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

To: wagglebee

My answers do not differ from yours. Why would you assume differently?


60 posted on 08/14/2011 12:05:10 PM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: RFEngineer; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; Lesforlife; ...
My answers do not differ from yours. Why would you assume differently?

Well, let's see:

A 'Duty To Die' In An Advanced Civilization?
 
If you are looking to off granny because she’s a PITA, that is one thing. Of course there is no “duty to die” in this case.

If you are saying that there may be limits to life-extending medical care that the government won’t pay for in the future like it does today - and if pursuit of such care will bankrupt your survivors and leave them destitute, then I would say there IS a hypothetical duty to not pursue such care and be left to your fate.

14 posted on Monday, May 10, 2010 7:40:03 PM by RFEngineer
 
 

It's pretty clear that YOU support a "duty" to die.

65 posted on 08/14/2011 12:15:48 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | 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