Posted on 04/17/2017 4:46:19 AM PDT by Kaslin
Once again, the confused logic of liberals is almost impossible to comprehend. Take, for instance, the multi-million dollar steel suicide barrier about to be constructed in San Francisco. After 1,600 people, tragically died since 1937 by jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge, an obstacle to suicide will soon run the 9,000-ft. length of the bridge.
What’s perplexing is that this compassionate enterprise is taking place in a liberal state where assisted suicide is legal, and where, in 2011, out of 802,400 pregnancies, 184,552, or 23%, ended in abortion.
San Francisco is a city whose majority likely endorses the 3,000 abortions performed every day in America. Yet Bagdad-by-the-Bay plans to spend 211 million in taxpayer dollars to deny one person, every two weeks, the right to choose to do what California law otherwise maintains should hinge solely on personal choice.
In other words, by erecting suicide barriers on the Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco liberals, who, for the unborn denounce the right to life, and, for the sick and dying support the right to die, want to inflict life on those who prefer death.
Even still, liberal Californians would probably argue that jumping off a bridge is different because, according to state law, to qualify for death with dignity one must be succumbing to physical, not mental, illness.
Sorry to have to be the one to say it, but, especially in a liberal bastion like San Francisco telling one group, they have a right to die while refusing another that same right smacks of the sort of discrimination liberals usually pride themselves on avoiding.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
because attempted suicide is a moneymaker for the healthcare government industrial complex.
The Coast Guard station that responds and attends to these corpses has a high rate of PTSD associated with first responders.
Assisted suicide and abortion are legal in this state.
A net running 9,000 feet long seems like an extraordinary expense and culturally unnecessary for Califor is life standards.
Dies this get paid for out of the new $.12 cents per gallon tax or from the extra $100-$250 per hear for DMV fees?
Maybe those broads shouldn’t spend their formative years laying on their backs with their legs spread open.
Death to those who want life, life to those who want death, unlimited expensive medication to drama queens Who actively sought infection.
that’s San Francisco.
So they finally approved building that stupid barrier. If someone really wants to commit suicide, don’t these idiot liberals think they can find another bridge or another way?
The left wants abortion because it is favored by fang-tooth feminazis who unfailingly vote democrat. They favor end of life “euthanasia” because it mostly terminates White Christians who they hate. They oppose gays, dickchoppers and other insane people jumping off a bridge, well, because they want their votes. Same reason for opposing the death penalty.
The majority of Californians are insane no doubt.
Get out of the way and leave them alone!
Based on their track record, you would think San Francisco would install a suicide room on the bridge. The room would be equipped with voice recognition writing machines to enable those who speak any one of the 3 million languages spoken locally to “write” a suicide note. For those who are too distraught suggested texts could be supplied. Fedex boxes could be available with prepaid shipping labels to send loved ones valuables and DNA swabs would round out the amenities so even if their “guest” is not identifiable by other means the IRS will know who he/she is.
When Pope Alexander VI (the Borgia pope) was selling indulgences, he said, “The Lord desireth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should live and pay.” Perhaps California politicians have likewise figured out that when they allow a suicide, they lose a taxpayer.
Jump into the net, climb to the edge of the net, jump again.
What would be the multi-million dollar fix for that? Another net?
I heard that this netting could actually attract thrill seekers.
There are people who go bungee jumping and hang gliding for the fun of it. Suppose people want to jump off the bridge into the netting for the fun of it?
But then, if someone gets hurt in doing so, they will sue the city, because the stated function of the netting is to keep people safe.
Sadly, seriously, I see the point of those who say that someone with suicidal tendencies, may simply take their life in some other way, if they can’t jump off this bridge. Will this netting really save anyone, when we consider that factor?
I would bet money that the REAL reason for this has nothing to do with compassion or suicide prevention but instead is all about who will make money on it. Follow the money.
Saw that movie. Sticks with you for quite some time.
Haha. Comments and beliefs like that are soooo conservative and Christian and helpful.
BTW, those broads aren’t the only participants. But you already knew that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.