining” as “defence” is to “defense” or “football” is to “soccer.”

Paula, while I may have a tendency towards phrasing things in a snarky way, my intent in the case was not snarkiness or disrespect. From what I’ve seen of you on this blog, I have no reason not to think well of you. While I’m not Roman Catholic, I think I understand and appreciate the reasons they give for not using birth control, and I’ve mixed feelings about the topic. Anyway, thank you for clarrifying your meaning. Also, I was not aware that sterilization was considered an option by the Roman Catholics, so I’ve learned something new.

And, for the record, I’m perfectly open to the possibility of marrying a Roman Catholic.

Carl, I think a overstock of the letter g was recently discovered in the archives of Oxford University. Rather than add to an overburden landfill by disposing of these or risk increasing the carbon footprint by burning them, it was decided to fit them into various existing words.

Some English people have started to resent these extra gs and have suggested that these gs be exported to southern regions to the U.S. where often gs are dropped in spoken dialects. So far negotions are stalled as loyal southerners balk at this other war of aggression. They is fixin to get riled up soon enough.

Andrew, I apologize for misunderstanding you. Sterilization is not an approved option for Catholics. I was simply pointing out which methods of birth control are 100% effective.

What can I say? I read lots of things by British authors and pick up a few things here and there. For example, I simply can not spell “grey” with an “a.” It just doesn’t feel right. For the most part, however, I write in American.

BTW, speaking from a strictly academic perspective, most historians consider industrialization as the process that has brought about the profound shift in child bearing patterns. Supposedly every industrial society has seen its birth rate drop dramatically. Historians frequently attribute it to the fact that in a shift from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy, children go from being an economic assets to economic liabilities. Part of this is becomes the consumerism that goes hand in hand with industrialization creates a desire to lavish more goods on the children that you do have. Part of it is because higher educational expectations contribute to children spending more and more of their time at school (often to the direct or indirect expense of the parent) rather than working. Child labor laws also limit the economic value of children. Improved life expectancies, particularly as a result of lower childhood mortality, also reduce the imperative to replace the workforce at such a rapid rate.

What is left unsaid in this NPR report is that most babies born with Down syndrome are born to mothers younger than 35. It is true that the incidence of bearing a child with Down syndrome increases with age but those women under the age of 35 still bear more children and therefore you will find more babies with Down syndrome in the younger parent population.

In my opinion, the emphasis of this report is to target younger mothers for screening—despite the brief statement given by the mother of a young adult with Down syndrome.

Ninety-two percent of parents given a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome choose to abort their babies.

As the mother of a 15 y.o. child with Down syndrome, these statistics cause me a great deal of grief. I wish the whole world could experience the joy I know in my child. She has a wonderful quality of life and mine has only been enhanced by giving birth to and raising this precious young lady.

I’m certain Jesus weeps with me for all those unborn children diagnosed with Down syndrome in the womb who never fulfill their earthly ministry on earth…

“Nor is any other method of birth control except for full abstinence or sterilization”.

I wouldn’t put a whole lot of faith in the latter. My cousin had her third child AFTER her tubal ligation—it was wonderful because that baby is her only daughter. Another friend fell madly in love with a woman 20 years younger than him, and they had a beautiful little boy, when Dad was 56 and POST-vasectomy. Yeah, right, sterilization.

I have also seen the statistics quincess outlines and they are appalling. The three friends I have with Down’s kids all gave birth to them with the moms UNDER the age of 35.

I weep with you too, quincess, and if someday we figure out that God DOESN’T forgive humanity for what it’s done, I won’t be surprised.

I just watched a story on WCNC 36 Charlotte of a boy with Down’s syndrome who is on the football team as a backup lineman who scored a touchdown on a special play. It is not posted on the net yet.

#35, I am perfectly comfortable with putting “Contract with America” in the same catagory as “Postal Service”, “Government Intelligence”, and others.

I favor widespread voluntary sterilization. I chose to be sterilized at 21 and do not regret it at all. I have been able to experience many valuable relationships with some excellent women as a result of that decision and have not been burdened with parenting or child support payments. I have encouraged others to choose as I have. Those who choose to go through life unsterilized should not be taxing the rest of us to support their choice to reproduce. I see nothing wrong with producing children as long as the resources are there to properly care for and educate them and the people raising them have the requisite level of maturity and nurturing skills.

My opinion is that the USA does not need to produce any more children. There are only so many people our economy, and out planet, can support. Those who have a need to care for children can adopt. There are far more children than good homes - one need only look at the children of Darfur and similar places. Importing disadvantaged children and placing them in good homes seems to me a better way to go than ad hoc impregnation.

You will neither accept nor understand this, DesertDavid. But you are to be pitied. How terrible it must be to live a life predicated upon the self-centered opinions that you have just expressed. Enjoy the time and money that you will now be able to spend on yourself. Truly you have already received your reward.

Perhaps if more progressive Episcopalian followed DesertDavid’s example, TEC could go the way of the Shakers.

DesertDavid,
Your statement left mee speechless for a few minutes. I had to reread it to be sure I’d actually understood it correctly. Sadly, I had. I can only imagine what constitutes a “valuable relationship” in that desert of yours. Your comment that you “see nothing wrong with producing children” is colder than some of the writings of sociopaths.
Having no children myself, and having what you so clinically described as a “need to care for children” I do care for other’s children whenever possible. It is a joy.
Please do not imagine that you are spiritual or responsible. I can say with complete assurance that there is something seriously wrong with you. Carl is right. You are to be pitied.

Every now and then I wonder if DesertDavid is someone the bloggers have invented to provide evidence for their characterization of TEC. I’m thinking he should get a weekly column with the ENS, perhaps even with link on the Episcopal Church’s mainpage, so he can regularly share gems like this with the whole of TEC, the Anglican Communion and the general populace.

Our humanity is assaulted by this culture from many forces and angles. Desert David and others who have chosen not to be ‘breeders’ have elected to detach themselves from their life-giving potential as an act of their own will. This desire probably comes from fear that arises out of hurtful childhood and family experiences where their own personhood was disrespected and/or devalued. Injuries to our humanity are subsequently compounded by our own sins, choices, conditioned sinful behaviors, misperceptions that arise out of the distressing events and relationships of childhood. This leaves people with inordinate hungers and needs. The temptation is to try to fulfill our needs without getting hurt again. We may seek sexual fulfillment without consequence, committment or permanence. This is a ‘my will be done’ mindset that runs counter to God’s command to be faithful to one marital partner and to ‘be fruitful and multiply’ This is a mindset that belies a fear of life and a fear of death. It does not come out of union with God, alignment with His Word, or a holy fear/reverence, an intimate personal knowledge and loving relationship, or confidence, trust and faith in God.

I have never felt a need to care for children. I have an aversion to spending much time with children. I do not like to be around people with Down Syndrome. The Lord has so arranged my life that I do not have to deal with any of these challenges. This is not a sign of any wisdom or virtue on my part. In fact, it’s a sign of seeking my own comfort as I go through life, and being indulged by God, perhaps to spare my weakness. I do not think I am working for or aiding any social goal such as reducing population. Just as we hunt to cull the herds of deer, when the time comes the Lord will cull our herds. I also don’t think Dave “is to be pitied.” At least not by me. I don’t have any standing to go around pitying people on account of their self-image. Pain and suffering, yes, self-image, no. Lots of people have to face moral dilemmas because of being pregnant with adverse circumstances. Most people in the world are never going to be such strong Christians that every pregnancy will be the source of unmitigated joy. But very few people will ever go David’s route, either voluntarily or by force.

PS - “This is a mindset that belies a fear of life and a fear of death.” Let me add, there are other fears - of relationship, intimacy with people and with God that arises when we have suffered broken attachments as children through our parents actions and attitudes, their divorce, conflicts and disunity, their disrespect and/or abuse of us and each other, that cause us to be afraid of and unable to enter fully and committ to life, marriage and parenthood.

Rocco, not everyone is called to parenthood or marriage. No one is called toward promiscuity and extra-marital sex. Or, at any rate, such a call does not come from God.

Well, AndrewA, what I said and what you think I said are two different things. I can tell you from first-hand experience that God does not call anyone to promiscuity and extra-marital sex. I haven’t just taken this on faith. I know it for a fact.

“I have been able to experience many valuable relationships with some excellent women as a result of that decision and have not been burdened with parenting or child support payments.”

I am sure that the many excellent women also are impressed by the commitment and depth of the love DesertDavid has had for them. A glorious series of relationships I am sure has been had by all.

RE: “Those who choose to go through life unsterilized should not be taxing the rest of us to support their choice to reproduce.”

I completely agree—I’m in favor of ending all tax incentives for home ownership, corporate development and recruitment, welfare, etc, etc. None of us should be taxed to support other people’s choices. I assume, also, that those of us who have not chosen to reproduce should not be forced to pay for public education and those uncivilized barbarians who do not choose to listen to classical music should not be forced to support National Public Radio.

I hope that DesertDavid will be the first to sign on to my Platform, since I assume that he is consistent in not wishing others to be taxed to support other people’s choices.

Sarah, I think you are on to something. Why should I have to pay for healthcare and social security, for example for other people’s offspring?

Sarah - you mean, we only pay taxes for the shcool system if/while we have kids in it? Way cool.

.... except the local K-8 school wd have no funding, since most of the funds come from “seasonal residents” taxes. Would you insist we all leave the island? Have uneducated kids to burden society in other ways? Besides, you’d have to stop ordering lobster bisque, there’d be no lobsters to bisque.

That’s okay Desert David, My wife and I will make up for your sterilization, leave an enormous carbon footprint and use up all those resources you’ve left for us. Thanks.

Oh, by the way, this strategy of yours may in fact “save the planet”. In about a generation or so.

I for one would love to be a fly on the wall as DD gives some sweeet damsel his seduction speech. I am sure it is right up there with “You know, with all the trouble in this world and the commies having the bomb now, this could be our last night on Earth.”

P.S, I do want to thank Dave for a very well needed laugh this morning. The image of him solemnly explaining to his intended sweetheart how he will not be burdened because of his selfless and noble act is priceless.

I don’t know Paula, those damsels aren’t dummies. They might be giving him a line.

What a sad and hopeless way to live, Desert Dave. But such a philosophy is self-correcting. It doesn’t enter the gene pool.

I keep looking, expecting and hoping to see an entry signed by DesertDavid which says, “Don’t you people recognize sarcasm when you read it?” Was he really serious? What about the “sex outside marriage” issue that this brings up? Or shouldn’t I go there?

I hope Desert David will explain that, reine4. His post leaves the suggestion that sex outside the bounds of marriage is OK as long as you can’t father a child.

I don’t think you’re being fair to NPR - I don’t see any lamenting. They’re just noting the surprising trend that despite better and more frequent testing, birth rates for DS babies continue to go up. Then they offer multiple explanations including the improved quality of life for people with DS. Finally they have a doctor point out that the rise in birth rates for DS has actually not kept up with the rise in birth rates for mothers over 35, which implies that more testing actually has had the expeced affect (which is more abortions).
The story seems pretty balanced to me, and actually I found it quite interesting (as the husband of a 39-year old wife trying to get pregnant).

Your post begs a few questions that should be answered. “Is is possible to be unfair to NPR?” “Why would we want to be fair to NPR?” Personally, I would just de-fund the whole enterprise, and let its frequency allocations lie fallow for a couple of years. But I am a radical, and by no means a moderate.

The problem with the report is the unspoken premise behind it. The report presumes that aborting a child for Down’s Syndrome is a perfectly reasonable and morally acceptable response. The story is a story only because the enlightened classes that support and listen to NPR expect responsible and morally reasonable parents to dispatch their defective children before any legal obligation attaches. The counter-intuitive nature of the statistics is why NPR even bothered in the first place. And this attitude shows in how the report is presented. There is no moral offense at the idea of killing someone who is defective. There is no thought paid to the implication of this attitide for those who live with such defects. There is only mild shock and wonder that more parents than expected are setting aside the “Limited Liability Clause” that now attaches to pregnancy. It’s a morally dead and deadening perspective.

©2009 Stand Firm, LLC. All rights reserved. Permission to copy and distribute free of charge is granted, provided this notice, the logo, and the web site address are visible on all copies. For permission for use in for-profit publications, please email contact@standfirminfaith.com.