United We Stand - uwsboard.com

USN_Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

cwtcr hokie wrote: Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have brain function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have knee function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

We do it with livestock, so it seems like a legitimate question since you want to treat people like livestock.

Slippery slope!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's no slipping required. They're already denying surgeries for people in the UK based on their BMI.

Good if true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We already know you're a statist.

Got it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

cwtcr hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

cwtcr hokie wrote: Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have brain function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have knee function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

We do it with livestock, so it seems like a legitimate question since you want to treat people like livestock.

huh? what? I can have them cut off my leg at the knee and function just fine, if my brain is not functioning then I cannot do anything, the article says the kid is in a partial vegetative state and current medicine cannot cure his brain issue, so is it right to keep his body alive even tho there is zero shot at a cure? If there was a cure or they could erase the damage already done then this is a whole different conversation.. do you agree?

Both of our arguments are that a person's value reaches a point where we call it a loss and "total" the person. We just disagree on what that value is.

Point is... you, me, or some bureaucrat have no business deciding the value of another human's life.

The last appeal was denied today.

Major Kong wrote:The last appeal was denied today.

Sad

Big Brother is watching...

USN_Hokie wrote:Big Brother is watching...

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:Big Brother is watching...

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:Big Brother is watching...

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:Big Brother is watching...

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:Big Brother is watching...

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:Big Brother is watching...

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote: What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

I understand the thinking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

cwtcr hokie wrote: Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have brain function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have knee function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

We do it with livestock, so it seems like a legitimate question since you want to treat people like livestock.

Slippery slope!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's no slipping required. They're already denying surgeries for people in the UK based on their BMI.

Good if true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

unless you are the one being denied

cwtcr hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

cwtcr hokie wrote: Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have brain function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

Your personal opinion, do you think it is right to keep someone alive that does not have knee function? It is possible for a long time, is it right?

We do it with livestock, so it seems like a legitimate question since you want to treat people like livestock.

Slippery slope!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's no slipping required. They're already denying surgeries for people in the UK based on their BMI.

Good if true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

unless you are the one being denied

I think USN was stating a proposal in the UK to be current fact, but we discriminate against patients all the time for good reason. For the same reason that an alcoholic shouldn’t be first on the list to get a liver transplant, a fat ass shouldn’t be first on the list to get a government subsidized hip replacement.

Life sucks sometimes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[/quote]

What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.[/quote]

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.[/quote]

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.[/quote]

but the problem IN THIS CASE is the kid already has brain damage and is in a partial veg state, there is no cure that current medicine knows about, so nobody is saving the body of the kid, there is no saving the kid. Prolonging his suffering yes as per the article the kid will not be playing in the playground next week if the parents take him to Italy. I differ with the UK folks in that if they want to prolong the time on this earth for the kid's body then I would not stop them. My question is how ethical is it to keep the body alive, the brain has already checked out and will continue to do that per the article. I am sure they could have kept Barbara Bush "alive" past the day she died also, thus why I have and recommend for everyone a living will and a do not resuscitate order. I don't want to be a veg, not sure why anybody would want to be.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

cwtcr hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote: Slippery slope!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's no slipping required. They're already denying surgeries for people in the UK based on their BMI.

Good if true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

unless you are the one being denied

I think USN was stating a proposal in the UK to be current fact, but we discriminate against patients all the time for good reason. For the same reason that an alcoholic shouldn’t be first on the list to get a liver transplant, a fat ass shouldn’t be first on the list to get a government subsidized hip replacement.

Life sucks sometimes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fact. Ironically, it includes knee surgery.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/31/health/s ... index.html

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:
What’s he watching? Reality?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

Militant atheists always like to mock religion as an obsolete remnant of the past which is only needed by idiots, yet they always seem to be the first ones to jump on the train supporting euthanasia/eugenics, or other atrocities against human life.

USN_Hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

Militant atheists always like to mock religion as an obsolete remnant of the past which is only needed by idiots, yet they always seem to be the first ones to jump on the train supporting euthanasia/eugenics, or other atrocities against human life.

They're mentally ill, self loathing to the point they want to end the species. They think mankind is the problem with Earth. And they seem to come to that conclusion because they're sad and so the Earth must be broken or they'd be happy.

USN_Hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:You're lucky no woman wants to procreate with you and so can't comprehend what happened.

I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

Militant atheists always like to mock religion as an obsolete remnant of the past which is only needed by idiots, yet they always seem to be the first ones to jump on the train supporting euthanasia/eugenics, or other atrocities against human life.

That’s some profound stuff there. Who is the militant atheist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote: I regret that you feel the need to resort to personal insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

Militant atheists always like to mock religion as an obsolete remnant of the past which is only needed by idiots, yet they always seem to be the first ones to jump on the train supporting euthanasia/eugenics, or other atrocities against human life.

That’s some profound stuff there. Who is the militant atheist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The people that are nonchalant about denying medical care to children.

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:You can take it as an insult or not, but as a parent, you have no **** idea what you're saying. That's straight up ignorance on your part, and it's rather unseemly to those that do have kids.

Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

Militant atheists always like to mock religion as an obsolete remnant of the past which is only needed by idiots, yet they always seem to be the first ones to jump on the train supporting euthanasia/eugenics, or other atrocities against human life.

That’s some profound stuff there. Who is the militant atheist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The people that are nonchalant about denying medical care to children.

So nobody involved in this thread or back story. I agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My problem with all of this is the UK Universal Healthcare System has been taken completely out of the loop.

The parents have secured the $$$ and means to take care of their son. The staff of Alder Hey Hospital have decided that they and they alone have the say over the care of Alfie Evans. His parents have absolutely no say in the issue.

The courts in the UK have decided that the hospital has the right to make those decisions not the parents. This is what I have a huge problem with. Taking the ultimate decision out of the hands of the parents.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote: Kids are going to have terminal illnesses regardless of your parental status.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's obviously not the issue, it's denying them care even when the parents will pay.

Militant atheists always like to mock religion as an obsolete remnant of the past which is only needed by idiots, yet they always seem to be the first ones to jump on the train supporting euthanasia/eugenics, or other atrocities against human life.

That’s some profound stuff there. Who is the militant atheist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The people that are nonchalant about denying medical care to children.

So nobody involved in this thread or back story. I agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you are here, though not a militant. Certainly seem indifferent about kids being denied care.

Major Kong wrote:My problem with all of this is the UK Universal Healthcare System has been taken completely out of the loop.

The parents have secured the $$$ and means to take care of their son. The staff of Alder Hey Hospital have decided that they and they alone have the say over the care of Alfie Evans. His parents have absolutely no say in the issue.

The courts in the UK have decided that the hospital has the right to make those decisions not the parents. This is what I have a huge problem with. Taking the ultimate decision out of the hands of the parents.

Ditto. I'm ok with the socialized medicine refusing to pay. But they're way out of line by denying any care from any provider.

Major Kong wrote:My problem with all of this is the UK Universal Healthcare System has been taken completely out of the loop.

The parents have secured the $$$ and means to take care of their son. The staff of Alder Hey Hospital have decided that they and they alone have the say over the care of Alfie Evans. His parents have absolutely no say in the issue.

The courts in the UK have decided that the hospital has the right to make those decisions not the parents. This is what I have a huge problem with. Taking the ultimate decision out of the hands of the parents.

This is what the left eventually wants here. Dopes like ip long for it. They say it won’t happen like that here......but those of us who know what leftism brings, know it’s going to happen if we go down that road. You give these pricks and inch, they always take the proverbial mile.