homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Politics/Religion/Current Affairs   » And just to stir things up a bit (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: And just to stir things up a bit
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 20, 2007 11:45      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How about this.

It'll probably be immensely popular around these parts.

Enjoy! [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 2 posted April 20, 2007 12:30      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's interesting to note that the video conveniently leaves out shootings like the one that killed five Amish schoolgirls in an Amish school that most certainly had not "kicked God out."

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 20, 2007 12:36      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good point, Steen!

The Amish seemed to have little trouble accepting the tragedy in their lives as the logical extension of our society and culture and, as I recall, forgave the killer as their faith teaches - which seems a whole lot healthier than what followed all the other school shootings: hand-wringing, anger, confusion, blame and demands against officials, calls for tighter gun-control. You know, the usual.

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 20, 2007 13:40      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Um, hate to nit-pick, but that video implies that child porn on the internet is legal, as protected "free speech".
They must have missed the "Thou shalt not lie" line in the book.

[edit]I suppose you didn't need to be a rocket scientist to know there's be copy-cats.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted April 20, 2007 14:13      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
garlicguy wrote:
The Amish seemed to have little trouble accepting the tragedy in their lives as the logical extension of our society and culture and, as I recall, forgave the killer as their faith teaches - which seems a whole lot healthier than what followed all the other school shootings: hand-wringing, anger, confusion, blame and demands against officials, calls for tighter gun-control. You know, the usual.

The Amish did react in a much better way than most others do. It seems almost as if a general sequence of events has been unofficially accepted by our society. First the shooting then the media frenzy followed by various groups trying to use the tragedy to push their own agenda.

There's something that bothers me about all this, though...

While there is no doubt that it's tragic that 32 people died, the attention given to this shooting is far more than it deserves. In 2005, 7,460 teenagers died in car crashes. 28% of those had been drinking. That's over 2,000 lives that are gone.

While I do think it would be good to identify those with mental problems and help them, I think we would be far better off if we concentrated on finding ways to reduce teenage drinking instead of wringing our hands over a sensationalistic moment like this shooting.

Note: statistics taken from CDC and SADD

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Sxeptomaniac

Member # 3698

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 20, 2007 15:26      Profile for Sxeptomaniac   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steen:
There's something that bothers me about all this, though...

While there is no doubt that it's tragic that 32 people died, the attention given to this shooting is far more than it deserves. In 2005, 7,460 teenagers died in car crashes. 28% of those had been drinking. That's over 2,000 lives that are gone.

While I do think it would be good to identify those with mental problems and help them, I think we would be far better off if we concentrated on finding ways to reduce teenage drinking instead of wringing our hands over a sensationalistic moment like this shooting.

Note: statistics taken from CDC and SADD

You're not the only one bothered by that, Steen. I recently read an opinion article with many of the same concerns.

--------------------
Let's pray that the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its iniquity elsewhere. - C. S. Lewis

Posts: 1590 | From: Fresno, CA | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 20, 2007 16:11      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steen:
In 2005, 7,460 teenagers died in car crashes. 28% of those had been drinking ... I think we would be far better off if we concentrated on finding ways to reduce teenage drinking instead of wringing our hands over a sensationalistic moment like this shooting.

There's plenty that can be done to improve road safety.

Last year 337 were killed on the roads in my home state, back in the early 70's (when there were 1/3 as many cars on the road) we were killing over 1,000 a year.

That reduction was achieved when politicians decided enough was enough, and they got serious about improving road safety. Some of the changes were unpopular at the time, (eg compulsory seat belts, random alcohol testing, automatic speed cameras) and caused people to whinge about losing their "freedoms", but the plain hard fact is we're saving over 2000 lives a year, and the only freedom we've given up is the freedom to drive like lunatics.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 21, 2007 09:46      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Famous Druid:
people to whinge about losing their
"freedoms", but the plain hard fact is we're saving over 2000 lives a year, and the only freedom we've given up is the freedom to drive like lunatics.

Which, as I see it, is really the only important point that the video, (and others like it), has to offer.

Why in the world are so many of us insistent upon gaining or hanging on to "freedoms" which damage ourselves, our planet or its occupants?

"Freedom to do harm" is hardly the same as its cousin "Freedom from harm", and yet the direction being taken for the past 40 years seems much more replete with the former and alarmingly lacking in the latter...

It surely must be that not all "Freedoms" are for our betterment, despite our first impressions. FWIW

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Just_Jess_B

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 2161

Icon 1 posted April 21, 2007 12:31      Profile for Just_Jess_B   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I understand the arguments presented here. Unfortunately, I disagree.

You, your neighbor, everyone in your family has "freedom to do harm." You could use a fist to harm. You choose not to because of an ethical/moral compass.

Should you and your whole family be put into cells because of the potential that you could, at some point, kill someone (either accidentally or on purpose)?

--------------------
Opinion is not Truth; that is why each has its own definition. Illiteracy sucks.

Posts: 1370 | From: Whaddya mean, Arizona? | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 21, 2007 13:49      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
(Apology: This grew in the typing phase.)

Perhaps my point was not quite clear. Let me try again.

Of course we each have potential to do harm.

My point was that government's duty, job, etc. is to govern, not to endorse ridiculous claims to individual freedoms that have no place in a moral society.

The the most simple example I can think of, is one that is a very incendiary topic in most places, but let try to me put this as gently as I can: Some believe abortion to be an inalienable right of a woman or a couple, an option to be chosen at her or their convenience. Others would hold to the notion that this is grossly unfair or unjust because it abuses the rights of the fetus (or baby, described as an unborn human). Frankly, without taking sides in that moral issue, my point is simply the the government has no business issuing a ruling either way. It has an obligation to stay the hell out of the argument, excepting for when the civil opponents break civil laws.

Your morality is not mine; mine is not yours. I can argue that all killing is wrong and base my political thinking on that premise whether talking about wars, capital punishment, murder and so forth. The difficulty in the US (at least) on this issue is that until the 1970's, it seemed that everyone understood that the unborn were included in that protection of the law. What Roe vs. Wade and all the other hullabaloo since has focused on is the definition "life".

It seems that is or should be a moral definition, not one left up to scientists. They are scientists, not philosophers nor moralists. They should be free to formulate scientific theories, not encumbered with responsibility for definitions in the moral issues of the population. And then, we have the ever-changing scientific conclusions based on new evidence.

Salt, caffeine, milk, oats, you name it. In the last 25 years they have all been proclaimed poisonous; they have all been proclaimed healthful.

The recent Terry Schiavo case in Florida indicated just how diametrically opposed people can become on this definition. In the end, it is a choice(def.): a matter of the will; a decision based on desire. Morality has become passť in these instances.

Those who wanted her dead carried the day. Some of those same voices are running around right now calling for disarming citizens under the banner of "safety for all" and "greater gun control". Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it. Among the first orders of business for the Hitler Regime when it came into power was to disarm the citizens. Then the goons did what they damned well pleased.

So... who gets to decide, and how are such issues decided? If we (the people) would solve the large issues of right and wrong, perhaps we could leave behind the micromanagement of each detail of our lives such as privacy laws (ugh) and courts deciding personal matters for the nation's citizens. What seems to get mostly in our way is our passionate adherence to certain (lesser) issues and we end up right back with government running the people, not merely the business of governance.

I think (hope) the producers of that clip are trying to get us to think before we give away the best practices of society in the name of "individual rights".

Ooops. [blush] /EOR (end of rant; not the stuffed donkey) gg

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Just_Jess_B

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 2161

Icon 1 posted April 21, 2007 17:01      Profile for Just_Jess_B   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am in full agreement that it is the individual, not the government who is responsible for governing one's behavior. If the line crosses the public good, that individual should face consequences.

The difficulty lies in that we have many advancements which have ethical (and moral) ramifications. The debate over Terry Schiavo is a great example of this. There was so much involved in her death and many ugly accusations of bad behavior all around. Ethics won over morals in that situation, and morals won when John Paul II died just after.

We each have to find our own compass, and sadly many people don't have one. Frightening to think about is that some people are so mentally broken that they have a moral compass which spins wildly.

Man is a selfish animal who is also graced with compassion. We cannot live by quorum. Sadly, we already live in a babysitter state and people at this point in time seem happy to give up their rights to avoid their responsibilities.

--------------------
Opinion is not Truth; that is why each has its own definition. Illiteracy sucks.

Posts: 1370 | From: Whaddya mean, Arizona? | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 21, 2007 17:57      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That is one excellent video rant GG, but unpicking the arguments in it I find things that I am in complete agreement with mixed up with others that are more problematic.

What I agree with is the stuff about education. From my experience with my children's schools, and from talking (with increasing frustration) to my brother-in-law who is an "expert" in this field, it seems to me that education professionals (in the UK anyway) seem to be locked into some hippy mindset from the late sixties, mired in moral relativism, whose only touchstones seem to be some rather wooly ideas about "respect", and for whom the only enequivocal evil is racism. This failure of leadership is one of the reasons that educational standards in the UK are still fairly abysmal, but in many senses this is just a general reflection of the collapse of deference, and the confusion that exists throughout our society now, and not something that they should shoulder all the blame for.

Where I have a problem is the central argument of the piece, which might be summarised thus; in a spiritual vacuum morals decay. I don't believe in this for two main reasons. The first is that I don't think that a commonly agreed moral code for society needs to be grounded in revealed truth from a religion. Moral philosophers from Aristotle to John Stuart Mill have explained fairly well what we know instinctively to be right and just without recourse to religion. The second reason is empirical, I do not see that citizens in a more religious societies behave better than those from a more secular culture. For instance statistics about church going confirm that the US is a much more religious country than the UK, but do you think Americans are more moral than Brits?

You might argue that in former times when there were more illiterate and ill educated people, and society was consequently less mobile, that religion could provide some glue to hold society together, but if it ever was true, I don't believe that is the case any more. The real problem that underlies this as I see it, and for which nobody as yet has any satisfactory answers, is how, in an advanced educated liberal democracy, do you keep the bonds of society from gradually disintegrating in peace time.

PS Interestingly this was one of the central concerns of Leo Strauss, the founder of neoconservatism, but perhaps if we want to keep this discussion amicable, we should not persue that particular avenue! [Wink]

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 22, 2007 00:13      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by garlicguy:
The recent Terry Schiavo case in Florida indicated just how diametrically opposed people can become on this definition...

...Those who wanted her dead carried the day.

Surely you meant to say "Those who believed she was already dead".

quote:
Why in the world are so many of us insistent upon gaining or hanging on to "freedoms" which damage ourselves, our planet or its occupants?

"Freedom to do harm" is hardly the same as its cousin "Freedom from harm", and yet the direction being taken for the past 40 years seems much more replete with the former and alarmingly lacking in the latter

Much hinges on the definition of "harm".

While I suspect I'd agree with the video makers on the more obvious forms of "harm" (death, injury, drug addiction, etc), we'd most likely disagree on their long list of "moral harm", which to my ears would sound like whining that not everyone adheres to their particular brand of Christianity.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
ASM65816
SuperBlabberMouth!
Member # 712

Member Rated:
2
Icon 5 posted April 22, 2007 02:37      Profile for ASM65816   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
April 21, 2007 17:57 ††† †† †† †† † † †† ††
Where I have a problem is the central argument of the piece.....

I couldn't "stomach" more than the first seconds of the video when it got to "God, why did you let _____."

Unlike school shootings, squirrels at Mt. St. Helens were not shooting other squirrels. The deer didn't go around killing other deer. The 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens (apparently an act of god) violently exterminated thousands upon thousands of lives, human and non-human, and reduced hundreds of square miles to wasteland.

Basically, god hates trees, and squirrels, and fish, and bears, and mountains, and on and on and on.... if one assumes that god destroys/kills only because "he" hates things. (just venting)
 

quote:
... Compassion ...
How far should compassion extend?
    To one's blood kin? To one's city? To one's nation? Beyond?

On occasions, does "compassion" require that one violate (or interfere with) the free-will of another human being?

--------------------
Once a proud programmer of Apple II's, he now spends his days and nights in cheap dives fraternizing with exotic dancers....

Posts: 1035 | From: Third rock from sun. | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 10:04      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Famous Druid:
quote:
Originally posted by garlicguy:


...Those who wanted her dead carried the day.

Surely you meant to say "Those who believed she was already dead".

I'm sorry, but the reason for not letting this go is that there really are "two sides to every story' in most instances. If you have an interest in seeing a side of this story that will not be carried in mainstream news media outlets, then read the article linked below. But first, these caveats:
1)The author is an attorney, part of the Terri Shiavo team attempting to preserve her life;
2)Nevertheless, it is an eyewitness account from one trained in the law and whom would lose much if found to be fabricating such a story;
3)The visit took place before the judicial order to withhold life support was issued;
4)The article appears on a website maintained by a Catholic Christian Pro-life organization.

So here it is, if you care and dare to read it:

Would YOU define Terri as brain dead after this visit?

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 11:52      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Garlicguy wrote:
Would YOU define Terri as brain dead after this visit?

From the article
Terri was not in bed, but was in her chair, which has a lounge chair appearance and elevates her head at about a 30-degree angle. She was dressed and washed, her hair combed, and she was covered with a holiday blanket.

...

I was amazed that someone who had not been outside for so many years and who received such minimal health care could look so beautiful.


Minimal health care? Terri didn't do any of the things mentioned herself. Her caregivers moved her from the bed to the chair, dressed and washed her, combed her hair and covered her with that blanket. That's actually quite good compared to the care that most invalids receive. The lawyer who wrote this has no clue what constitutes good care and minimal care.

There were no tubes of any kind attached to her body. She was completely free of any restraints that would have indicated any type of artificial life support. Not even her feeding tube was attached and functioning when we entered, as she is not fed 24 hours a day.

Once again, the lawyer proves herself to be incompetent. It's not uncommon for someone in a persistent vegetative state to be able to persist on their own without artificial life support. If lack of awareness (the definition of persistent vegetative state) , we'd all have to be on life support every time we went to sleep.

So... the lawyer paid by the parents, so there's a severe conflict of interest there, and she shows with her own words that has no experience with medical cases of this sort. In light of those two things, I think the lawyer is a very biased and cannot be considered a credible witness.

Beyond that, there was nothing really wrong with Terri's body. If there was any conscious thought there, she could done at least as much as any other baby that had gotten to the stage of vocalizing pseudo-words (4-6 months) can do... Rolling over, sitting and crawling and grasping objects within reach. She was doing none of that and had not been doing it for 15 years.

Upon autopsy, it was found that her brain had lost half its mass due to the death of brain cells. Damage was widespread to all areas of the brain and there was no chance that she would have ever improved.

So... no, I don't think Terri Schiavo was brain dead (which would include the cessation of autonomic functions such as breathing and heartbeat), but I do believe she was in an irreversible persistent vegetative state.

Incidentally, I have a living will that says to let me die in such circumstances.

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
CommanderShroom
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2097

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 12:20      Profile for CommanderShroom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hrmm.

Sorry gg, I made it through the school list and turned it off.

Why do terrible things happen to people? It is because people are terrible creatures. Even in love we do terrible things to one another. Trust me I know this shit. As the number one tenet in Buddhism says. Life is suffering.

I have no God in my life and I am half-Korean. So what are my chances of walking into a building and killing everyone I can, before I ventilate myself. None.

God does not make the man, man makes the God. And sadly enough, religion doesn't make for a spiritual or loving person. Religion is a means to an end. An end some people never wish to reach.

To palm a tragedy as a case for finding "God" is sick, reprehensible, disgusting and if I knew who it was I would take my newly found jockey-shift handle upside their head. Because anyone hat wishes to cash in on tragedy is not worth the meat that would get fed to the pigs.

--------------------
Does he know our big secret?
Has one of us confessed?
'Bout the wires circuits and motors
Buried in our chest

Posts: 2465 | From: Utarrrrggggghhh!!!!!!!! | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 13:31      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steen:

So... no, I don't think Terri Schiavo was brain dead (which would include the cessation of autonomic functions such as breathing and heartbeat), but I do believe she was in an irreversible persistent vegetative state.


Okay. Do you happen to know when that term "irreversible persistent vegetative state" became the equivalent of "already dead"? I admit that I don't, and that I am troubled by the number of folks I could name personally who supported the judge's decision in the Shiavo case who would also argue against putting down an animal in similar condition. More particularly, the parents were willing to take on her care, but her guardian (husband) was not, and would not agree to transfer the responsibility back to them. (There is much more on this aspect of the case, but I'll refrain from dredging that up here.)

Steen, I'm sorry if this heats you up unnecessarily, but your comments about the attorney's competence and bias surprise me. She admitted being surprised by the visit because she expected Terri's condition to be much more 'vegetative' (I guess that's what you'd call the attorney's description of her own expectations.) Add to that, I gave a caveat mentioning the potential bias, so I don't know why you needed to restate it. But if you believe there is no bias in the national media on this (or other similar topics) please, let us in. This was posted for the "other view". [Big Grin]

Incidentally, I have a living will that says to let me die in such circumstances.

As is and should be your right. I don't believe Terri had such an instrument in place and my point here is that her wishes and those of her immediate family were trumped by those of the husband. This in a nation with a divorce rate of over 50%. *Yikes*

I'm really not intending that many here will agree with that I'm pointing out, nor that they'll change their position on such matters. I really did and do hope some may give it a bit more thought. But it is among the many emotionally charged issues facing those "living" in the world today.

My real question would be more to the idea that, if Terri's wishes and those of her parents could be so easily marginalized and set aside, how far is it before the aged and/or less profoundly invalid people on the planet will be treated similarly?

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
nerdwithnofriends
Uber Geek
Member # 3773

Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 13:35      Profile for nerdwithnofriends     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by garlicguy:

My real question would be more to the idea that, if Terri's wishes and those of her parents could be so easily marginalized and set aside, how far is it before the aged and/or less profoundly invalid people on the planet will be treated similarly?

