MANIFESTO OF THE WPPFF/WILD TURKEYS/COALITION OF THE SANE

Me. | 29MARCH05 | Long Cut

[Chad Fairbanks]

It's fun poking sticks at you little monkeys.

Racist much?

[unbalanced but fair]

"I'll fight to preserve your choices, help me fight to preserve peoples' lives." Very well put. I think you'll find that's what most people want.
One of the problems is that this has all been allowed to go on for so long...Roe vs. Wade, Nancy Cruzan, Karen Quinlan, and so on. Perhaps Terri's case will have made people think over these precendents and voice their thoughts as well as you just did. The name callers, screamers, etc. may get a brief amount of attention{often the wrong kind}; but true change will come from well thought out discourse. It can be done.

[Rheo]

The political parasites, and their incompetent lawyering certainly didn't help much. IN fact, I think they made it far worse, and may have created more problems for all of us...

Worth repeating

[mountaineer]

I can just imagine him lurking through these threads, popcorn in hand, watching with wry amusement as FR self destructs

Joined by Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, James Carville, Harry Dean and Nancy Pelosi, no doubt. The left loves to see conservatives eat their own. Some here are playing right into their hands.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

LOL Reminds me of the quote... "Did you stop beating your wife?" :)

[Stakka Skynet]

"There are quite a few converts here. It just shows that a lot of us grew up"

From little lefties into big lefties.

[malakhi]

Here's my first-draft solution to that dilemna: First, living wills should be considered null and void on the basis that there is no way to know what one really wants until they are actually in that position. Second, a person should be free to refuse any treatment, if their will can be established beyond any doubt. In the case of refusing a treatment where such a choice could reasonably be considered life-or-death, it should be recorded in either signed or otherwise recorded form with affidavits signed by three unrelated adult witnesses (the standard for capital punishment in Texas is my reference here).

Okay.

I'm not sure I understand the rejection of living wills, though. Certainly having something written down is preferable to relying upon verbal testimony. Further, if someone changes his mind, the old will could be rescinded.

If you reject living wills entirely, then you are going to end up with a lot more of these types of situations.

[mountaineer]

Oops, I mean Harry Reid.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Well, you posted that to yourself, so...

I'll just let your inadvertant honesty stand.

[.38sw]

Wanna borrow a smiley, and poke back?

[Pan_Yans Wife]

The Schindlers' fate was decided from the very first case. They just are blind to reality and are propelled by hatred for Michael Schiavo.

[.38sw]

"If a FReeper finds this an acceptable means to discuss this and other issues, they are welcome to join in and participate. Those who find pleasure in attacks, flame-baiting, slander, stalking, and personal atacks will be ignored, and their egos will go unfed."

Thanks for bumping the thread.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Well, if I'm a monkey, I guess I can fling poo back instead. ;0)

[Long Cut]

"If a FReeper finds this an acceptable meansd to discuss this and other issues, they are welcome to join in and participate. Those who find pleasure in attacks, flame-baiting, slander, stalking, and personal atacks will be ignored, and their egos will go unfed."

Thanks for the bump!

[Finger Monkey]

Do you have a visual?

[atlaw]

"First, living wills should be considered null and void on the basis that there is no way to know what one really wants until they are actually in that position."

Ok. No living will may be honored. In the absence of effective living wills, the State will decide the fate of a terminally ill patient based upon (presumably) your remaining rules.

"Second, a person should be free to refuse any treatment, if their will can be established beyond any doubt."

Uh-oh. We're already in trouble here. You've declared living wills null and void, so if the terminally ill patient is comatose or in a persistent vegetative state, the State cannot determine the "will" of the patient. This problem will be (presumably) resolved by your next rule.

"Third, if a person is not capable of expressing their will, no reasonable treatment on which his life is dependent should be refused or denied to him under any circumstances."

So the State will decide what is "reasonable" treatment. And the State, being benign and limitlessly wealthy, will therefore keep the comatose or PVS patient alive indefinitely (so long as doing so is "reasonable").

And the State will, of course, not require the patient's relatives to pay for this perpetual care, thereby preventing the specter of bankruptcy. Indeed, the State will not require the patient's relatives to care anymore one way or the other. Or express any opinion. Or, god forbid, disagree.

And finally, we know that the State would adopt your definition of "reasonable" treatment, and would never change that definition in the future (say, when the economics of the deal got a little dicey).

I am comforted.

[Finger Monkey]

shudder

[Stakka Skynet]

"Racist much?"

Now how on earth did you reach that conclusion? For you to even draw that parallel from the word "monkey" makes your own thought processes suspect.

[.38sw]

LC, I borrowed your post and have been using it where appropriate. Thanks so much.

[Steel Wolf]

Joined by Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, James Carville, Harry Dean and Nancy Pelosi, no doubt. The left loves to see conservatives eat their own. Some here are playing right into their hands.

It's the old 'lie down with dogs' problem. We laughed at the left when Michael Moore hijacked their side (and with it, any shred of vestigal credibility they might have). Now, we've got our own hijack situation in progress from our own extremist moonbats. I think it speaks much better of us that we're not taking it lying down. Still, if we can't put down the Kook Intifada soon, then we're going to lose a lot of hard won ground.