I have never liked the Randroids. I like them less now.

A parent has a moral obligation to provide for his or her children until these children are equipped to provide for themselves. Because a person afflicted with Down syndrome is only capable of being marginally productive (if at all) and requires constant care and supervision, unless a parent enjoys the wealth to provide for the lifetime of assistance that their child will require, they are essentially stranding the cost of their child’s life upon others.

The implication of this is, then, the killing of all people who are not “economically viable” once they pass the age of “economic viability,” whenever that is. It means the only value — sorry, only “objective” value — a human life has is the ability of the human being to produce economically as much (or preferably more) than he or she consumes. A human being who does not contribute economically has no value, and thus no purpose for being alive.

Funny, but why does this idea sound so Marxist to me?

The Best of Charles H. Featherstone