I've been working on some posts built around The Abortion Debate No One Wants To Have* since I read the article, but I see that other people are beating me to it. Good. It needs to be talked about. Lots. From lots of angles. Parents of disabled people are being pestered by folks who can't understand why someone would "keep" a child with known defects, and don't mind voicing their disapproval. This should be fought, I think. It's nuts. It's cruel. It's inhuman. And it's cowardly (more on that at a later date).
Headmistress over at The Common Room blog is the mother of a child with cerebral palsy and mental retardation. Her post here.
Wilfred McClay at Mere Comments weighs in with Eradicating the Disabled.
Please let me know if you have (or run across) other good posts on this. Thanks.
*"The Abortion Debate No One Wants To Have" was written by Patricia E. Bauer, and was published Tuesday, October 18, 2005, in the Washington Post. The subtitle is "Prenatal testing is making your right to abort a disabled child more like "your duty" to abort a disabled child." Kudos to the Washington Post for running this.
Suboptimal Understanding - (Don Boudreaux) TweetCommenting on Scott Sumner’s recent, excellent EconLog post on trade theory and policy advocacy, Warren Platts writes like a man who ...
3 hours ago