Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: oincobx

That’s as I understand it as well. Forgive me for possibly mischaracterizing the debate, but what I’m getting here is the aroma of “it’s too bad that the girl will die, but the important thing is that The Rules remain inviolate.” That’s the sort of attitude I’d expect out of a death panel but not on a conservative forum. Possibly I’ve misinterpreted.


30 posted on 06/04/2013 10:18:26 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: Billthedrill
That’s as I understand it as well. Forgive me for possibly mischaracterizing the debate, but what I’m getting here is the aroma of “it’s too bad that the girl will die, but the important thing is that The Rules remain inviolate.” That’s the sort of attitude I’d expect out of a death panel but not on a conservative forum. Possibly I’ve misinterpreted.

I don't think that's what people are saying (and it's certainly not what I'm saying). My point is simply that available transplant organs are very scarce, and unfortunately (but unaviodably) the fact that one person receives an organ necessarily means that someone else on the list does not receive that organ. In light of those circumstances, I think that it is better for these decisions to be made using a set of consistent set of rules/criteria than for some Washington bureaucrat (here, Sebelius) to start changing the rules for certain patients because those patients have managed to get widespread media attention.

35 posted on 06/04/2013 11:01:51 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson