Replies

>>Do you honestly believe that she would want to be maintained in this sad state?<<<

I also think the same thing of the homeless degenerates I see on my city street everyday. They sleep on the street, they eat out of garbage cans, they urinate in public, their brains are also half gone from drugs and alcohol abuse.
They have no quality of life and frankly would be better off and at peace and with God. I am sure they would rather be dead than in the sad state they are in.

Also, blind people. I can not image being blind and not being able to see. I am sure their quality of life sucks too. They are in a sad state as well.

Oh and what about the retards.OMG they are so sad, they have no idea of what is going on and they will never lead a "normal" life. They are better off at peace instead of the sad state they are in.
What kind of quality of life can a severely mentally retarded person have anyway!!!

When can we start this "better off dead" policy, because I have more to add to my list.

In addition to severely disabled people like Terry,who else would you put on your "Better off dead" list????????

Great post.

We have in place a very simple law: You can make a legal document that says under what condition you are to be let go.

No document, and we keep you alive as long as it doesn't involve artificial means. Feeding is not an artificial means.

I don't understand what those who want this woman to be starved to death feel is to be gained by this other than that we are merely expanding the right to choose into the post-natal stage.

The pro-choice argument in large part is about "wanted" babies. Now we're talking about "wanted" adults.

The compromise in all this is that legal form. It's available to ANY adult. That they don't get one in their 20's or 30's because "no one does" at that age is the lamest defense in a society where we are expected to make our own life choices--the basis for the pro-starvation folks here.

As you point out, homeless people cannot make decisions for themselves, and are essentially living on public property, we're essentially their next of kin, so I guess we can decide to off them.

Also, as you point out, blind folks are missing one of the senses used for input on what life is all about--a blind person on one level can never fully comprehend what life is, so how can they make a rational decision about whether or not they want to live? They're living an illusion of life, a shred of what life is really about.

Those who are incapacitated and can't move can't get much out of life--they can't hold jobs, can't contribute to society...

The slippery slope argument is incorrectly used in this case: Killing TS isn't about a slippery slope towards killing the unwanted, it IS killing the unwanted, period. We're not heading toward that kind of world; we're living in it.