Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wagglebee

Can we agree upon the following?

- As long as Kevorkian is a free citizen not subject to legal sanctions, not imprisoned nor under probation supervision, he is free to speak as he wishes. Same as anyone else who enjoys the first-amendment protection of free speech. Same as you or I.

- Any organization is free to choose to pay him to speak, or to choose not to. Same 1A protection. If the speaker fees are paid with taxpayer funds, then there if a good argument hat any Florida taxpayer has grounds to argue against.

- The Schindler family has at least as many free-speech rights as Kevorkian has. Kevorkian has a right to voice his opinion, and the Schnindlers have a right to voice theirs. Any organization has a right to book him to speak, and anyone has a right to tell them they shouldn’t.

So this is not a debate about rights. It is a debate about choices. Some group of people chose to book Kevorkian, and some other folks oppose that. There is no travesty here. This is the system working as it’s supposed to.

Independent of the above, I will note that Kevorkian is famous for helping people die — or killing people, if you prefer — who stated, clearly, that they wanted to die.That is is a different matter from people who were not able to form or express an intent. People like, for example, Terri Schiavo.

My understanding is that Kevorkian acted on informed consent. If I am mistaken, please enlighten me.


149 posted on 09/04/2007 4:08:32 AM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ReignOfError

Thank you for this excellant clarifying post. You are correct..this is about choices..and I do agree he should not be paid,and certainly not with tax funds.

Your entire post is very articulate.


151 posted on 09/04/2007 4:32:33 AM PDT by Recovering Ex-hippie (We need a troop surge in Philly and Newark!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

To: ReignOfError
I agree with everything except that I don't think that taxpayer funds should be used to pay Dr. Death to speak and I question the following:

My understanding is that Kevorkian acted on informed consent.

Many of his victims were simply depressed, a person suffering from severe depression is demonstrably incapable of giving informed consent about their future. There have also been reports that at least one of his victims tried to back out once the procedure was started and that Dr. Death did not allow it.

157 posted on 09/04/2007 9:31:13 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

To: ReignOfError
My understanding is that Kevorkian acted on informed consent. If I am mistaken, please enlighten me.

If his "patients" were clinically depressed when they made the decision for suicide, they were non compis mentis and their consent was as valid as a consent signed by a guy tripping on acid.

172 posted on 09/04/2007 7:31:23 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Libs obviously don’t believe pro-lifers are terrorists, or they'd placate us by banning abortion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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