26 May 07
Originally posted by ivanhoeWhat should be done in any particular case will depend on the specifics of the case. Why do the parents insist? What are the doctor's rights and responsibilities? What are the laws in the area where this all takes place? All these are morally relevant considerations.
How do these parents do this ? ... and what happens if you think it should not be killed but the parents insist ?
26 May 07
Originally posted by bbarr"What are the laws" ..... ha ha ha ......
What should be done in any particular case will depend on the specifics of the case. Why do the parents insist? What are the doctor's rights and responsibilities? What are the laws in the area where this all takes place? All these are morally relevant considerations.
26 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrI have showed in another thread that your ideas and the Nazi ideas during the twenties and thirties of the twentieth century are spitting images. Indeed 2+2=4 in your Bbarrian presentation of the facts ... and I agree ..... I do not intend to discuss the validity of Nazi ideas even though they are presented now in a different and seemingly more up-to-date jacket.
If you have an argument, present it.
Premise 1....?
These ideas were disgusting then and they are disgusting now. Indeed .... 2+2=4, then and now.
26 May 07
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou showed no such thing. You merely asserted without reason and in the face of refutations provided by both me and Nemesio that my conception of what makes a life worth living was similar to that of a couple German authors. One major difference you overlooked was that I take the actual views and interests of the person whose life it is as partially determinative of what makes their life worth living. Unlike the Nazis, I believe that if a person doesn't want to die, or wouldn't want to die could they make their desires known, then this constitutes a decisive reason against euthanasia. Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche did not claim this in the book you cited. They claimed that the alleviation of suffering could warrant euthanasia despite considerations of whether the person at issue would have wanted to die could they have made their wishes known. Of course, I disagree with this. Further, Binding and Hoche claimed that considerations of racial purity or frugality could warrant killing persons, despite the explicit witholding of consent of the victim. Again, here I disagree, both because I take racial purity to be morally irrelvant, because I do not think frugality is that important in life and death decisions.
I have showed in another thread that your ideas and the Nazi ideas during the twenties and thirties of the twentieth century are spitting images. Indeed 2+2=4 in your Bbarrian presentation of the facts ... and I agree ..... I do not intend to discuss the validity of Nazi ideas even though they are presented now in a different and seemingly more up-to-date j ...[text shortened]...
These ideas were disgusting then and they are disgusting now. Indeed .... 2+2=4, then and now.
26 May 07
Anyone here ever worked professionally with the severly retarded? I have, and I believe there's a good case for putting them to sleep.
They are a waste of time and resources. They ruin the lives of their families. If you think that sounds cruel, go spend some time with a group of them, and get back to me after you know what you're talking about.
26 May 07
Originally posted by Sam The ShamA very good movie on your theme is Judgment At Nuremberg.
Anyone here ever worked professionally with the severly retarded? I have, and I believe there's a good case for putting them to sleep.
They are a waste of time and resources. They ruin the lives of their families. If you think that sounds cruel, go spend some time with a group of them, and get back to me after you know what you're talking about.
There is one character named Rudolph Petersen that is mentally incompetent. That he is so is quite a spectacle. Get the old original movie with Burt Lancaster. It is worth watching. There is a larger theme that is asked of the Judges who had to make the determination for the state. They don't make movies like this anymore. Too bad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_at_Nuremberg
26 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI'm familiar........"use the words hunter rabbit farm in a sentence", yadayadayadaaa.
A very good movie on your theme is Judgment At Nuremberg.
There is one character named Rudolph Petersen that is mentally incompetent. That he is so is quite a spectacle. Get the old original movie with Burt Lancaster. It is worth watching. There is a larger theme that is asked of the Judges who had to make the determination for the state. They don't ...[text shortened]... make movies like this anymore. Too bad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_at_Nuremberg
The character montgomery cliff played was not SEVERLY retarded. I'm talking about brain dead droolerballs that are moaning lumps of flesh. They should be euthanized.