NationStates Jolt Archive

I was kinda surprised it took this long. Usually the Hitler tactic gets whipped out way sooner.

Yeah, but Nanatsu is hawt, and Spanish. No-one wants to mention Guernica.

It's a joke, NnT. One in very bad taste, I admit. I just can't resist a joke.

Yeah, but Nanatsu is hawt, and Spanish. No-one wants to mention Guernica.

It's a joke, NnT. One in very bad taste, I admit. I just can't resist a joke.

Me, hawt? If you say so.

:(
I'm so ashamed of Guernica...

Alas, I know you're joking. Don't worry.

I intend to clone myself and create an army of perfect Beeker replicas

Like Bladerunner except with maybe a longer lifespan ;)

I'm a straight not able to breed. That take me to another level.

It does. I rest content that I have informed you of how "breeders" as a term for straights is offensive. You didn't mean it that way, fine.

As I'm not able, I don't intend to breed. Thus, the rest of the world's population able to breed is a "breeder", and the few "chosen" ones unable are not. If they decide to be gay, have or not to have children it's their problem, if they have the ability, they are theorically breeders.

Here's a thought. Most people never have a test for fertility until they've tried and failed to conceive. Calling them "breeders" might be a bit of a presumption.

For me, perfectly fertile people, male or female, are breeders, without taking into account if they are gay, bi, straight, or anything else.

I think we can rule out girls beneath the age of puberty, and ... er ... boys too ?

That's probably half of the NSG audience, given the adult stuff that we've slipped under the guidelines recently :p

I joke, but honestly it hadn't occurred to me you were sterile. I am too (surgically, perhaps reversible). If you want to be fertile, hang in there. We'll get our clones yet!

Hey, that's not fair. What the Nazis really did wrong was try to invade Greater Europe.

The US was cool with the Nazis until it looked like that might actually happen.

Those Nazis put on a damn fine Olympics. You gonna hold that against them?

EDIT: It IS a rather long thread now, Nanatsu. :)

The trains ran on time, and the autobahn was a great idea.

I intend to clone myself and create an army of IMperfect Beeker replicas

fixed.

Like Bladerunner except with maybe a longer lifespan ;)

Bladerunner was human.

Er ... is there some version after the Director's Cut ? :confused:

The trains ran on time, and the autobahn was a great idea.

And that's why I shout "die you fucking Nazi" whenever the train is on time, and do my graffiti on the overpass.

Fucking nazis. Don't give 'em an inch.

fixed.



Bladerunner was human.

Er ... is there some version after the Director's Cut ? :confused:

I've seen versions of it where it's hinted that he's a replicant. The dreams of the unicorn and Roy Batty's cry of "kinship" as he leaps across the apartment building to save Decker are pretty strong clues, especially when coupled with Graff's leaving behind a little metal origami unicorn at the end of the movie.

But it's something that's rather hotly contested on whether he is or he isn't. If he is, he's a replicant of the same kind as that girl, given false memories of (presumably) the real Decker.

I've seen versions of it where it's hinted that he's a replicant. The dreams of the unicorn and Roy Batty's cry of "kinship" as he leaps across the apartment building to save Decker are pretty strong clues, especially when coupled with Graff's leaving behind a little metal origami unicorn at the end of the movie.

But it's something that's rather hotly contested on whether he is or he isn't. If he is, he's a replicant of the same kind as that girl, given false memories of (presumably) the real Decker.

Well, that shows how much I know. I thought the point was that I was a replicant ...

Meh. I saw the Director's Cut on a big screen, and I was tripping outa my brain. Also, I don't see many movies, they mess with my head ...

No, the Nazi reference was used from the very get go.:p

Ah, glad I didn't notice it, then.

I do, however, I can understand the instinct, and so forth, I partially understand it and comprehend it.


I'm glad you admit that your understanding is only partial. t does make me wonder how you can make the rest of the assertions in your post with such confidence, but meh.


Depends on how you look at it. A sacrifice like that has no meaning. The kid is not going to get better, he isn't going to have a resemblance of a normal life. She's throwing away her life for nothing. If she sacrificed her life to improve his status of living in any way, she would have my respect. If she could actually change something through her sacrifice, she would have my respect. If she could exchange herself with her son, she would have my respect.


Are you suggesting that only "normal' people are worth the effort?


As it is, she's banging her head to a wall until she dies, willingly and knowing that she's not going to bring down not even a brick with her efforts. That's silly, even stupid, and she is a victim of her own silliness. My main feeling is pity, because she's just another victim of her basic instincts. Might sound callous to you, but that is the way it is. Sacrifice is only worthy when the cause is, and in this case, the only possible worthy cause is improvement of the kid. Continous breathing doesn't mean "life", as I see it, so step down of your high horse.


So if she's a victim then what's the solution? To take the kid away from her thus releasing her from her burden? Does that seem like a kindness to you? Would it be a kindness to him? I'm not the one on the high horse, friend. You're seeking to pass judgment. I'm looking at the positive.


Frankly I think she deserves some degree of respect for her willpower, nothing else. You can use willpower in a stupid manner, anyway. Her sacrifice has no meaning, no purpose with the exception of hurting herself to the point of death. It's assisted, prolongued suicide.


I see it as a life given for a much better reason than a lot of the deaths that h appen around us every day.


Yeah, you kept a kid through an eternity of pain and you brought yourself down as a cost. Love, compassion? What I see here is perhaps obsession. Meaningless sacrifice. Maternal instinct. Love? The kid wants that? craves that? He asked for that? No, it's just what she sees as her duty, nothing more, nothing else.


Again, what's the solution? Euthanasia for the kid and a mandated treatment regimen for mom?

Are you suggesting that only "normal' people are worth the effort?

Yup, which rules out mormons.
Unless they're kinky mormons.

Yup, which rules out mormons.
Unless they're kinky mormons.

Zing!

Ah, glad I didn't notice it, then.

Yeah, it was plain silly.

And that's why I shout "die you fucking Nazi" whenever the train is on time, and do my graffiti on the overpass.

Fucking nazis. Don't give 'em an inch.

When I was stationed in Germany, I used to give the ol' Nazi salute at random to old people who were outside.

In southern Germany, nearly every one responded with the salute.

The best one was two old women who rose to their feet from their garden, and both gave the salute.

Plenty of Nazis left there.

I won't forget the flaming swastika I saw in Bettrigen (on the side of a large hill) formed by several thousand torch carrying Germans. Don't tell me they aren't Nazis.

Somehow, I knew some holier-than-thou do-gooder would turn this into an anti-abortion crusade. In a way, it's my fault. I didn't make myself clear. My problem was not with Nanatsu's claim that this woman shouldn't have tried to carry the baby to term per se, as I know better than almost anyone here how difficult it is to care for a disabled child. I cannot condemn any woman who decides that it would be too much to handle. Quite frankly, condsidering how poorly my parents raised me, they should have aborted me. I'd rather be an aborted fetus than the severely screwed up person that I am. I objected to two things. First Nanatsu did not NOT say that this woman knew her son would be born like this. Unless I'm misunderstanding her words, she said that the woman's doctor's were very clear that the child would never be self-sufficient; not that they told her this while the child was still in utero. What we're talking about here isn't abortion, it's euthanasia and eugenics. I object to the notion that the disabled are somehow unfit (although Nanatsu assured me that that wasn't her intention, and I believe her). Second I object to the notion that not aborting or abandoning a disabled child is somehow selfish. The fact that my life sucked had little to do with my disability and more to do with my family. Yes, this poor woman is in over her head. Everyone who has commented to the effect of how stupid and selfish this woman was for trying to cope with her child's condition has simply reinforced my belief that the human race has absolutely NO redeeming value.

No, it's even worse than that. Your comments to this thread show it's hitting pretty close to home for you ... and you've been really down about your future recently too.

That's pretty much what Nova Magna Germanica is reduced to, they gave up winning a debate months ago.

That you gave a civil answer at all makes it pretty plain you're twice the person he is. At least twice.
:fluffle:

Was my question offensive or sad, Maineiacs? I thought about it before I asked whether I should ask such a question. But I was very interested in what you have to say.

My position was: If there is at least 1 disabled person who would have prefered not to be aborted, then this may invalidate the argument that the killing is done for them so they wouldnt have to suffer. Then I realized that some people may give defiant answers. So maybe it's more brave for the parents to abort rather than give the choice to the child since it's a very hard choice.

I hope I dont have to make such a decision ever because I dont like deciding on other people's lives. And non-disabled people suffer a lot too, I'm sure there are many non-disabled people who suffer more than disabled people for whatever reasons.

Also note that I'm talking about "so they wouldnt have to suffer" argument here. Not about survival of the fittest. Stephen Hawking suffers from Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Latin sometimes sounds very ominous because of all these medical terms).


About 5 to 10 percent of all ALS cases are inherited. The familial form of ALS usually results from a pattern of inheritance that requires only one parent to carry the gene responsible for the disease. About 20 percent of all familial cases result from a specific genetic defect that leads to mutation of the enzyme known as superoxide dismutase 1 (SOD1). Research on this mutation is providing clues about the possible causes of motor neuron death in ALS. Not all familial ALS cases are due to the SOD1 mutation, therefore other unidentified genetic causes clearly exist.

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/amyotrophiclateralsclerosis/detail_amyotrophiclateralsclerosis.htm


Granted, he wasnt born with a disability but if genetic screening was possible for inherited ALS which may cause severe disability, I'm wondering if the OP would consider the baby unfit to survive. Sometimes "weaknesses" may be turned into opportunities:


Despite his disease, he describes himself as “lucky" – not only has the slow progress of his disease provided time to make influential discoveries, it has also afforded time to have, in his own words, “a very attractive family”.[20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking

which reminded me of Einstein and his boring job at the Swiss patent office and how that boredom and time to think contributed towards his work.

To make one thing clear, I don't pity nor condemn the mother. I am angry at her. And I am angry at myself because, after taking a look at that child, I wished right there and then that he wasn't born. Strapped to machines, unable to communicate nor know what was happening around him. Incredibly cruel!! And by thinking those things, I am and will always feel like a monster. That boy shouldn't have been born. He shouldn't have, and saying it makes me sad. So sad... saying it makes me feel like I'm an evil person, that I don't have feelings. Keeping a human hooked to a machine is horrible!

But I don't fool myself. I voiced how I felt on the subject and I'm not looking for anyone's sympathy. The mother deserves no feeling on my part whatsoever. But the child does.

I'm still wondering if these subjects are ok to talk to. Most of us are just engaging in "what if's" while creating "collateral damage" to those whom these subjects are very relevant to.

Or maybe discussing this helps somehow causing the participants to think?

Well, that shows how much I know. I thought the point was that I was a replicant ...

Meh. I saw the Director's Cut on a big screen, and I was tripping outa my brain. Also, I don't see many movies, they mess with my head ...

Well, there's some, but less, speculation about that, too.

Graff's remark when Decker finds the little origami unicorn is "It's too bad she won't live, but then, who does?" Which has a few different interpretations. The most common is that he's simply referring to replicants in general, the other being that he includes Decker, and the third that he means people at large, either in the sense that they're all mortal, OR, that a large subset of society has been replaced with replicants.

Was my question offensive or sad, Maineiacs? I thought about it before I asked whether I should ask such a question. But I was very interested in what you have to say.

My position was: If there is at least 1 disabled person who would have prefered not to be aborted, then this may invalidate the argument that the killing is done for them so they wouldnt have to suffer. Then I realized that some people may give defiant answers. So maybe it's more brave for the parents to abort rather than give the choice to the child since it's a very hard choice.

I hope I dont have to make such a decision ever because I dont like deciding on other people's lives. And non-disabled people suffer a lot too, I'm sure there are many non-disabled people who suffer more than disabled people for whatever reasons.

Also note that I'm talking about "so they wouldnt have to suffer" argument here. Not about survival of the fittest. Stephen Hawking suffers from Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Latin sometimes sounds very ominous because of all these medical terms).


http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/amyotrophiclateralsclerosis/detail_amyotrophiclateralsclerosis.htm


Granted, he wasnt born with a disability but if genetic screening was possible for inherited ALS which may cause severe disability, I'm wondering if the OP would consider the baby unfit to survive. Sometimes "weaknesses" may be turned into opportunities:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking

which reminded me of Einstein and his boring job at the Swiss patent office and how that boredom and time to think contributed towards his work.

My position is based not on my disability, but rather on how poorly my parents handled it, and what they did to me as a result. In my case I would have been better off having been aborted. Is that true of every disabled person? Of course not.

cerebral palsy almost always prevents breeding. SO the concern about passing on genes from the son is unlikely. The woman is also unlikely to breed again.


Yeah, sexual selection. Thats why what you propose is unnecessary.


Also we are social animals and those tend to care for the sick and old to the extent the group is able to. Humans as a group are far more able to care for the sick then other groups.

That being said however we need to take steps to minimize breeding by those who carry severe genetic illness. At puberty a genetic screening should be conducted and those carrying severe genetic illness should have the surgery to remove their ability to breed. Also all females should be put on birth control unless there is a medical reason they should not be on it. Likewise as soon as they develop a male birth control pill they should also be placed on that unless health concerns prevent them from taking it.

At a time when a couple wishes to have a child they should in the process of seeking permission to come off birth control be tested to see if they are carriers of less severe genetic illness that if they were to breed could result in genetic complications for the child.

Also an intelligence test should be issued and amount of children allowed for a couple should be determined by those results.

this is the way to ensure good genetic stock with out having to resort Draconian measures of leaving the sick to die.

Also would keep the stupid people from having so many kids. Solve teenage pregnancy issues and help increase the demand for adoption and decrease the demand for abortion.

Intelligence is not the only measure. There is beauty, athletic abilities, artistic talent, etc...

And the pill, btw, may cause many side effects.

I believe adults should have the right to euthanize babies who are severely brain damaged etc..., but having the state control whether someone should be born or not is, if not bad simply by principle, a monstrously slippery slope.

When I was stationed in Germany, I used to give the ol' Nazi salute at random to old people who were outside.

And because they responded with the Nazi salute, they must be Nazis.

You tell that story like it's funny.

It fucking isn't.

You are an arsehole: a hole where a human should be, with shit coming out of it.

I'm going to take a little break now, pausing only to say: NMG, perhaps my memory is faulty or perhaps your character has improved, but I have no particular complaint with your post. Talk to Nanatsu while I'm gone, if she doesn't like you, don't be here when I come back.

And because they responded with the Nazi salute, they must be Nazis.

You tell that story like it's funny.

It fucking isn't.

You are an arsehole: a hole where a human should be, with shit coming out of it.

I'm going to take a little break now, pausing only to say: NMG, perhaps my memory is faulty or perhaps your character has improved, but I have no particular complaint with your post. Talk to Nanatsu while I'm gone, if she doesn't like you, don't be here when I come back.

