I was reading something online today and came across a post about a Denver newspaper article about a bill or something that would make it mandatory for pregnant women to have the HIV test in order for the baby to get the proper care should the mother be HIV positive. One politician voted no and claimed that if the mother is HIV pos and the baby got it from her, then it would teach the woman to not be as promiscuous and others would follow the example. Or something like that. Now I agree that his opinion it totally bogus. Why punish the baby for the irrisponsibility of the mother??? Ok now lets look at this a different way.
A woman is very promiscuous and gets pg. Doesnt matter if she is tested or not. But she doesnt want the baby so she opts for abortion. Oh, excuse me, legalized murder. So if you compare the two, the man voting against the testing is basically stating that the woman made the mistake and letting the baby suffer is her punishment. What about killing an innocent baby because of the mothers mistake? What is the difference? There is none. Just like making testing mandatory (which is a simple bloodtest) can help save the life of an innocent baby, so can making abortion illegal! The baby should'nt have to be punished for the mother's irresponsibility! I rest my case. On another though, if HIV can lead to aids, wouldnt that be sealing the fate of a baby to die, possibly very young? Even in infancy? If that were to happen, the mother could be prosecuted for the death of her child. Notice I said could. Not would. Again, I rest my case.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I can say irony... "Irony!" :-)
Just 5 more days!
(well, technically 4 days 13.5 hrs)
The only thing with HIV is that not all pregnant women pass it onto their child once the baby is born. It's a 50/50 chance of it being passed on.
Post a Comment