- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 20 year old sex abuse victim in Holland euthanized
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:11 pm to MSMHater
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:11 pm to MSMHater
quote:
Quite a logic leap. These two mean no where near the same thing.
Read the requirements laid out on the Dutch government's website. It's pretty clear. To kill a child all that's needed is two doctors and the parents to agree it's for the best. After that, the child can legally be killed.
How is that a logic leap to you?
This post was edited on 5/11/16 at 3:12 pm
1
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:12 pm to TigersforEver
Agreed.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:12 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
It proves that in the Netherlands there is already legal procedures for killing people who have not and cannot request that they be killed.
Uhhhhhhhhhhgggmmmm, huh? Where is this written?
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:13 pm to Blue Velvet
quote:
All these "small government" conservatives
Strike two.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:13 pm to Darth_Vader
Seems like a solution for all the tribulations of the SJW
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:17 pm to HoustonChick86
quote:
That's 3 people that have to agree.
None of which is the one being killed.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:18 pm to HoustonChick86
quote:
That's 3 people that have to agree...it's not like they are just walking around killing people for fun or because the baby isn't cute.
That's the same number of people the Nazis required to kill a child in their euthanasia program, only difference is it was three doctors instead of 2 doctors and parent(s). As for why they're killing them, go read the Dutch website. Nowhere on their does it saw the child has to have any terminal illness or condition. All it says is....
quote:
the child’s suffering must be unbearable and with no prospect of improvement
That's a very broad and open term that can be interpreted in many different ways. It could be used to kill a child with any number of developmental or physical conditions. They could use this to justify killing a child for nothing more than a condition like down syndrome.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:18 pm to CadesCove
quote:
None of which is the one being killed.
Well it's incapable of rational thought and is doomed to a life of suffering... so... seems merciful to me.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:19 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The point of all that was there's been many in here claiming the euthanasia program in the Netherlands is strictly voluntary and for adults. Well, that's not true. It proves that in the Netherlands there is already legal procedures for killing people who have not and cannot request that they be killed.
That is not unique to The Netherlands and doesn't apply to the 20-something woman in question.
quote:
And I notice that you don't seem bothered by this. Instead you're trying to make some moral distinction between a mentally unstable 20something and a newborn. Why is that? Why does it not bother you that they are legally killing innocent people?
Because I have a firm belief that suffering adults should be permitted the option of doctor assisted suicide, a much less firm conviction regarding infants and the unborn, and am capable of considering the two separately.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:20 pm to Stacked
quote:
It proves that in the Netherlands there is already legal procedures for killing people who have not and cannot request that they be killed.
Uhhhhhhhhhhgggmmmm, huh? Where is this written?
On the official website of the Government of the Netherlands. I'll post the link for the 3rd time now...
Euthanasia and newborn infants
Now if you can explain to me how a newborn can give it's consent to be killed, I'll retract my statement.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:21 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
They could use this to justify killing a child for nothing more than a condition like down syndrome.
No medical professional could honestly and with integrity say that a condition like downs syndrome is unbearable.
If you have two that state as such, in addition to parents, we're talking about a crime that falls outside the current discussion.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:22 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
They could use this to justify killing a child for nothing more than a condition like down syndrome.
I've never heard of down syndrome as being unbearable. And I highly doubt you are going to get two doctors to agree that is a condition worth killing a child over.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:26 pm to LSUBoo
quote:
None of which is the one being killed. Well it's incapable of rational thought and is doomed to a life of suffering... so... seems merciful to me.
These are some of the over 70,000 the Nazis showed mercy to.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:28 pm to Darth_Vader
You really do seem unnaturally fascinated with this Nazi correlation.
How many of those over 70,000 had parents that consented?
How many of those over 70,000 had parents that consented?
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:29 pm to HoustonChick86
quote:
I've never heard of down syndrome as being unbearable. And I highly doubt you are going to get two doctors to agree that is a condition worth killing a child over.
Just sterilize anyone with an inheritable disease.
You have no right to pass your condition or the risk there of to future generations.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:30 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Read the requirements laid out on the Dutch government's website. It's pretty clear. To kill a child all that's needed is two doctors and the parents to agree it's for the best. After that, the child can legally be killed.
How is that a logic leap to you?
How do the doctors determine the action is "for the best"?
You think that medical opinion is based on what? The emotions of the parents? The physical appearance of the child? Your ridiculous logic assumes the parents and doctors are making this decision based on something other than current medical research, statistics, physical conditon, future mental capacity, or any other number of considered factors.
"All you need is 2 doctors and a parent to agree to legally kill a child" is an oversimplified abortion of logic. As if the 3 entities crowded in a dark corner to conspire to kill a sick child. It's mentally lazy and completely disregards the medical factors that are present in making that decision.
This post was edited on 5/11/16 at 3:31 pm
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:30 pm to Darth_Vader
Wow. That's kind of like a baseball pitcher in a bases loaded jam get out of the jam by allowing a base clearing grand slam.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:31 pm to Kujo
quote:
Just sterilize anyone with an inheritable disease.
Eugenics. Interesting... What's next?
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:33 pm to HoustonChick86
quote:
I've never heard of down syndrome as being unbearable. And I highly doubt you are going to get two doctors to agree that is a condition worth killing a child over.
The point is according to the broad wording of that law, it would be legally justifiable.
A life of suffering without hope of any cure is already used as reasoning for the vast majority of abortions of downs babies.Go look at the birth rates of babies with down syndrome and you'll see they've fallen sharply ( LINK). If that argument can be made to abort downs babies, it can be made to kill them as well, especially with a vaguely worded law like they have in the Netherlands.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:34 pm to Darth_Vader
When I saw that post, all it said it was blah blah blah Godwin's Law blah blah blah.
Page 9 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News