Yup. You about cover it all NH. And no, I don't like Hotwife.

Hotwife: GTFO.

And because they responded with the Nazi salute, they must be Nazis.

You tell that story like it's funny.

It fucking isn't.

You are an arsehole: a hole where a human should be, with shit coming out of it.

I'm going to take a little break now, pausing only to say: NMG, perhaps my memory is faulty or perhaps your character has improved, but I have no particular complaint with your post. Talk to Nanatsu while I'm gone, if she doesn't like you, don't be here when I come back.


It was funny, because they were Nazis. And after being told that there aren't any left in Germany.

Sorry, that's not trolling either. I think you don't like me pointing out that there are Nazis running around in Germany.

It was funny, because they were Nazis. And after being told that there aren't any left in Germany.

Sorry, that's not trolling either. I think you don't like me pointing out that there are Nazis running around in Germany.

Putting aside for a moment the issue of whether or not there are Nazis in Germany...

Why in the hell would you be going around giving the Nazi salute to random strangers? This is the part that makes absolutely no sense to me.

It was funny, because they were Nazis. And after being told that there aren't any left in Germany.

Sorry, that's not trolling either. I think you don't like me pointing out that there are Nazis running around in Germany.

Which has nothing to do, once again, with the OP.

There are Nazis everywhere, not only in Germany. But the Nazi have nothing to do with the OP, is that clear or should I spell it at intervals of 5 seconds between each word for you to understand it?

And because they responded with the Nazi salute, they must be Nazis.

You tell that story like it's funny.

It fucking isn't.


Actually, it does sound funny. Especially if 1, they saluted back, or 2, it pissed off stuck up prima-donnas like you.

BZ Hotwife!

[BZ is a Navy thing, look it up]

Why in the hell would you be going around giving the Nazi salute to random strangers? This is the part that makes absolutely no sense to me.

My thoughts exactly...

The highest concentration of Nazis is in Russia, and you're still extremely unlikely to ever run into one there.

Which has nothing to do, once again, with the OP.

There are Nazis everywhere, not only in Germany. But the Nazi have nothing to do with the OP, is that clear or should I spell it at intervals of 5 seconds between each word for you to understand it?

In the OP you stated EXACTLY the reasoning given by the Nazis to kill off people who were crippled, etc.

EXACTLY.

Putting aside for a moment the issue of whether or not there are Nazis in Germany...

Why in the hell would you be going around giving the Nazi salute to random strangers? This is the part that makes absolutely no sense to me.

To see if what the europeans told me was true - that there are no Nazis in Germany.

In the OP you stated EXACTLY the reasoning given by the Nazis to kill off people who were crippled, etc.

EXACTLY.

But my reasoning wasn't aiming at discussing Nazi policies.

Nobel Hobos - official warning for flaming. It's good that you've decided to step out of the thread for a bit, but you should ideally do that, and give yourself time to cool off, before you go posting stuff that you know will get you warned.

To see if what the europeans told me was true - that there are no Nazis in Germany.

That is the most asinine thing I've ever heard. Seriously, who does that sort of thing?

But my reasoning wasn't aiming at discussing Nazi policies.

Your reasoning in the OP exactly equals ALL of the rationale given in the movie Dasein Ohne Leben.

EXACTLY.

Your thinking that such a person shouldn't have been allowed to live is EXACTLY their reasoning.

Your position was morally bankrupt, and you don't want me pointing it out.

Your reasoning in the OP exactly equals ALL of the rationale given in the movie Dasein Ohne Leben.

EXACTLY.

Your thinking that such a person shouldn't have been allowed to live is EXACTLY their reasoning.

Your position was morally bankrupt, and you don't want me pointing it out.

Only a sick mind like yours would reason about my OP in this way.

Only a sick mind like yours would reason about my OP in this way.

You're the one who needs help, if you believe that we should be putting down the lame, the mentally retarded, and the crippled.

If twelve people are trapped somewhere, and they know for a fact they will be rescued in six months, but they only have enough food for three months, is it justified that 6 of them might die to save the other six? Or would you simply doom all 12 to death because it is inhumane to kill another human being?




This reminds me something important most people overlooked in this thread (I think).

Rarely, almost never, we are certain of anything. I dont think even the most advanced medical tests can predict 100% how ill a child can turn out. From the example in OP (cerebral palsy):


Although the condition is not progressive, the effects of CP may change over time. Some may improve: for example, a child whose hands are affected may be able to gain enough hand control to write and to dress him/herself. Others may get worse

http://www.ofcp.on.ca/aboutcp.html

And about the stupid getting trapped example, how the fuck can you know such a thing? Maybe you are trapped and ask for help and it'll take them 6 months but who knows? Something unexpected may happen, like somehow finding more food wherever you are trapped or somehow an earlier rescue. Or you may make a perfectly "rational" decision and kill 6 people. This may cause severe psychological trauma on the remaining 6 which may cause psychosis and the remaining 6 may kill each other. You never know. That's the thing in life, we never know for sure. Not even the most fundamental thing which is where the particles that make up everything are (Heisenberg uncertainty principle).

So aborting a child who may have a serious condition? I hope I'll never have to make such a choice and I might as well choose abortion but I think I'd rather try to be optimistic.

You want to point out where Nanu said that? Because Im tempted to report you for making that insinuation.


You better show me a quote or start explaining how you might have gotten such a deranged idea.

Just read the OP. The sentiment is pretty clear there, unless she edits it.

It's Dasein Ohne Leben. Cut and dried.

You're the one who needs help, if you believe that we should be putting down the lame, the mentally retarded, and the crippled.

You want to point out where Nanatsu said that? Because Im tempted to report you for making that insinuation.


You better show me a quote or start explaining how you might have gotten such a deranged idea.

You want to point out where Nanatsu said that? Because Im tempted to report you for making that insinuation.


You better show me a quote or start explaining how you might have gotten such a deranged idea.

And a mod has already read the thread:

I examined the surrounding material in the thread and did not find anything that was outright flaming, trolling et cetera by Hotwife. I can understand why Nobel Hobos might find it objectionable, but his response would be unacceptable whatever the provocation. If Hotwife had been trolling I'd have warned him too.

...
[BZ is a Navy thing, look it up]

I think you need to spell it out, Bravo Zulu, because just saying BZ sounds like jacket zipper or something :p

I think you need to spell it out, Bravo Zulu, because just saying BZ sounds like jacket zipper or something :p
Well, you do _say_ Bravo Zulu, just like you'd say Sierra Hotel... In naval message format, I think it would just be letters, though. Certainly if you were hoisting flags, you'd want to economize. I guess I don't know what the standard is for NSG.

You're the one who needs help, if you believe that we should be putting down the lame, the mentally retarded, and the crippled.

I never posted that. And the sicko here is you. Need I remind you that you're the only one who sees monsters and movie plots and gives a Nazi salute to old German people on a sick whim.

So once again, you're sick.

Much as I know many are going to cry about what I will say, but screw them, it needs to be said

We should adopt a policy of Survival of the fittest, [and this includes removing all foreign support of africa], but it should be judged by a certified medical practitioner to ensure that there is conclusive proof that the child indeed does have medical/psychological weaknesses that would prevent it from living a normal life

If medical testing proves the child to be unfit but the parents want to keep the child, thats their problem because in a 'survival of the fittest' policy, the government isn't giving any form of hand-outs to 'special needs' kids

B U T

on the good side, the further that science studies genetic research, the closer we come to being able to select how our children are born, so the doctors can just remove all weaknesses and allow normal or better kids to be born

Much as I know many are going to cry about what I will say, but screw them, it needs to be said

We should adopt a policy of Survival of the fittest, [and this includes removing all foreign support of africa], but it should be judged by a certified medical practitioner to ensure that there is conclusive proof that the child indeed does have medical/psychological weaknesses that would prevent it from living a normal life

If medical testing proves the child to be unfit but the parents want to keep the child, thats their problem because in a 'survival of the fittest' policy, the government isn't giving any form of hand-outs to 'special needs' kids

B U T

on the good side, the further that science studies genetic research, the closer we come to being able to select how our children are born, so the doctors can just remove all weaknesses and allow normal or better kids to be born


Yeah! Then we can breed out those dirty jews!

Much as I know many are going to cry about what I will say, but screw them, it needs to be said

We should adopt a policy of Survival of the fittest, [and this includes removing all foreign support of africa], but it should be judged by a certified medical practitioner to ensure that there is conclusive proof that the child indeed does have medical/psychological weaknesses that would prevent it from living a normal life

If medical testing proves the child to be unfit but the parents want to keep the child, thats their problem because in a 'survival of the fittest' policy, the government isn't giving any form of hand-outs to 'special needs' kids

B U T

on the good side, the further that science studies genetic research, the closer we come to being able to select how our children are born, so the doctors can just remove all weaknesses and allow normal or better kids to be born

"Remove all weakness"? You mean like congenital stupidity? What's your standard for a "normal life"? Who gets to decide? What do you consider to be "fit"?

In the US, rights cannot be infringed without due process of law, due to the 14th amendment.

The question is that would seperate that, and cold blooded murder...

Your idea is kind of like GATTACA.....

In my opinion, if an overwhelming majority supports this, then what would happen is that there would be a separate court to handle these cases. And, taking a page from the gun control advocates, we would make there be so much paperwork, red tape, fines, interviews, and testings that that alone would discourage people from doing these things.

The US government would always take the side of life (the defendant), and the time for the lawyer (paid by the government) would be supplemented by the fees and taxes that would result in the euthanasia.

This would discourage the patents from killing, and, like we do to a pedophile, the parents would be placed on a special registry, and they would also not be allowed to adopt children.

That is my plan.

Yeah! Then we can breed out those dirty jews!

Damn I think I felt that one from here...

Damn I think I felt that one from here...

I bet. Seriously, the poster I quoted is a joke. Hes a blatant Nazi. Its not even funny.

Oh wow, I've read an entire NSG thread. I rarely do that. I deserved a cookie.

I was riding the metro this morning, must have been around 11:00, and when it stopped at my destination I stumbled upon this lady with an 8 year old on a wheel chair.

You may think that there's nothing out of the ordinary, we see children and adults on wheel chairs every day. But with this child, there was something out of the ordinary to me. In fact, it was so out of the ordinary that it produced a series of feelings in me that have left me with a sour taste in my mouth.

Since I had time to reach the office, I stopped to chat with the mother and she told me that her son was born with a sever case of cerebral palsy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy). He (Ricardo was his name), couldn't talk, hear, nor see. He had to be strapped to a respirator, something I noticed from the plastic tube attached to his trachea and the oxygen tanks behind the wheel chair, and had to be fed. It so happened that the mother had also developed a severe case of ostheoporosis and the beginning of, from what she describe to me, fibromialgia.

She looked down trodden, because her doctor had told her a few days before that hers was a progressive condition and it could be crippling. If the condition worsened enough for her to be crippled in any way, her son was done for. She was on her own, there was no one to take care of the child other than her and she didn't know what to do.

Of course, I was speechless, and although I felt sad for her, I was also enraged. Why is that? She knew this child had no chance at life by himself, the doctors ahd been very clear on the matter and (I'm not questioning her devotion and love for him) still knowing this, she had him.

If I try to describe all the things I felt, this post, I fear, might sound bloggy to you all. So, drawing this to a close, don't you think Mother Nature is wise?

In the Animal Kingdom, when a lion baby is born sick, the mother knows it and lets it die. She knows this baby lion has no chance and there's no reason to waste it's energy in keeping it alive if she has two other babies that are perfectly healthy and that do have a chance to join the pride. This is called Survival of the Fittest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest) and I consider it wise. Do you think we humans should start doing that too? Considering that a child who's born with a severe condition and can't hear, talk or see, wouldn't it be better to let this child die? Is it cruel to still bring it into this world knowing he/she will never be able to fend for him/herself? That this child will never have a chance at a normal life, is it humane to raise it?

Comments?
No, you're not a monster. You're not calling for the child to be killed, nor are you calling for a genetic culling of any sort.

whether or not to take on such a task is not a light decision, yet it is a decision only a few can or have to make.

yes, I've thought 'what would this world be like if children that require extraordinary care from the time they were born were allowed to pass on quiety and peacefully', this is NOT saying to kill them by injecting them with poisons or drugging them to sleep, but to not attempt to prolong their life via mechanical means.

it's not an easy question to answer. for one, allowing them to die would free up medical resources for people who can be saved. but, it reduces the chance to study the diseases and genetic conditions that allow medical advances to be made. granted there are alot more pros for each side, but most of them are personal.

Others have to make the choice of abortion or no, Giving your child up for adoption or to raise them yourselves.

some have selfish reasons, others are thinking of the child and doubt they could give that child a life he or she deserves.

whether any one thought is correct pales to the thought of the fact that they have to live with their choice. just like that woman has to live with her choice to raise her son (and this is NOT assuming that she is raising that child alone).

it's a choice that is hard to make and I can only pray I be spared making such decisions.

but I know that should I have to make such decisions, it won't me just me making it.

no Nanatsu no Tsuki, you are not a monster for having such thoughts. the telling sign is the fact that such thoughts do trouble you.

and for me, I was born two months premature. so yes, I owe my life to those who fought for me to live.

No, you're not a monster. You're not calling for the child to be killed, nor are you calling for a genetic culling of any sort.

whether or not to take on such a task is not a light decision, yet it is a decision only a few can or have to make.

yes, I've thought 'what would this world be like if children that require extraordinary care from the time they were born were allowed to pass on quiety and peacefully', this is NOT saying to kill them by injecting them with poisons or drugging them to sleep, but to not attempt to prolong their life via mechanical means.

it's not an easy question to answer. for one, allowing them to die would free up medical resources for people who can be saved. but, it reduces the chance to study the diseases and genetic conditions that allow medical advances to be made. granted there are alot more pros for each side, but most of them are personal.

Others have to make the choice of abortion or no, Giving your child up for adoption or to raise them yourselves.

some have selfish reasons, others are thinking of the child and doubt they could give that child a life he or she deserves.

whether any one thought is correct pales to the thought of the fact that they have to live with their choice. just like that woman has to live with her choice to raise her son (and this is NOT assuming that she is raising that child alone).

it's a choice that is hard to make and I can only pray I be spared making such decisions.

but I know that should I have to make such decisions, it won't me just me making it.

no Nanatsu no Tsuki, you are not a monster for having such thoughts. the telling sign is the fact that such thoughts do trouble you.

and for me, I was born two months premature. so yes, I owe my life to those who fought for me to live.

I thank you for giving me your honest thoughts on the subject and for not jumping into conclusions and calling me a Nazi. I also thank you for not considering me a monster.

This could have been lifted directly from Dasein Ohne Leben, the Nazi film that rationalized the killing of the "unfit".

In the Animal Kingdom, when a lion baby is born sick, the mother knows it and lets it die. She knows this baby lion has no chance and there's no reason to waste it's energy in keeping it alive if she has two other babies that are perfectly healthy and that do have a chance to join the pride. This is called Survival of the Fittest and I consider it wise. Do you think we humans should start doing that too?

There are even visual examples in the film, and they make this argument repeatedly in the film.

This could have been lifted directly from Dasein Ohne Leben, the Nazi film that rationalized the killing of the "unfit".



There are even visual examples in the film, and they make this argument repeatedly in the film.

I've never seen that film. And it's a crass insult on your part to call me a Nazi or to even think that I would advocate Nazi practices. The point of the OP was asking people what do they think about the subject and about my reaction to seeing a child in such a condition and my subsequent thoughts. You missed the whole point. And since you did not at all understand the puspose of it all nor were civil enough to be a part of this debate, you and whatever you may think in that sick mind of yours are dismissed.

I bet. Seriously, the poster I quoted is a joke. Hes a blatant Nazi. Its not even funny.

Indeed.

As much as I sometimes dislike Star Trek:TNG episodes, they did have a good one in which the Enterprise responds to a distress signal from a colony where the people living there are carefully engineered for particular genetic traits including high physical standards of 'perfection.'

Of course it's Geordi LaForge who is in charge of assisting the colonists in devising a gadget to save the day, but he's weird to them because he was born blind, which never would have happened on the colony. (It isn't made clear whether that means he'd have been aborted or if his conception would have been carefully managed to filter out any such imperfections.)

The irony is that the technology in his visor inspires the solution needed to save the colony.

The episode raised the question: Does someone have to be physically 'perfect' in order to be useful? Happy? Productive? Certainly we can look at extremes where a person has a physical or mental malady that makes them a virtual vegetable, but where would you draw the line?

What's more is that maybe on some level, our humanity lies in seeing the value of every single person and caring for them even when they can't contribute back. It's compassion and self sacrifice that make us better people, and are worthwhile even for their own sake.

I've never seen that film. And it's a crass insult on your part to call me a Nazi or to even think that I would advocate Nazi practices. The point of the OP was asking people what do they think about the subject and about my reaction to seeing a child in such a condition and my subsequent thoughts. You missed the whole point. And since you did not at all understand the puspose of it all nor were civil enough to be a part of this debate, you and whatever you may think in that sick mind of yours are dismissed.

I didn't miss the point at all.

Thinking like that is pure Nazi, and there's no denying it.

It's not a crass insult to say that the thinking is Nazi. The mods didn't think is was insulting either.

If you haven't seen the film, you're in sore need of an education.

You should read this book as well:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0807846759/fileformatnet-20

If you haven't seen the film, you're in sore need of an education.

You should read this book as well:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0807846759/fileformatnet-20

Don't make me laugh, troll. You're the one who's in sore need of an education. You're the one going around saluting like a Nazi and if you think I'm Nazi, what does that make you? You're the one who finds my post to have Nazi remarks when that was the last thing it did. You're the one who likes to stir shit up, so spare me if I don't take into consideration just how blatantly stupid it is to pay attention to your vacuous posts. The other posters seem to think along the same lines, they've been here longer than me. It speaks for itself. You are not worth my time or anyone else's for that matter.

Don't make me laugh, troll. You're the one who's in sore need of an education. You're the one going around saluting like a Nazi and if you think I'm Nazi, what does that make you? You're the one who finds my post to have Nazi remarks when that was the last thing it did. You're the one who likes to stir shit up, so spare me if I don't take into consideration just how blatantly stupid it is to pay attention to your vacuous posts. The other posters seem to think along the same lines, they've been here longer than me. It speaks for itself. You are not worth my time or anyone else's for that matter.

Answering your post with a detailed set of links and critique is not trolling.

Saluting like that in Germany was done to see if there were any Nazis still around - and I could get several salutes in reply every time I did it. Proof that they're still around.

Look at my first post in this thread. It's far from vacuous.

It does. I rest content that I have informed you of how "breeders" as a term for straights is offensive. You didn't mean it that way, fine.

No, I didn't mean it to be offensive.

Here's a thought. Most people never have a test for fertility until they've tried and failed to conceive. Calling them "breeders" might be a bit of a presumption.

Potential breeders until found otherwise? :P

I think we can rule out girls beneath the age of puberty, and ... er ... boys too ?

That's probably half of the NSG audience, given the adult stuff that we've slipped under the guidelines recently :p

Indeed and indeed.

I joke, but honestly it hadn't occurred to me you were sterile. I am too (surgically, perhaps reversible). If you want to be fertile, hang in there. We'll get our clones yet!

I don't know if I could handle a clone of myself. I think of myself when I was 15...And well, I don't really want to have to care and handle that.

I've seen versions of it where it's hinted that he's a replicant. The dreams of the unicorn and Roy Batty's cry of "kinship" as he leaps across the apartment building to save Decker are pretty strong clues, especially when coupled with Graff's leaving behind a little metal origami unicorn at the end of the movie.

But it's something that's rather hotly contested on whether he is or he isn't. If he is, he's a replicant of the same kind as that girl, given false memories of (presumably) the real Decker.

He is a replicant. It has been stated several times.


I'm glad you admit that your understanding is only partial. t does make me wonder how you can make the rest of the assertions in your post with such confidence, but meh.

My understanding will be always be partial until I have a disabled son, while I'm sick. As I won't be ever on that situation, my understanding will remain partial forever. I also think your understanding is as partial as mine.

Are you suggesting that only "normal' people are worth the effort?

As you brought the term "solution" below, I wonder. What's the point of sacrificing yourself to solve a problem without solution? Is it really worth of it? I guess you find quite amazing the fact of jumping out of a falling plane. It's the same logic. Quite brave for jumping, quite stupid because it isn't worth the effort. No gain, then the pain is unsubstancial.

This is not about normal or not normal people, nice straw man. Watch it burn. People with the chance to improve or be healed are worth the effort, normal or not. That was my point. If the kid was in the same situation but with chances to improve, that would one thing that would validate each and every sacrifice, but the fact is that he is irreversibly doomed, and will go worse and worse with the time. Normal or not normal, the sacrifice must have a valid point. I hope you donate your organs to people with AIDS, too.

So if she's a victim then what's the solution? To take the kid away from her thus releasing her from her burden? Does that seem like a kindness to you? Would it be a kindness to him? I'm not the one on the high horse, friend. You're seeking to pass judgment. I'm looking at the positive.

You brought the term solution here. Let's see. Helping her with her own health looks like a good prospect of a "solution". Taking or not taking the kid away from her is not the point here, another straw man. And kindness is such a relative word that I'm not even touching that one. Have you asked the child what he really wants? No, and actually we can't. Then stop supposing what is kindness here and what isn't. You are passing as much judgment as I am. The only point here is that I actually acknowledge that I am doing it.

I see it as a life given for a much better reason than a lot of the deaths that h appen around us every day.

So the intention is what it counts, regardless of the results? Good thinking, quite moral. Rationally speaking it is still stupid. With no possible positive results, positive intentions and reasons are futile.

Again, what's the solution? Euthanasia for the kid and a mandated treatment regimen for mom?

Again, what's the solution? Mandated treatment for the mom should be the best thing, regardless of what happens with the kid. Euthanasia or not. That is not what I am either advocating or defending here. Too many crows in your backyard? This is a scarecrow gathering.

Saluting like that in Germany was done to see if there were any Nazis still around - and I could get several salutes in reply every time I did it. Proof that they're still around.

I'm sorry but I'm calling bullshit on this one. Much as you're trying to characterize this as some kind of intelligent experiment to determine the number of Nazis in Germany, it's really little more than a goofy stunt. If there were any justice in the world someone would have seen you giving that salute and kicked your ass for it.

Unless, of course, the story is entirely made up, which seems more likely to me.

Don't make me laugh, troll. You're the one who's in sore need of an education. You're the one going around saluting like a Nazi and if you think I'm Nazi, what does that make you? You're the one who finds my post to have Nazi remarks when that was the last thing it did. You're the one who likes to stir shit up, so spare me if I don't take into consideration just how blatantly stupid it is to pay attention to your vacuous posts. The other posters seem to think along the same lines, they've been here longer than me. It speaks for itself. You are not worth my time or anyone else's for that matter.

Cántale el Cara al Sol y ya, Nana.

En serio, deja de prestarle atención, lo que quiere es enojarte y ya lo logró. O...

Welcome him to the den of the hot tempered bitches.

My understanding will be always be partial until I have a disabled son, while I'm sick. As I won't be ever on that situation, my understanding will remain partial forever. I also think your understanding is as partial as mine.


Maybe, maybe not. I don't have any children with such issues but they do exist in my family and circle of friends.


As you brought the term "solution" below, I wonder. What's the point of sacrificing yourself to solve a problem without solution? Is it really worth of it? I guess you find quite amazing the fact of jumping out of a falling plane. It's the same logic. Quite brave for jumping, quite stupid because it isn't worth the effort. No gain, then the pain is unsubstancial.

I don't see that it's the same logic at all. Do you truly see no value in the effort? Don't you think that caring for someone, even someone who is profoundly retarded and/or terminal, can be an experience that not only builds individual strength and character but also serves as an inspiration and an example to others? If everybody thought the way you suggest, how quickly would we find ourselves in a society of euthanizing 'non-viable' people?


This is not about normal or not normal people, nice straw man. Watch it burn. People with the chance to improve or be healed are worth the effort, normal or not. That was my point. If the kid was in the same situation but with chances to improve, that would one thing that would validate each and every sacrifice, but the fact is that he is irreversibly doomed, and will go worse and worse with the time. Normal or not normal, the sacrifice must have a valid point. I hope you donate your organs to people with AIDS, too.


If an AIDS victim needed a piece of my liver he/she could have it. (Or the whole damn thing, if I am dead.) I don't know about you but I don't judge the value of a person's life by how long they're expected to live. You or I could die tomorrow but that doesn't somehow make us a less valuable person for it, even in hindsight.


You brought the term solution here. Let's see. Helping her with her own health looks like a good prospect of a "solution". Taking or not taking the kid away from her is not the point here, another straw man. And kindness is such a relative word that I'm not even touching that one. Have you asked the child what he really wants? No, and actually we can't. Then stop supposing what is kindness here and what isn't. You are passing as much judgment as I am. The only point here is that I actually acknowledge that I am doing it.


Helping her by force?

Actually, taking the kid away IS the point, in that you're suggesting that this woman is accomplishing nothing by continuing to sacrifice to care for him. I am asking you for an alternative. Why are you reluctant to explore that?


So the intention is what it counts, regardless of the results? Good thinking, quite moral. Rationally speaking it is still stupid. With no possible positive results, positive intentions and reasons are futile.


If we were a society of computers then I'd concede the point. We aren't computers. I happen to see self-sacrifice as a positive thing for someone's character. If they choose to sacrifice everything, even their own health, then who are you, or anyone, to judge them for it?


Again, what's the solution? Mandated treatment for the mom should be the best thing, regardless of what happens with the kid. Euthanasia or not. That is not what I am either advocating or defending here. Too many crows in your backyard? This is a scarecrow gathering.

Yeah I get it. You're calling it a strawman.

... And I reject that conclusion on the grounds that I want to know what your optimal alternative is, and that's the only one I see. Have you got a better one? Whip it out!

Maybe, maybe not. I don't have any children with such issues but they do exist in my family and circle of friends.

Understanding by association brings you to the same grounds as myself. Are you daring to suppose that I do not have cases similar to this one close to me? Yet, until you are the mother in that situation, your understanding will remain partial.

I don't see that it's the same logic at all. Do you truly see no value in the effort? Don't you think that caring for someone, even someone who is profoundly retarded and/or terminal, can be an experience that not only builds individual strength and character but also serves as an inspiration and an example to others? If everybody thought the way you suggest, how quickly would we find ourselves in a society of euthanizing 'non-viable' people?

Oh, it can build a lot of spiritual character that will come handy when she's also terminal in her deathbed. Pretty useful. Building spiritual character is only truly valuable when you have time to put such learning experience to use. "I learned a lot and died when I finished" is not truly an achievement. Experience is for the future, that's the point of it. If you kill your future to earn experiences and spiritual strenght, you are doing yet again another stupid and meaningless thing.

Inspiration for others...To sacrifice their lives for no meaning? No thanks, I don't know if it would be truly an advantage if many people start to learn that. Not something I would like to see inspired. People would start to fight massive wars again to sacrifice themselves for a piece of colored fabric.

Again, last time, I am not advocating euthanasia of any kind here. I am just putting the needs of the mother far ahead of those of the boy here, that's it. Would you start to advocate that mothers that give birth to dead babies be sacrificed in a futile attempt to extract the already dead boy intact? That would be a great sacrifice indeed.

I'm not either speaking about viable or not viable people. AGAIN. I hope you're not then again trying to impose the nazi thing on me, becuase, really, I wouldn't advocate that.

If an AIDS victim needed a piece of my liver he/she could have it. (Or the whole damn thing, if I am dead.) I don't know about you but I don't judge the value of a person's life by how long they're expected to live. You or I could die tomorrow but that doesn't somehow make us a less valuable person for it, even in hindsight.

Alright. Then let's extract one of your kidneys while you are living. Why not both? True sacrifice, isn't it. Go then, if you are a truly defender of the meek, and sacrifice YOUR life, for someone already doomed. Until I watch you going weekly to a dialysis machine because you donated both your kidneys to someone with terminal AIDS, I won't truly pay heed to your ideal of sacrifice. Teach-by-example. I'm pretty sure you either value your kidneys too much, or you think it's worthless to waste your entire life and health trying to save someone sick and already dying, because you haven't done that yet. Or you just think your value would be wasted.

Actually, taking the kid away IS the point, in that you're suggesting that this woman is accomplishing nothing by continuing to sacrifice to care for him. I am asking you for an alternative. Why are you reluctant to explore that?

Without external help, I think not. Your alternative is that the mother continues to care for him until she dies, or disabled, and then the kid can die shortly thereafter? You can't give what you can't have, darling. My alternative is that SHE is taken away and given treatment for her suffering and bad health. After that, we can speak about what happens to the kid.

Have I convinced you that I really do not worry about what happens to the kid as long as the mother doesn't die caring for him? I don't want him to be taken away. I don't really want anything to him. For me, she can keep him as long as she takes the needed steps to care for herself.

If we were a society of computers then I'd concede the point. We aren't computers. I happen to see self-sacrifice as a positive thing for someone's character. If they choose to sacrifice everything, even their own health, then who are you, or anyone, to judge them for it?

They have the liberty of sacrifice themselves for no gain. I have the liberty of calling them stupid for that. Liberty goes both ways. I happen to see sacrifice as a positive thing, when it has purpose and meaning.

Cántale el Cara al Sol y ya, Nana.

En serio, deja de prestarle atención, lo que quiere es enojarte y ya lo logró. O...

Welcome him to the den of the hot tempered bitches.

Ala, a ese gringo imbécil ya ni caso que le hago. Es eso, simplemente un imbécil, formalizando ya mi opinión sobre su gente. Ni me molesto en cantarle, que se arruina mi hermosa voz.;)

Oh, he was already welcomed. Don't you worry about that.

Understanding by association brings you to the same grounds as myself. Are you daring to suppose that I do not have cases similar to this one close to me? Yet, until you are the mother in that situation, your understanding will remain partial.

Which brings us right back to the person who DOES know, the mom. And she's chosen to take this course of action. Now that we've established that neither you nor I can truly understand her position, why are you presuming to judge her, again?


Oh, it can build a lot of spiritual character that will come handy when she's also terminal in her deathbed. Pretty useful. Building spiritual character is only truly valuable when you have time to put such learning experience to use. "I learned a lot and died when I finished" is not truly an achievement. Experience is for the future, that's the point of it. If you kill your future to earn experiences and spiritual strenght, you are doing yet again another stupid and meaningless thing.

Inspiration for others...To sacrifice their lives for no meaning? No thanks, I don't know if it would be truly an advantage if many people start to learn that. Not something I would like to see inspired. People would start to fight massive wars again to sacrifice themselves for a piece of colored fabric.


She seems to find meaning in it. And given th at, according to your own argument she'd know better than either of us, I'm prepared to trust her judgment.


Again, last time, I am not advocating euthanasia of any kind here. I am just putting the needs of the mother far ahead of those of the boy here, that's it. Would you start to advocate that mothers that give birth to dead babies be sacrificed in a futile attempt to extract the already dead boy intact? That would be a great sacrifice indeed.

You've expounded at length on what you're not saying but you seem to continue to adamantly refuse to propose an alternative. You say you're not for euthanasia, so what WOULD be your ideal solution?. (again)


I'm not either speaking about viable or not viable people. AGAIN. I hope you're not then again trying to impose the nazi thing on me, becuase, really, I wouldn't advocate that.


I'm not the one bringing up Nazis.


Alright. Then let's extract one of your kidneys while you are living. Why not both? True sacrifice, isn't it. Go then, if you are a truly defender of the meek, and sacrifice YOUR life, for someone already doomed. Until I watch you going weekly to a dialysis machine because you donated both your kidneys to someone with terminal AIDS, I won't truly pay heed to your ideal of sacrifice. Teach-by-example. I'm pretty sure you either value your kidneys too much, or you think it's worthless to waste your entire life and health trying to save someone sick and already dying, because you haven't done that yet. Or you just think your value would be wasted.

If one of my children needed 2 kidneys from me then he or she would have them. If any of my children needed my heart then they would have it. It's a small sacrifice to me. Would it matter of they had these physical ailments? Not at all.

Maybe it's because I'm a parent that I have an easier time seeing the nobility in what this woman is doing. She's not doing anything for her son that I would not do for one of mine.


Without external help, I think not. Your alternative is that the mother continues to care for him until she dies, or disabled, and then the kid can die shortly thereafter? You can't give what you can't have, darling. My alternative is that SHE is taken away and given treatment for her suffering and bad health. After that, we can speak about what happens to the kid.


1)Are you advocating forced medical treatment on a non-consenting patient?
2)You'd better be ready to discuss th ekid because the moment you take mom away for that treatment he's got to be taken care of by somebody. Who? I'm still waiting for your solution.


Have I convinced you that I really do not worry about what happens to the kid as long as the mother doesn't die caring for him? I don't want him to be taken away. I don't really want anything to him. For me, she can keep him as long as she takes the needed steps to care for herself.


Ok so he's not worth your consideration. Is that true of all retarded kids or just this one?


They have the liberty of sacrifice themselves for no gain. I have the liberty of calling them stupid for that. Liberty goes both ways. I happen to see sacrifice as a positive thing, when it has purpose and meaning.

Not unlike the liberty to talk through the rectum, which is what I see when people judge others' choices when they themselves don't have to face them. I think this woman deserves a pat on the back. You seem to think she's some sort of victim of maternal instinct and should be taken away for treatment with or without her consent and to hell with what happens to her son.

How humanitarian of you. Do you really think you're doing mom a favor, then?

FFS all this pro-life, for those who live in half-lives involving disabilities that prevent them living a normal life, and possibly involving problems that prevent them from communicating in any effective way to describe their suffering,

not to mention all the pro-life rant is given by forum users who are not suffering from these disabilities and thus have 'outsider' information and opinions about the subject

oh yes, its all much nicer to let those born with disabilities and defects to spend a generation of life in suffering until they are old enough to find some way to beg a neo-Dr Kevorkian into giving them the euthanasia they spent so long waiting for to release them
many years of suffering from both the disabilities and the negative feedback thrown at them by those who condemn them for their disabilities, is so much better than having been dealt with at birth or before

FFS all this pro-life, for those who live in half-lives involving disabilities that prevent them living a normal life, and possibly involving problems that prevent them from communicating in any effective way to describe their suffering,

not to mention all the pro-life rant is given by forum users who are not suffering from these disabilities and thus have 'outsider' information and opinions about the subject

oh yes, its all much nicer to let those born with disabilities and defects to spend a generation of life in suffering until they are old enough to find some way to beg a neo-Dr Kevorkian into giving them the euthanasia they spent so long waiting for to release them
many years of suffering from both the disabilities and the negative feedback thrown at them by those who condemn them for their disabilities, is so much better than having been dealt with at birth or before

Your solution? Seems like everybody wants to make a case for diminishing the value of those people's lives but nobody has the guts to carry that logic through to its conclusion.

Indeed.

As much as I sometimes dislike Star Trek:TNG episodes,

Thats just blasphamy.

FFS all this pro-life, for those who live in half-lives involving disabilities that prevent them living a normal life, and possibly involving problems that prevent them from communicating in any effective way to describe their suffering,

not to mention all the pro-life rant is given by forum users who are not suffering from these disabilities and thus have 'outsider' information and opinions about the subject

oh yes, its all much nicer to let those born with disabilities and defects to spend a generation of life in suffering until they are old enough to find some way to beg a neo-Dr Kevorkian into giving them the euthanasia they spent so long waiting for to release them
many years of suffering from both the disabilities and the negative feedback thrown at them by those who condemn them for their disabilities, is so much better than having been dealt with at birth or before



There are plenty of people with disablities who dont seek assisted suicide. Unless you can prove that the highest suicide rates are among those with disabilities of course...

Thats just blasphamy.

Brother, once you've been to Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica, it's never the same again.

Brother, once you've been to Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica, it's never the same again.

I never watched Babylon, but Battlestar was pretty solid.

bit late in the day, but meh.

Whils my mum was pregnant, she was offerwed an abortion due to me being supposed to be born with severe cerebal palsy, and pretty much FUBAR.

thankfully my rentals said no, and i turned out ok, i walk alright, speak alright, type like alls i gots is thumbs, but feel quite strongly about this.

you cant write people off, just look at stephen hawkins.

my 2p.

bit late in the day, but meh.

Whils my mum was pregnant, she was offerwed an abortion due to me being supposed to be born with severe cerebal palsy, and pretty much FUBAR.

thankfully my rentals said no, and i turned out ok, i walk alright, speak alright, type like alls i gots is thumbs, but feel quite strongly about this.

you cant write people off, just look at stephen hawkins.

my 2p.

But that's just it. We're not writting anyone off. Everyone has a purpose. My concern stemmed from watching this kid at the metro on Wednesday. He couldn't move or do anything. Plus, the boy can't even breathe by himself without the help a machine. Upon the views that the mother was aware of her child's severe cerebral palsy and possible complications since before he was born, was she responsible in having him?

But that's just it. We're not writting anyone off. Everyone has a purpose. My concern stemmed from watching this kid at the metro on Wednesday. He couldn't move or do anything. Plus, the boy can't even breathe by himself without the help a machine. Upon the views that the mother was aware of her child's severe cerebral palsy and possible complications since before he was born, was she responsible in having him?

its her call, she's the mother.

my rents were told the same, and yet they had me anyway... you cant just give birth to a kid, then go "oh look, its a bit broken" and kill/dump it, thats just wrong.

never easy choices to make, social services should be helping that mother.

ATM its the parents choice. lots of healthy kids are aborted each year, and lots of not-so healthy ones are born, some loved, loads not (my mum works in s special needs school). the question should be, if the parents are told what to expect, are they fit to make the decision on the child's life?

by that i mean, loads of the kids with "severe learning and behaivour difficulties" at my mums school are from parents who attended the school and had learning difficulties themselves... are these people fit to parent once being told ther kid isnt quite ok? or even at all?

[can of worms]

its her call, she's the mother.

my rents were told the same, and yet they had me anyway... you cant just give birth to a kid, then go "oh look, its a bit broken" and kill/dump it, thats just wrong.

never easy choices to make, social services should be helping that mother.

ATM its the parents choice. lots of healthy kids are aborted each year, and lots of not-so healthy ones are born, some loved, loads not (my mum works in s special needs school). the question should be, if the parents are told what to expect, are they fit to make the decision on the child's life?

by that i mean, loads of the kids with "severe learning and behaivour difficulties" at my mums school are from parents who attended the school and had learning difficulties themselves... are these people fit to parent once being told ther kid isnt quite ok? or even at all?

[can of worms]

Let us talk about the mother and her responsibility with the child.

She could never have predicted that, before he was born, she would be suffering from a debilitating condition like fibromialgia. Her condition is a progressive one, and her doctors already told her that eventually, she will have to remain in bed. She will be unable to take care of her son properly if at all. And to top it, there's no one else around to take care of the kid when she's unable to. What will become of this child? That concerns me.

I never watched Babylon, but Battlestar was pretty solid.

B5 is well worth your time to get into.

bit late in the day, but meh.

Whils my mum was pregnant, she was offerwed an abortion due to me being supposed to be born with severe cerebal palsy, and pretty much FUBAR.

thankfully my rentals said no, and i turned out ok, i walk alright, speak alright, type like alls i gots is thumbs, but feel quite strongly about this.

you cant write people off, just look at stephen hawkins.

my 2p.

Glad to have you with us :)

^ thanks.

i try to be grateful/thankfulk sometimes. it'd be nice to not take every day for granted, but, well, that aint happening, having said that, breathing beats being dead.

@ Nanatsu no Tsuki:

over here(UK), the kid would go into social services, stuck in a hospital and generally ignored untill death OR be taken care of by another family.

that situation sucks, but what can you do? sure you can help individuals, but damn. there must be a fair few people in similar situations.

@ Nanatsu no Tsuki:

over here(UK), the kid would go into social services, stuck in a hospital and generally ignored untill death OR be taken care of by another family.

that situation sucks, but what can you do? sure you can help individuals, but damn. there must be a fair few people in similar situations.

Social services will also take care of the child here, but this kid needs special attention that the SS can´t provide. And there´s no one else of the family to take care of him. Sadly, as you say, he will be ignored in a hospital bed until he dies. And that´s a pity.

I'm still a bit confused, Nanatsu. Did the mother know her child would be severely disabled before he was born?

I'm still a bit confused, Nanatsu. Did the mother know her child would be severely disabled before he was born?

From what she told me she was counseled by her doctors to terminate the pregnancy because they were certain the child had the severe palsy and was supposedly deaf. She was aware that her child was very sick. She still decided to have him.

Which brings us right back to the person who DOES know, the mom. And she's chosen to take this course of action. Now that we've established that neither you nor I can truly understand her position, why are you presuming to judge her, again?

Do not take the argument too far. Neither you nor me had the chances to become the absolute leader of Germany during the 30's. Who are we to say a judment about the nazis or Hitler, then? Although I can't fully understand the situation, and neither you, we are pretty free to judge. At least I am. Actually, if we follow your line of reasoning, judgment of anyone or anything is impossible.

She seems to find meaning in it. And given th at, according to your own argument she'd know better than either of us, I'm prepared to trust her judgment.

I'm not forbidding her to do anything. She can do whatever she wants to do, including jumping in front of a train if she wishes to. Doesn't seem less stupid to me, although. You find her judgment worthwhile, I don't. You think she's not stupid, I do.

You've expounded at length on what you're not saying but you seem to continue to adamantly refuse to propose an alternative. You say you're not for euthanasia, so what WOULD be your ideal solution?.

Wait, if I propose an alternative, I would be violating her right to do whatever she pleases to do, because it had to be opposite to what she wants. That's your trap, right? If she wants to go through assisted, slow and painful suicide, then do it. It's her free will. I still think it's a stupid free will.


If one of my children needed 2 kidneys from me then he or she would have them. If any of my children needed my heart then they would have it. It's a small sacrifice to me. Would it matter of they had these physical ailments? Not at all.

Maybe it's because I'm a parent that I have an easier time seeing the nobility in what this woman is doing. She's not doing anything for her son that I would not do for one of mine.


So it's a gene preservation thing. Why your children are superior or more worthy than any disabled John Doe out there? You are the one discriminating based on DNA, actually. Go away with your crappy "altruistic" principles thing. You are just advocating to act to preserve your sperm. Hence my breeder comment.


1)Are you advocating forced medical treatment on a non-consenting patient?
2)You'd better be ready to discuss th ekid because the moment you take mom away for that treatment he's got to be taken care of by somebody. Who? I'm still waiting for your solution.

1.- That would be violating her rights. I would try to convince her that her current course of actions will just kill her and then soon enough her kid will follow.
2.- Either someone takes charge for him, or he just gets his short lifespan shortened. I'm not speaking about "killing him". Just let nature takes his course without endangering any third party.

Ok so he's not worth your consideration. Is that true of all retarded kids or just this one?

No, he's a terminal sick person. I'm more worried about the sacrifices that some healthy people has made to delay the inevitable. The retarded thing doesn't have anything to do with it. It's the terminal thing. I have said that like five times during the argument. Do you read english or do you have some kind of comprenhension problem? because you keep bringing the topic to the table after being told that the retarded thing doesn't have anything to do.

Not unlike the liberty to talk through the rectum, which is what I see when people judge others' choices when they themselves don't have to face them. I think this woman deserves a pat on the back. You seem to think she's some sort of victim of maternal instinct and should be taken away for treatment with or without her consent and to hell with what happens to her son.

How humanitarian of you. Do you really think you're doing mom a favor, then?

I'm passing a judgment, I'm not doing anyone a favour, neither you are.

You are the one talking through your guts here. Actually, you haven't understand half the things I said. Go, grown up, get rational, and we can speak later. Take your emotional crap elsewhere. I'm entitled to my opinion and you are entitled to yours.