Syd Lexia wrote:

Also, the Holocaust was a logical extension of eugenics. Before WW2, the United States had programs in place that sterilized mental patients. After WW2, those were all halted.

Define "mental patients"?

faggotmachine wrote:

If I happened to get some women pregnant and it turned out the kid was gonna be retarded... ABORTED. BAM. No way I would ever father or waste money on a worthless resource consuming retard. Its beyond stupid in so many ways. I don't ever plan on having kids, nor do I want them. I would sooner adopt if there was some sort of choice and I had to pick. As for the people that chose to have retarded children, well thats their choice. They can go along wasting money on something that will never be more than lump of flesh that resembles something humaniod. Even dogs don't suck as bad as retards. As least your dog knows where to shit and piss. I'm talking about purely retarded, like no use whatsoever. Downs kids are cool because they can at least talk and do normal things. TERRI SCHIAVO.

Sorry to double post...

How do you plan to know that the child is retarded while still in the womb? You can't perform an IQ test on a fetus (which is necesssary to find out the mental capacity of someone). Though I respect your position on not wanting useless people on the earth, your methods are very flawed.

I agree completely that Terri Schiavo and all other people who are in a permanent vegetative state should not be kept alive. I think if they are in a coma, they stand a chance.

As for the mention of the holocaust and killing "mental patients", I'm not sure I follow that theory. It may be the psychologist inside me, but most mental disorders are treatable and the person affected doesn't require assistance living. I don't see the point in killing off these people, they are perfectly able to function in society, work, have families, and most mental disorders are either not hereditary or have a very low probability of being passed on.

I personally think that certain conditions do warrant euthanasia. I once saw a story on TLC where the child was born with no airway to her nose, blind, deformed mouth that would not allow to eat and would have to be fed from a tube, severe mental retardation, etc. and this poor child had endured dozens of surgeries and was only a toddler. In that case, the child had no sense of existance. Her quality of life was very poor. I think this child should have been euthanised. There was no chance for the child to ever maintain a life without constant nursing services at her side.

/rant

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Wrong, Vald. YOUR definition isn't being referred to. I think everyone but you and Tish means the same thing.

If you want to use the term retarded incorrectly, be my guest. I'm not going to sit here and insult anyone, but the term "retarded" is not really a subjective term. It's a clinical diagnosis for a mental disorder: characterized by several factors, but the main criteria is an IQ below 70. Insult me all you want and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, but I have a BA in Psychology that tells me otherwise.

I guess only myself and Valdronius believe in political correctness and using clinical terms appropriately.

Wolfman Jake wrote:

If you're going to try and throw around clinical definitions, please get them right at the very least. Most persons are labeled as mentally retarded when their IQs are TWO standard deviations below the mean.

DEFINE: an IQ below 70, significant limitations in two or more areas of adaptive behavior (i.e., ability to function at age level in an ordinary environment), and evidence that the limitations became apparent in childhood.