To: Lunatic Fringe
Most of Kevorkian's victims were not terminally ill.
The problem is once you start down that road, what constitutes being "terminally ill" will be defined down.
10 posted on
12/13/2006 12:37:02 PM PST by
dfwgator
To: dfwgator
Your slippery slope argument can be applied to all governmental action whether you agree with the action or not.
49 posted on
12/13/2006 1:17:24 PM PST by
monocle
To: dfwgator
Why must "terminally ill" be a requirement?
If an individual, a human being, a person, has pain that he doesn't wish to endure, why must he endure it just because the government says?
99 posted on
12/13/2006 2:11:57 PM PST by
Gondring
(I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
To: dfwgator
I think that anyone accused of murder should simply say, "He wanted to die with dignity." Who can prove him wrong?
100 posted on
12/13/2006 2:12:54 PM PST by
AmishDude
(I coined "Senator Ass" to describe Jim Webb. He may have already used it as a character in a novel.)
To: dfwgator
...that and there is a huge difference between passively dying and actively speeding up the dying process.
Electing to be taken off life-support machines is entirely different than electing to be hooked up to a death-inducing machine.
101 posted on
12/13/2006 2:14:10 PM PST by
Ghost of Philip Marlowe
(Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
To: dfwgator
"Most of Kevorkian's victims were not terminally ill. "
What??? Show me. That's not how I remember his cases.
128 posted on
12/13/2006 4:02:54 PM PST by
hophead
To: dfwgator
"Most of Kevorkian's victims were not terminally ill."
Source?
Are you some sort of an authority concerning the terminally ill?
Kevorkian is a nutjob but that does not mean to say that he has no market for his services.
Big time au contraire.
143 posted on
12/13/2006 5:14:35 PM PST by
Radix
(Don't mind me, I post dumb stuff all of the time.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson