• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Political Ad

A

Anonymous

Guest
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
Red Robin said:
So essentially you are making the argument that the Constitution is not relevant in this type case. Much like the antigun lobbyist argument which is that times have changed. I disagree OT . Our laws have to have a witness rock, a basis, a survey marker that is constant . If not we'll be blown with the wind.
Thanks for the discussion.

No- The Constitution is very much alive- and by the Supreme Courts refusing to hear the case which affirmed the lower courts rulings that the husband had legal standing- they left stand the basic argument I have been giving...That this is an issue between the legal guardian (husband), doctor and God to decide....
What ? Are you confused. Go back and read your post that said we didn't have machines to keep them alive. The case to which I refered never went to the supreme court . Dylan, remember?

Well I'm a mile ahead of you :lol: I was talking the Schaivo case-- which in the Supreme Courts Schaivo decision pretty much left the same ruling...

I'm not going to argue with you- but in my opinon its a decision to be made by family, doctors and God- not government....

You still never answered whether you would want to live or a family member to live in the state either Dylan or Schaivo were in......But thats OK- because it should be a personal issue of your own....
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I'm not going to argue with you- but in my opinon its a decision to be made by family, doctors and God- not government....

..
You and X agree then. The question that comes to mind then is when is it ok to kill them?

To answer your question about living with a child that is incapacitated, all of my children have been just exactly like Dylan, they just out grew it. By your definition they were philosophically dead when they were born till they were about a month or two old. If they hadn't grew out of it , I'd play the cards I was delt. I wouldn't kill them. I would hope if you would have killed yours , you'd at least put a bullet in his little head and not starve him over 24 days!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
And I also had the decision of removing my Dad from life support after another heart attack- the doctors told me both his lungs and heart were ruined beyond repair....

But the decision was not that tough, because we had discussed it before and he had made it very clear that if he could not live a productive life that he didn't want to....And I always felt that if God had meant him to live longer he would have intervened when he was removed from the ventilator... I guess God wanted him...
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
And I also had the decision of removing my Dad from life support after another heart attack- the doctors told me both his lungs and heart were ruined beyond repair....

But the decision was not that tough, because we had discussed it before and he had made it very clear that if he could not live a productive life that he didn't want to....And I always felt that if God had meant him to live longer he would have intervened when he was removed from the ventilator... I guess God wanted him...
Sorry to hear about your Dad. I don't see any stemcell stoping that type of situation though . I much prefer the "don't put them on lifesupport" decision if I have to make one. My original line of thought was , with the so called impending benifits of ESC research, are we too quick to mercy kill? If we do it your way, how can anyone know when to kill them (if you actually believe in the benifits of Embryonic stemcells )? I don't .
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
I'm not going to argue with you- but in my opinon its a decision to be made by family, doctors and God- not government....

..
You and X agree then. The question that comes to mind then is when is it ok to kill them?

To answer your question about living with a child that is incapacitated, all of my children have been just exactly like Dylan, they just out grew it. By your definition they were philosophically dead when they were born till they were about a month or two old. If they hadn't grew out of it , I'd play the cards I was delt. I wouldn't kill them. I would hope if you would have killed yours , you'd at least put a bullet in his little head and not starve him over 24 days!
Ok I've been sitting back reading and actually enjoying this post,its been handled respectivly,I like that. I tend to follow OT's way of thinking pretty well exactly. The reason I'm popping in is your statement RR about your children being the same as Dylan only outgrew it...sorry a child does not outgrow cerebral palsy. A child for sure in the shape Dylan was in could NEVER EVER outgrow,its not possible. Our four year old nephew has cerebral palsy caused by a skull fracture at birth and didn't clot properly,luckily Ashtons problams are muscle,and no mental.Hes a very high functioning little boy that gets lots of pysio therapy,botox treatments on his legs...going to the Shriners hospital in Montreal to see what else they can do for him...but he will ALWAYS have CP.

Another child I worked with,,,Nathan was pretty well the same as Dylan,but this darling child gave the lesson of patience and unconditional love to all around him,does he know this, probably not but I most certainly would have fought ANYBODY who felt he was no use to society,he was for sure.I really have a problam with the taking lives before there time...this one I truly waver one...although if a man ready to burn to death in a vehical asked me to shoot him...I probably would :!:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
And I also had the decision of removing my Dad from life support after another heart attack- the doctors told me both his lungs and heart were ruined beyond repair....

But the decision was not that tough, because we had discussed it before and he had made it very clear that if he could not live a productive life that he didn't want to....And I always felt that if God had meant him to live longer he would have intervened when he was removed from the ventilator... I guess God wanted him...
Sorry to hear about your Dad. I don't see any stemcell stoping that type of situation though . I much prefer the "don't put them on lifesupport" decision if I have to make one. My original line of thought was , with the so called impending benifits of ESC research, are we too quick to mercy kill? If we do it your way, how can anyone know when to kill them (if you actually believe in the benifits of Embryonic stemcells )? I don't .

Well- my thoughts are that since abortions are taking place, and will continue to whether it is legal or illegal, whether they occur in the US or Mexico or Sweden-- its too bad the stemcells from these abortions couldn't be put to a good cause to see if they can be used to find cures for some of these horrific diseases.....
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
I'm not going to argue with you- but in my opinon its a decision to be made by family, doctors and God- not government....

..
You and X agree then. The question that comes to mind then is when is it ok to kill them?

To answer your question about living with a child that is incapacitated, all of my children have been just exactly like Dylan, they just out grew it. By your definition they were philosophically dead when they were born till they were about a month or two old. If they hadn't grew out of it , I'd play the cards I was delt. I wouldn't kill them. I would hope if you would have killed yours , you'd at least put a bullet in his little head and not starve him over 24 days!
Ok I've been sitting back reading and actually enjoying this post,its been handled respectivly,I like that. I tend to follow OT's way of thinking pretty well exactly. The reason I'm popping in is your statement RR about your children being the same as Dylan only outgrew it...sorry a child does not outgrow cerebral palsy. A child for sure in the shape Dylan was in could NEVER EVER outgrow,its not possible. Our four year old nephew has cerebral palsy caused by a skull fracture at birth and didn't clot properly,luckily Ashtons problams are muscle,and no mental.Hes a very high functioning little boy that gets lots of pysio therapy,botox treatments on his legs...going to the Shriners hospital in Montreal to see what else they can do for him...but he will ALWAYS have CP.

Another child I worked with,,,Nathan was pretty well the same as Dylan,but this darling child gave the lesson of patience and unconditional love to all around him,does he know this, probably not but I most certainly would have fought ANYBODY who felt he was no use to society,he was for sure.I really have a problam with the taking lives before there time...this one I truly waver one...although if a man ready to burn to death in a vehical asked me to shoot him...I probably would :!:
Mrs Greg I failed to notice your post. I don't know how I missed and I appologise. When I said my kids were like Dylan, I was refering to what old timer said was their philosophical state. They didn't have a very good quality of life. They had to be fed everything they ate, had to have their pants changed, didn't show expression, unresponsive, couldn't talk, screamed like they were in pain , ect...my point which I guess was too unobvious was that all babies are the same as Dylan . In a month or two mine began to develop normally of course. I wasn't making light of Dylan or his condition , but rather showing when you remove the definition of life as the condition of being nondead, then it is no longer objective but is subjective . Who's to say your quality of life is good enough???? Or mine. Or my friend here Wilford Brimley. :lol: The real reason they killed Dylan was that they felt his case was hopeless. If someone had told them that the chance for a cure in 3years was 95% they would have jumped for joy and kept him alive till the cure came about. Should we have the nerve to kill people because it appears there is no hope on the horizion yet we also (In my opinion) kill human embryos for the exact reverse reason, stating that they have to die so that Dylan type kids can live?? It's circular reasoning and flawed logic in my mind which if allowed opens up yet more unanswerable questions.
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
Here's my question in all the talk about embryos. Seems some want to say it's taking a life. However even in natural conception not all embroys get the chance to turn into living breathing babies. Sometimes mothers miscarry. If they are indeed living (like people) (not saying for sure what I think of it all I need to research more about embryos) why aren't funerals held for a miscarried embryo? Just a question that I wondered what you all thought about it.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
Here's my question in all the talk about embryos. Seems some want to say it's taking a life. However even in natural conception not all embroys get the chance to turn into living breathing babies. Sometimes mothers miscarry. If they are indeed living (like people) (not saying for sure what I think of it all I need to research more about embryos) why aren't funerals held for a miscarried embryo? Just a question that I wondered what you all thought about it.
I couldn't tell you why there isn't funerals for miscarried children BUT I can tell you a loss through miscarriage is no easier on the parents then a loss of a stillborn full term child.A loss is a loss :!:
 

Latest posts

Top