Yes. Ultimately, the reason we should let people choose isn't to prevent people who would be bad parents from becoming parents. That's an issue that couldn't be solved directly, but could be indirectly addressed by providing comprehensive sex ed. The real reason we should let people choose is so people aren't forced to do or not do something they don't or do want. People may choose the wrong option for themselves and regret it, but outside forces aren't going to know what they want better than they will.

Magical thought experiments can often mislead, as ethics cannot exist outside of our uncertain, unmagical reality.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

But in this case the "wrong option" means a human being will suffer terribly (assuming we're talking about parents who wouldn't pass the test)... Do we not ethically owe it to children/humanity to take some level of precautions against allowing them to grow up in hell?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago

We do owe them protection, but not only do we owe ourselves reproductive rights, there are other ways to protect those children. We can give people the knowledge and resources to be better parents while taking kids away from those that still suck. How many parents largely suck because of poverty? How many never got the chance to learn how to parent or what the experience will be like?