This is about the hottest topic imaginable. But as long as commenters address their attention to the issue, and not to each other, I won't close comments.
Thanks for your love for your children, including your special-needs child.
......
I also read those Slate-type articles which straight-facedly argue for child euthanasia. It is a LOGICAL question, "What would be your objection, if any, to euthanising a 3-day-old who was the product of rape or incest?"
But in fairness, I'm confident that ALL the denizens here, who support late-term abortion rights, would hurriedly disavow child euthanasia, and would fight against its legalization. When we talk about pro- child euthanasia proponents in America, we are (I assume) truly talking about the fringe.
The typical woman who has a late-term abortion certainly does not think it is infanticide. Commonly, such a person agonized over the decision and is tortured by the slightest possibility of connecting it with infanticide. Several of my friends have been in that position. Trust me, it is a very painful topic for them, one on which you must show the greatest sensitivity.
And yet, as a culture, we can't afford not to discuss the subject.
....
And with that, how about we re-direct (mostly) back towards James' main topic -- voters as check-and-balance -- without turning this into a primarily abortion debate that TJM started. None of us are going to feel edified at the end of that discussion, I don't think. :- )
Best,
Jeff