>>But they did. Just stepping bravely through two births that would just make anyone else shake their heads in disbelief. Knowingly, or determinedly unknowingly (to the same effect) give birth to a child with Down syndrome,
just to be in line with the party line, that's so... and now of course her daughter had a choice to carry the pregnancy to the end... because that's what happens to the girls who don't practice abstinence, as everyone can see now. And the father had the choice to get married.
>
>To be fair, we do not know why she chose to give birth to the child with Down syndrome and we do not know why her daughter is giving birth or getting married. It may be her mother's politics, but it could be any other reason as well. To assume it was/is only due to support the party line is unfair and unknown. Also, how do we know the father had no other choice or that he would've chosen anything else?
>
>FWIW, I agree with the rest (what happens when you don't practice abstinence nor use birth control and what happens when other options are not taught or available or supported at home)
Calling this situation "in line with party line" shows serious disconnection with stated "pro-choice" platform unless it is just one choice allowed. Personally, I support pro-choice in sense that both choices should be respected.
Edward Pikman
Independent Consultant