Replies

Depending on the exact mitochondrial disorder, it's probably true that there's just no hope for this child.

But dammit, it's just so f***ing wrong for a living, breathing human being to die from starvation or dehydration after some cold-blooded "doctor" (first do no harm..?) yanks the plug on the orders of some unaccountable committee somewhere.

The UK, as a de-facto socialist state, has decided this child's life has no value to the State, and thus should be terminated. But even from the most darkly inhuman point of view, there is so much to be learned medically- for the sake of all humanity- to fight to keep such people alive. And from any principled point of view, it's just wrong to terminate a child for convenience or finance' sake.

I am not a particularly religious person, but abortion offends me incredibly deeply- it relies on the notion that a human being has no inherent value, only value to others, who can choose to deny that value and deny a fellow person his or her life...

...And this is so much worse. It's the State who gets to deny a person their inherent value of life?! This is the first step to quite literally disposing of "undesirables." We all KNOW where that path leads.

Terminally sick children are a recognizable, definable demographic group. And yet the UK thinks it can declare such a group worthy of death. What group will they declare undesirable and worthy of extermination next? We've seen this repeatedly through human history. The end result is death. Death, death, death, and no progress (in the sense of the deceptive leftist term "Progressive") to show for it.

The most anti-human people on the planet call themselves "humanists"...