It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2024 8:23 am



Reply to topic  [ 72 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Schiavo case 

What should we do with the vegetable?
Kill her quickly (lethal injection, .45 piece of lead to the back of the head, etc) 80%  80%  [ 8 ]
Kill her slowly (remove her feeding tube and let her starve to death over 3 weeks) 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Let her live (because we're bleeding heart liberals who prefer that people be forced to suffer for 15-30 years) 20%  20%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 10

Schiavo case 
Author Message
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 12:31 pm
Posts: 3334
Location: Belgium
Reply with quote
Post 
There's a big difference between paralyzed, or no arms and legs, and the vegetable state she was in. The former still have normal brain activitie, they sense (pain, hunger, .. ) like we do, not everywhere maybe, but they are 'aware'. Terry Schiavo wasn't.
You're comparing different things here.

But i agree that your system is fucked up, i don't agree with the thoughts of the extreme right christian conservatists (or something) that judges should be given less power (because they're too liberal) so that if for instance jeb bush decides to shake a magic trick out of his sleeve he can't be called to order by a court. And i'm afraid they will take this case to put their agenda through.

_________________
Beter een pens van het zuipen dan een bult van het werken!

~King of Thieves~


Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:50 am
Profile
King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 2:18 pm
Posts: 1976
Location: Sexy Town
Reply with quote
Post 
J wrote:
There's a big difference between paralyzed, or no arms and legs, and the vegetable state she was in. The former still have normal brain activitie, they sense (pain, hunger, .. ) like we do, not everywhere maybe, but they are 'aware'. Terry Schiavo wasn't.
You're comparing different things here.

But i agree that your system is fucked up, i don't agree with the thoughts of the extreme right christian conservatists (or something) that judges should be given less power (because they're too liberal) so that if for instance jeb bush decides to shake a magic trick out of his sleeve he can't be called to order by a court. And i'm afraid they will take this case to put their agenda through.


The guy with no arms or legs and the brain dead patient have 1 major thing in common. They are both alive. Not only are they both alive but they are both still alive because someone else is helping them live. How do you know that the brain dead patient feels no pain? If a brain dead paitent brain is alive enough to keep the core system running, "heart, lungs, etc" then its probable that the things like, hunger and pain, are still there.
Whats the difference between a brain dead patient and a armless, legless, deaf, blind mute? 1 has brain funtion the other doenst, but neither can feed themselves or communicate with their loved ones that they want to live or die.

My point earlier was its illegal to not feed your pet. Your pet! A animal. But its ok to pull the feeding tube out of a humans mouth and starve them to death. I mean come on, you have to admit thats messed up. Since when where pet rights stricker than human rights.

As far as the judges go, the judges in America have gotten out of hand. We have a system of checks and balances here. Judicial, legislative, and executive. The judicial branch only is supposed to interprate the law and latley they have been writing the law. Activist judges use their own personaly opinions and agendes in ruling on cases. Liberals(american) use the rouge judges to bypass the lawmakers and the ovice of the people (congress) to write into law (congress's job) stuff like gay marriage that the majority of people disagree with.

In america its supposed to be "we the people". But latley its "we the judges" and thats not how america is supposed to be.Anyway I went on a rant there but you get my point.

_________________
Contrary to popular belief, America is not a democracy, it is a Chucktatorship.
Image


Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:02 am
Profile ICQ YIM
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 10:23 am
Posts: 3956
Location: Amsterdam
Reply with quote
Post 
Is the majority of Americans really against gay marriage? I rather think the majority of the noisiest people in America is against gay marriage.

It's not Terri Schiavo's fault that your legislature is wack. If there would be proper euthanasia laws in your country she could have died a more humane way, although she still didn't feel anything, since those brain functions were dead.

_________________
Melchett: As private parts to the gods are we: they play with us for their sport!


Sat Apr 02, 2005 9:43 am
Profile
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 7:23 am
Posts: 14892
Location: behind a good glass of Duvel
Reply with quote
Post 
I understand your point with the pet-people comparison 11b, but when it comes to comparing Schiavo (or any other person in vegetative state) to someone who's paralyzed, deaf, blind and mute but still has brain activity you're wrong.

The two just aren't the same...that's why there was such a fuss about whether she's in a vegetative state or not. If she still showed any sign of intellectual activity i'm sure they would have never let her pass away. And of course, we can't know for sure what she is or isn't feeling/thinking, but modern science has provided us with all the means of being near to certain about that. Besides, if you're going to talk certainty principles you could also say that God's existence isn't certain and that there's absolutely no reason to say for sure why she should have lived. Apart from as a piece of furniture with a feeding tube in it. It might be a crude way of saying it, but that's really what she was.


As far as the ppl go: 80% of the American people were backing Michael Schiavo in this matter; according to a recent poll. So I would agree with Arathron and his noisy minority theory. :)

_________________
"I find a Burger Tank in this place? I'm-a be a one-man cheeseburger apocalypse."

- Coach


Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:44 pm
Profile
Felix Rex
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 6:01 pm
Posts: 16661
Location: On a slope
Reply with quote
Post 
I would say that, at least in the state of Texas, most people are against gay marriage. I don't know about more liberal states, or what the US in general would feel, but that's the impression I get around here. Bunch of backwards bastards, imo, but whatever.

On that, marriage doesn't really mean anything, especially not any more. This wonderful world we live in has twisted the institution enough that it's damn near worthless. I don't see any problem with letting anyone marry anyone else. Then again, I'm not religious and therefore don't subscribe to the discriminatory portions of certain religious works.

_________________
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:04 am
Profile WWW
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 10:23 am
Posts: 3956
Location: Amsterdam
Reply with quote
Post 
Indeed, one of the arguements for not having homosexuals marry is that it will undermine the institution marriage is. Then why ware those people not against Britney Spears marrying for a day?

_________________
Melchett: As private parts to the gods are we: they play with us for their sport!


Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:49 am
Profile
King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 2:18 pm
Posts: 1976
Location: Sexy Town
Reply with quote
Post 
Arathorn wrote:
Is the majority of Americans really against gay marriage? I rather think the majority of the noisiest people in America is against gay marriage.



Your right and wrong. The "vast" majority of America is against gay marriage but these people arnt the noisiest. The noisiest people are the people for gay marriage.

Here is what happens

The VAST VAST majority of people spread throughout America are against gay marriage. They have done the right thing and contacted their congressmen and or voted for congressmen that share their views. Their elected congressmen write laws supporting that view that gay people cant marry. Since the lawmakers are congress this is the right thing to do.

The noisy people come in because they are in the minority and disagree with the majority and the congressmen that the majority elected. So, what they do is protest and have parades and stuff. Not only that but they sue the city or state which has this law. They find a judge who they know to be a activist or support their positon for gay marriage and they sue. A legal case gets started and the judge decides that the majority of people, the majority vote, and the congressmen that where elected by the majority where all wrong and cant make that law and thus declares that law to be "unconstituional" thus the judge becomes the lawmaker and says that gay marriage is ok.

So the judges are turning into our lawmakers. Whats the point of making a law that the majority of people vote on when a judges and just change it to what ever he thinks is the right thing?

Satis:Marriage does mean something. It is a special union between man and women that is recongized by the chruch and state. The reason why its important is because of the "nuclear family". Ill give you a quick example. The Black community. Look at America black community. It is in shambles. Single mothers are highest in the black commuity. children raised by no father are mor likley to commit crime. Heres some more statistics.

Quote:
If someone told you that they had a remedy for poverty, out-of-wedlock births, crime and a host of other social ills, how would you respond? Even a cynic would at least want to hear what this person had to say. The truth is that the remedy is not really such a mystery; a growing body of social-scientific evidence demonstrates that the root cause of poverty, crime, and many of the problems attendant thereto are linked undeniably to the presence or absence of marriage.

Children in families disrupted by divorce and out-of-wedlock birth do worse than children in intact families on several measures of well-being. Broken families earn less and experience lower levels of educational achievement. There is a direct statistical link between single parenthood and virtually every major type of crime. And while the public is generally aware of the correlation between these problems and the breakdown of the family unit, most are probably unaware of the breadth of the supporting evidence.

The following is a brief overview of the research demonstrating the links between broken families and poverty, crime and children's well-being:

Poverty

* Fatherless children are six times more likely to live in poverty than children living with both parents. (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington D.C., 1997).
* Almost half of American families experience poverty following a divorce. (Julia Heath, Determinants of Spells of Poverty Following Divorce," Review of Social Economy, Vol. 49 (1992), pp. 305-315).
* Seventy-five percent of all women who apply for welfare benefits do so because of a disrupted marriage or a disrupted relationship in which they live with a male outside of marriage. (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Factors Affecting the Labor Force Participation of Lone Mothers in the United States, prepared by the Panel on Evaluation Factors Affecting the Labor Force Participation of Lone Mothers, Paris, 1989).
* The vast majority of children who live with a single parent are in households in the bottom 20 percent of earnings. Specifically, about 74 percent of families with children in the lowest income quarter are headed by single parents. Conversely, 95 percent of families with children in the highest quarter of income are headed by married parents. (Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, 1997).
* Over 12.5 million children in 1994 lived in single-parent families that earned less than $15,000 per year. Only 3 million such children lived with families that had annual incomes greater than $30,000. (Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, 1994).

Crime

* According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 70 percent of all juveniles in long-term correctional facilities did not live with their father growing up. In fact, a case study in Wisconsin revealed that nearly 88 percent of juvenile delinquents in state custody came from broken homes.
* A 1996 survey relating to the family background of jail inmates revealed that 60.3 percent grew up in broken homes. Furthermore, 46 percent indicated that a family member had been incarcerated. (Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, "Profile of Jail Inmates 1996," 1998).
* There is a strong correlation with the number of single parent families and the crime rate in cities with a population of over 100,000. (From the Journal of Legal Studies).
* According to a study conducted by the University of Pennsylvania, young men who grow up in homes without fathers are twice as likely to end up in jail as those who come from traditional two-parent families.

Children's Well-Being

* According to a study published in Psychological Reports, children of broken families experience significantly lower self-esteem and poorer self-concepts than children of intact families. The former also report more depression.
* The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported that children of never-married mothers are more than twice as likely to have been treated for an emotional or behavioral problem.
* Children whose parents separate are significantly more likely to experience conduct and mood disorders, engage in early sexual activity and abuse drugs. This effect is especially strong for children whose parents separated when they were five years old or younger. (David M. Ferguson, John Horwood, and Michael T. Lynsky, "Parental Separation, Adolescent Psychopathology, and Problem Behaviors," Journal of the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry, 33, 1994).

Nebraska is not exempt from these problems. During the 1990's, Nebraska has averaged 6,351 divorces per year. Since 1980, the percentage of out-of-wedlock births has increased every year, except for a slight dip in 1995. In 1998, over 26 percent of births were to out-of-wedlock mothers. Statistics reveal that the average income of Nebraska women heading their families is $14,000.

As healthy, intact families are replaced by living situations that lead to crime, abuse and a myriad of other problems, the burden on society will also become greater, and society itself will be less equipped to cope with it. Unfortunately, anti-family government policies have played a role in creating the current problem. Examples of such policies include the proliferation of no-fault divorce laws; welfare policies which provide disincentives for marriage; and family discriminatory tax policies (i.e. the marriage penalty, federal estate taxes, the earned income tax credit).

However, federal, state and local governments can play important roles in rebuilding the family to ensure that children escape the inherent problems associated with the disruption of marriage and out-of-wedlock births. One of the most effective things the State can do is adopt general policies and positions favoring marriage and the stability of two-parent homes. For instance, the State could encourage a public service ad campaign espousing the benefits of marriage. Given the high social costs associated with divorce and out-of-wedlock births, dollars expended on such a campaign would be money well-spent.

Other possible actions could include changes in no-fault divorce laws, better enforcement of child support laws, and revamping school curricula to ensure that the benefits of marriage and costs of divorce are fairly covered. In the private sector, businesses should be encouraged to become "pro-parenting" by doing such things as allowing flex time so that at least one parent can be home when the kids arrive after school. Churches and communities can also play vital roles by providing more parent surrogates for the parentless. Where parents are missing or unwilling to uphold their responsibilities, mentoring programs should be supported. Research has also shown that church involvement drastically reduces the likelihood of children from broken homes falling into the dangerous behaviors that beset many of their peers. Churches can further help by instituting pre-marital counseling and taking a strong stand against divorce and infidelity. It will take an integrated approach such as this to reverse the devastating effects of a culture that has devalued marriage.



If you dont see a problem with letting anyone marry anyone else then why not let people marry dogs or cats or sheep?

Rinox: Anwser this 1 question. If someones heart is beating, are they alive? Yes or no? Depends is not a option.

_________________
Contrary to popular belief, America is not a democracy, it is a Chucktatorship.
Image


Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:16 am
Profile ICQ YIM
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 10:23 am
Posts: 3956
Location: Amsterdam
Reply with quote
Post 
ElevenBravo The Great wrote:
Heres some more statistics.
[...]

A lot of these statistics are about disrupted marriages. I understand that a breakup in a family is very bad: many children get huge emotional hits during a divorce and it's aftermath. But are gays more likely to break up then heterosexual couples? Not very likely. I already gave the example of Britney Spears marrying for one day. Most gays who are so eager to marry want it for real, why else would they do so much trouble for it? Or do you think gay people are less capable of loving each other then "straight" people?

Quote:
If you dont see a problem with letting anyone marry anyone else then why not let people marry dogs or cats or sheep?

Because dogs, cats or sheep are not on the same emotional level as humans.

_________________
Melchett: As private parts to the gods are we: they play with us for their sport!


Tue Apr 05, 2005 10:07 am
Profile
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 7:23 am
Posts: 14892
Location: behind a good glass of Duvel
Reply with quote
Post 
ElevenBravo The Great wrote:
Rinox: Anwser this 1 question. If someones heart is beating, are they alive? Yes or no? Depends is not a option.



The answer is: yes.


I don't know if you would classify this as 'depends', but there's alive and there's alive. We both know that things aren't as clear cut as 'yes' or 'no'. They are alive, but they're not aware. Plants and trees are alive too, y'know. But aware?



@homosexual marriage...for all I care, ppl can marry their dogs, trees or goats. Whatever makes them happy. However, this is still different from marrying another man/woman. That are persons in their own value, who happen to practice their mojo on ppl like them, and so what? Apart from religious reasons-which are highly debatable-there's not a single reason why gay ppl shouldn't be able to marry.

About the laws/judges: this is how it's supposed to work; laws aren't universal and everlasting. They are tokens of their time, and widely open ton interpretation. E.g., people are equal = fine, but do you count blacks as people? Women? Mentally handicapped persons? etc.

It is the task of the legislative branch of each governemt to adapt, add and scratch laws as times go on, to suit modern need. Imho the unwillingness to touch a good part of the constitution and treating it like it's holy is a problem of the us. By that I mean the second amendment, which is a leftover from pioneering times (and that's not the only thing in there). I know not everyone agrees with that, but meh. My point is: laws aren't supposed to be everlasting. So if a judge chooses to adapt that by referring to the constitution, so be it. The irony is that they, if it comes to that, will change it back on the exact same grounds: the constitution. :roll:

_________________
"I find a Burger Tank in this place? I'm-a be a one-man cheeseburger apocalypse."

- Coach


Tue Apr 05, 2005 2:39 pm
Profile
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 12:31 pm
Posts: 3334
Location: Belgium
Reply with quote
Post 
Dunno how it's in america, but you can consider 2 types of marriage: for church and for law. And i don't see many reasons not to allow 2 people of the same sex to marry for law. If not for emotional reasons it's just for practical reasons that it should be allowed.

Will read the other stuff later.

_________________
Beter een pens van het zuipen dan een bult van het werken!

~King of Thieves~


Tue Apr 05, 2005 3:01 pm
Profile
King
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 2:18 pm
Posts: 1976
Location: Sexy Town
Reply with quote
Post 
...humm so much to respond to.

Arathorn wrote:
Because dogs, cats or sheep are not on the same emotional level as humans.


So? Im human and I have emotion, why cant I marry my dog? Am I not equal to everyone else who gets married? Am I lesser of a human? If homosexuals and hetrosexuals can marry then why cant I marry my pet? It has emotions and it loves me? If I arnt allowed to marry my pet then my rights are being infrindges apon. Right?

Rinox wrote:
ElevenBravo The Great wrote:
Rinox: Anwser this 1 question. If someones heart is beating, are they alive? Yes or no? Depends is not a option.
The answer is: yes.


ok so a beating heart is one that is alive. Now, a brain dead women on a feeding tube and a deaf,blind,armless,legless,mute have beating hearts(notice plants dont have beating hearts, where talking about humans here) so they are alive. Yes? Yes
Ok so every human that has a beating heart is alive.

So whats the differance when you take the feeding tube out of a human who is alive, compared to stop feeding a armless, legsless,deaf,blind,mute who is alive.

There is none, you, in both cases, are dening food to a person who is alive and can not feed themselves. brain dead or not the person is alive. Since we already established that only a beating heart is needed to be considered alive. Consciencness and alive are 2 separte things.

judges
Whats the point of writting a law if a judge is going to change it? In fact, whats the point of having a legislation if judges make the laws? There is none, so lets just do away with the whole legilative system and just cut right to the bull of having judges? Save tax payer money.

_________________
Contrary to popular belief, America is not a democracy, it is a Chucktatorship.
Image


Wed Apr 06, 2005 1:11 pm
Profile ICQ YIM
Minor Diety
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 7:23 am
Posts: 14892
Location: behind a good glass of Duvel
Reply with quote
Post 
I don't see the difference 11b. A person like you describe there (mute, blind, deaf, handicapped etc.) would and should be put to death too, because their lives would be living hell. Conscious and devoid of all social contact or ability to do anything...yikes. *shivers*

Of course, without euthanasia someone like that would have the 'joy' of feeling the pain, thirst and hunger when they're starved to death because of lack of euthanasia. :/

So 'plant' persons and persons like that are both in the same predicament: they are both inable to do anything anymore. What's the point of living? For another few months, even a year, sure. But for the rest of their lives?

The question if someone still has a point going on living (or in this case, being kept alive) depends from person to person and how severe their problem is. In schiavo and the hypothetical dude's case it's pretty clear-cut, in others it isn't. But I'm not gonna explore the nuances of every single case here.


@judges: again, the point of laws is that they are adapted and changed where necessary. Besides, these judges didn't change the laws as such, they set a precedent by making a different interpretation of them. A case such as Roe vs. Wade did exactly the same thing: they called for a re-interpretation of the original law, not for it to be changed.

_________________
"I find a Burger Tank in this place? I'm-a be a one-man cheeseburger apocalypse."

- Coach


Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:36 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 72 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.