By Sandy Rios
Published on September 26, 2008 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Politics

It was the annual "Summerfest" in a community about 60 miles west of Chicago. We were expecting rides and cotton candy, but were greeted instead by tractors and a pork chop dinner. The crowd was populated by just plain folks — old and young, enjoying the easy camaraderie of small town life. One family stood out. It was a mom and dad with a boy about eight I'll call "Johnny."

 

 We had come to see a Chicago band, awkwardly positioned on a flatbed truck, who didn't disappoint. They delivered great Chicago-style blues and rock, but as great as they were, they were promptly upstaged by Johnny. As the band started, he bolted to the grassy area before the stage and began to dance deliciously. He didn't just have one "move," he had lots of them with finger strategically pointed, and attitude enough for the whole band. As the singer jumped off the stage, Johnny would follow, imitating him playing harmonica and clutching his cordless mic as he serenaded a select few. When he finished a set and took a bow, Johnny took his, too...deeply, like a shadow on the lawn. The crowd roared and I was especially delighted when he came to serenade me with his imaginary microphone. I wanted to grab and hug him, but he would have none of it.
 
I looked down the row to see his parents standing silently, not with wild cheering but with wonder, amazement and...pride. You see, Johnny has Down syndrome. It was a moment parents of special needs kids seldom get to enjoy.
 
It struck me in that moment that nearly 90 percent of babies born with Down syndrome are now aborted. Most Johnnys never get the chance to delight a crowd or bring deep, abiding joy to their parents — because they never get a chance to live.
 
It was a Down syndrome baby that nurse Jill Stanek cradled until death at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, denied of food or medical treatment. Another imperfect baby, unwanted by its parents, starved out of existence.
 
When legislation to prevent such callousness and neglect sprang to life as a result of Stanek's story, Barack Obama spoke out against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. He argued that it was unfair to the mothers to let these babies live — that it would turn back abortion rights (as though infanticide and abortion were in the same legal ballpark). He voted against the legislation and tried to persuade others in the Illinois legislature to follow his lead. On the issue of abortion, he later publicly declared that he wouldn't want his daughters "punished with a baby," should they find themselves pregnant and unmarried. With that perspective Obama would surely find a Down syndrome baby beyond punishment.
 
It's not the only time in human history when something like this has happened.
 
In attempt to breed the Aryan race, the Nazis began a systematic extermination of "useless eaters." Videos were produced to illustrate the horrors of the disabled and thousands were led to their death with the approval of the German citizenry. One notable exception was Dietrich Bohhoeffer, a pastor later hanged to death with a piano wire for opposing the Nazis. In the face of the Aryan tide he penned these words: "Not only do the weak need the strong, but the strong need the weak."
 
One has only to be the parent of a child like Johnny to grasp the truth of Bonhoeffer's words. The Johnnys of the world teach us to endure with perseverance, build character and allow for a love that wells up from a place too deep for words to describe.
 
Sarah Palin gets it. That's why she and husband Todd chose not to abort baby Trig in spite of his alleged imperfections. To some, he is a "useless eater." He will never win the snow machine race his father is famous for or be mayor or governor of anything, but Sarah and Todd know the value of his life in ways that can never be explained to a man like Barack Obama. A baby like Trig is a precious life. And the baby carried by his sister is not punishment.
 
In his book The Power of the Powerless, Christopher De Vinck tells the story of his severely disabled brother, Oliver. As Christopher grew older and began dating, he brought his girlfriend to the family farmhouse and eventually asked if she would like to meet Oliver. Since Oliver lived on the top floor and had to be fed and diapered by family members, the first girl said a polite "no." The next girl, however, said, "Yes!"...climbed the stairs, crawled up on the bed with Oliver and proceeded to patiently spoon feed him.
 
"Which girl would you have married?" asked De Vinck. The power of the powerless; the ability of the helpless or infirm to reveal not their infirmity, but the character of those around them.
 
We have two candidates, one for president and the other for vice president, with very different views on the value of life. What does their attitude toward the Johnnys of this world — or the tiny lives who have come inconveniently — tell us about them? And by the way, which girl would you have chosen?

 


Comments
on Sep 28, 2008

which girl would you have chosen?

Depends, what did they look like?

As to the more general issue, I'd partly agree - I don't think a baby should be aborted simply because they will be more difficult to care for or not have as high a quality of life as other children. However there is more of a case if it is believed the child will only have a short life of constant agony, forced to spend it attached to a machine, but that's straying into the euthenasia debate which is another issue in itself (and since you wouldn't know for sure that would be the case prior to the baby being born I wouldn't have thought, then it's not so relevant either). IMO the state should provide support to parents with such children to ensure they are able to cope (either being able to afford appropriate care while they return to work or providing them with money/equipment etc. needed to care for the child themself), but I don't think it's right to abort a child just because they are thought likely to be disabled, since it is effectively like saying it is justified to round up and kill disabled people like what was done under the Nazi's. Then again, if you give birth to a baby+leave it in a bin you will usually be prosecuted to the full extent of the law+reviled as a baby killer, yet if you have an abortion undertaken on that same baby when it was a bit younger it's seen as socially acceptable, so it's not like it's the only contradiction in morals/standards out there.

on Oct 01, 2008

(and since you wouldn't know for sure that would be the case prior to the baby being born

There have been many recorded surprises at birth.  Children who were thought to being very disabled turned out to be perfectly fine.  Had the parents listened to the doctors these children wouldn't have seen the light of day. 

It's definitely a hard decision to go thru with a pregnancy not knowing exactly how disabled your child could be after being told the news.  Emotions run high but then again, I'm a firm believer we should never make decisions on emotion alone.   

Then again, if you give birth to a baby+leave it in a bin you will usually be prosecuted to the full extent of the law+reviled as a baby killer, yet if you have an abortion undertaken on that same baby when it was a bit younger it's seen as socially acceptable, so it's not like it's the only contradiction in morals/standards out there.

It's funny how just a few hours or days can make such a difference doesn't it?  As long as you kill the baby before its first breath, you're ok but it's definitely not socially acceptable to kill a baby (nor should it be) after it takes that breath.