Am I the only person who thought of soylent green when I saw this?

"Yeah, Bob's getting old. Looks like we've found our thanksgiving meal!!!"

--------------------
"The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain or in the petals of a flower." - Robert M. Pirsig

Posts: 948 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 14:22      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by garlicguy:
I'm sorry, but the reason for not letting this go is that there really are "two sides to every story' in most instances.

The other side of that particular story is that the 'responses' the lawyer describes to the family visit, smiles, 'lemon faces' and various vocalizations continued unabated when the family left. Expert medical testimony in the several court cases was that they were entirely random.

quote:
My real question would be more to the idea that, if Terri's wishes and those of her parents could be so easily marginalized and set aside, how far is it before the aged and/or less profoundly invalid people on the planet will be treated similarly?
You're drawing a long bow there GG.
We're not even willing to grant death to those responsible lucid adults who request it, so it'll be a long while before you see convoys of ambulances running from the old folks home to the Soylent Green factory.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 14:45      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You see... it's true, there ARE two sides to the story. There are even more than two sides in highly politicized cases. How does one judge the accuracy/integrity of the news we recieve? By political affinity or personal opinion only?

Suddenly we're right back where we began (disagreement, which should be fine) but with no clear source for resolving the difference. So should we all just agree to disagree at the beginning, since we'll base our final conclusions on the news sources that agree with our opinions and disregard the rest?

As for the medico's testifying to the randomness of Terri's actions, there were others who had been dismissed from caring for her who would have gladly testified just the opposite, had they been allowed... and it is this insidious fact that is most disturbing of all.

The whole thing reminds me of Frank Herbert's Dune were the Mentats had plans, within plans, within plans.

As for the long bow, Druid - you may be right about it being a long while until that day, but I don't think that necessarily is so. In fact, if you're under the age of 50, look at the math of how short a time it's been from, say Roe v. Wade, to the Kevorkian controversy (assisted suicide) to the Schiavo verdict.

In this age when human longevity beyond 100 years is becoming more and more common, while access to reasonably priced health care is becoming increasingly scarce for the financially 'average' (and below average), it might be wise check our bank accounts to see how long we'll be able to 'manage' being of sufficient value.

FWIW, YMMV, etc. [Razz]

gg

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 15:46      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
garlicguy wrote:
I gave a caveat mentioning the potential bias, so I don't know why you needed to restate it.

You did point out that the author was the parents lawyers, but made no reference to how her observations were those of someone who had knowledge on which to base her opinions on what she was seeing. I answered as I did to illustrate that fact.

I don't believe Terri had such an instrument [a living will] in place and my point here is that her wishes and those of her immediate family were trumped by those of the husband. This in a nation with a divorce rate of over 50%. *Yikes*

I would point out that she had been married to her husband for 15 years at the point when she collapsed and it was 8 more years before he petitioned to have the feeding tube removed. I don't think the divorce rate statistic for the nation is at all relevant.

My real question would be more to the idea that, if Terri's wishes and those of her parents could be so easily marginalized and set aside, how far is it before the aged and/or less profoundly invalid people on the planet will be treated similarly?

First, the issue was fought over for seven years. I wouldn't call that "easily marginalized."

Second, it's a long distance between removing life support such as a feeding tube to allow someone to die and actively killing someone who would otherwise live. Actively killing someone is murder or manslaughter and is prosecuted. I don't believe that is ever going to change.

In this country, removing someone from life support and allowing them to die is not considered actively killing them. This is necessary. If it were otherwise, we'd have tens of thousands of bodies being kept alive by blood pumps, respirators and so forth because nobody at a hospital would risk being charged with murder. If you think there are too many people who can't afford the price medical care now, just imagine what the prices would look like if they had to subsidize that.

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 16:18      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okay.

I'm 56.

I already like Tuesdays.

 -

Doesn't everyone? [Big Grin]

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Just_Jess_B

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 2161

Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 16:32      Profile for Just_Jess_B   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Voooom. overthehead.

I'm totally confused.

--------------------
Opinion is not Truth; that is why each has its own definition. Illiteracy sucks.

Posts: 1370 | From: Whaddya mean, Arizona? | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lady_Christy
Geek
Member # 7103

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted April 25, 2007 16:37      Profile for Lady_Christy     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh, Soylent Green...you amuse me so [Razz]

--------------------
"There are 10 kinds of people, those who understand binary and those who don't." :)

Posts: 207 | From: The Northwoods | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0


homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam