Religions > Atheism > should govt force nursing homes to give H2O & food to residents?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
03 Apr 2007 08:25:34 PM |
| Object: |
should govt force nursing homes to give H2O & food to residents? |
On Apr 3, 3:06 pm, "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@rcn.com> wrote in Re:
Legislative Privilege--The Right to Impeach, Let's Start With
Gonzales:
<dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message news:1175609794.032367.273030@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
What would you have liked to occur in the Terri Schindler Schiavo
matter?
That the Federal government stayed out of it.
Suppose an elderly man in a nursing home suffers a stroke, rendering
him unable to place food and water into his mouth.
Suppose the nursing home staff decline to give him a feeding tube
supplying water and food.
He dies 13 days later from dehydration.
Would you applaud the decision to not supply food and water to the
nursing home resident?
Would you condemn the decision to not supply food and water?
Would you want the federal government to tell the nursing home that it
had to give food and water to its residents?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
atheism-adherent Crick treatment suggestion could be solution to
Social Security funding problem
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1142519644.526802.121080%40u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com
Terri Schindler Schiavo story with villains, victims, and heroes
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1115741978.820440.50060%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
not-PVS
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1115683914.394927.244340%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Reality vs. worldview philosophy of materialism/ atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3813ksF5ggkc3U1%40individual.net
.
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: should govt force nursing homes to give H2O & food to residents? |
03 Apr 2007 09:13:40 PM |
|
|
In our last episode, <1175649934.754349.254570@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented broadcast on alt.atheism:
On Apr 3, 3:06 pm, "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@rcn.com> wrote in Re:
Legislative Privilege--The Right to Impeach, Let's Start With
Gonzales:
<dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message news:1175609794.032367.273030@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
What would you have liked to occur in the Terri Schindler Schiavo
matter?
That the Federal government stayed out of it.
Suppose an elderly man in a nursing home suffers a stroke, rendering
him unable to place food and water into his mouth.
Suppose the nursing home staff decline to give him a feeding tube
supplying water and food.
He dies 13 days later from dehydration.
So this is completely different from the Schiavo case which had been
tried in state courts dozens of times over the course of ten years, each and
everytime with the same conclusion on the medical facts and on the law being
reached.
Would you applaud the decision to not supply food and water to the
nursing home resident?
Of course not if this was their own decision made without any review.
But then, once again, this is completely different from the Shiavo case.
Would you condemn the decision to not supply food and water?
I would condemn the lack of process. The process could have revealed the
facts of the case and the law. In other words, it should have been handled
like the Schiavo case.
Would you want the federal government to tell the nursing home that it
had to give food and water to its residents?
Of course not. The role of the federal government (unless they are billed
for services not provided) is to ensure the right to due process. This is a
function of the federal courts, not of Congress.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> <http://myspace.com/larseighner>
Countdown: 657 days to go.
Chinese Terrorists:: Xuzhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Company Ltd.
Identified :: Wangdian Industrial Zone, Peixian, CN-32, China 221623
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: should govt force nursing homes to give H2O & food to residents? |
04 Apr 2007 08:12:15 PM |
|
|
On Apr 3, 10:13 pm, Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
In our last episode, <1175649934.754349.254...@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented broadcast on alt.atheism:
On Apr 3, 3:06 pm, "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@rcn.com> wrote in Re:
Legislative Privilege--The Right to Impeach, Let's Start With
Gonzales:
< > wrote in messagenews:1175609794.032367.273030@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
What would you have liked to occur in the Terri Schindler Schiavo
matter?
That the Federal government stayed out of it.
Suppose an elderly man in a nursing home suffers a stroke, rendering
him unable to place food and water into his mouth.
Suppose the nursing home staff decline to give him a feeding tube
supplying water and food.
He dies 13 days later from dehydration.
So this is completely different from the Schiavo case which had been
tried in state courts dozens of times over the course of ten years, each and
everytime with the same conclusion on the medical facts and on the law being
reached.
Who exactly reached "the same conclusion on the medical facts"?
Merely Judge Greer?
Would you applaud the decision to not supply food and water to the
nursing home resident?
Of course not if this was their own decision made without any review.
But then, once again, this is completely different from the Shiavo case.
Suppose the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the nursing home
staff's decision to not supply food and water to the nursing home
resident, and said the staff's decision was OK.
Would you applaud the staff's decision to not supply food and water to
the nursing home resident?
Would you condemn the decision to not supply food and water?
I would condemn the lack of process. The process could have revealed the
facts of the case and the law. In other words, it should have been handled
like the Schiavo case.
The Nazi T-4 'euthanasia' program possessed "process."
Are you familiar with procedures of that program? If so: do you
applaud its "process"? What improvements would you suggest, if any,
to the Nazi T-4 'euthanasia' program "process"?
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////////////////////
Wesley Smith in his 1997 _Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from
Assisted Suicide to Legalized Murder_
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3abe1cF6ac7t2U1%40individual.net
In early 1939, children born with birth defects or with
congenital diseases began to be killed under the
euthanasia program. These unfortunate children were
admitted to medical clinics by their doctors, where they
would be euthanized. Most of these children were
voluntarily turned over to medical authorities by their
own parents; some (but certainly not all) knew, or at least
suspected, that their disabled children were being sent to
their deaths. New reporting rules made it mandatory for
midwives and doctors to notify authorities when a baby
was born with birth defects. Once the referees
determined that the children were eligible for euthanasia,
they were killed either by intentional starvation or an
overdose of a drug, most typically a sedative called
Luminal. The euphemism of choice for this butchery was
"treatment."
It wasn't long before the list of those eligible to be killed
expanded.
Weikart, Richard. 2004. _From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary
Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany_ (USA: Palgrave
Macmillan), 312pp. On 226, the second to last paragraph of the
chapter "Hitler's Ethic":
When the Nazis finally implemented their "euthanasia"
program by Hitler's decree in 1939 after World War II
began, they recruited many physicians with views on social
Darwinism, eugenics, and racism similar to those of Rudin,
Lenz, Fischer, Ploetz, and other eugenicists we have
already discussed. Nazi propaganda films, such as the
documentary _Hereditary Illness_ (1936) and the feature
film _I Accuse_ (1941), wooed Germans to the idea of
euthanasia in the 1930s and 1940s (American eugenicists
circulated some of these films in the United States, too, in
the 1930s). If the title of one of these films, _All Life Is
Struggle_ (1937), is not Darwinian enough, then the
commentary made it explicit. While showing a disfigured
handicapped person, the narrator in _Victim of the Past_
(1937) declared, "Everything in the natural world that is
weak for life will ineluctably be destroyed. In the last few
decades, mankind has sinned terribly against the law of
natural selection. We haven't just maintained life unworthy
of life, we have even allowed it to multiply. The
descendants of these sick people look like this!"^62 Over
70,000 people perished in the "euthanasia" program at the
hands of physicians, who were willing participants,
because they were committed to a racist eugenics ideology
that the Nazis favored.^63
62: Michael Burleigh, _Death and Deliverance_ (Cambridge,
1994), ch. 6; quote at 189.
63: Henry Friedlander, "Physicians as Killer in Nazi Germany:
Hadamar, Treblinka, and Auschwitz," and Michael H. Kater,
"Criminal Physicians in the Third Reich: Toward a Group
Portrait," in _Medicine and Medical Ethics in Nazi Germany:
Origins, Practices, Legacies_, ed. Nicosia, Francis R. and
Jonathan Huener (New York, 2002), 59-92; Henry Friedlander,
_The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final
Solution_ (Chapel Hill, NC, 1995).
For Further Reading
[Weikart]"If the title of one of these films, _All Life Is
Struggle_ (1937), is not Darwinian enough, then the
commentary made it explicit."
1940 Nazi film "All Life is Struggle" embraced Darwinian
natural selection
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407042043.1c2ccf1f%40posting.google.com
a claim: "Darwin opposed eugenics in general and in principle"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1142043310.578516.215760%40j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com
about Weikart's book
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407030531.19253d93%40posting.google.com
Hitler's debt to American eugenicists
http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/offSiteArchive/HitlerDebtToAmerica.html
1868 Haeckel, 2003 Dawkins, 1997 George Williams, 1995 Dennett:
Darwinist atheists/ materialists downgrading the value of human life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-399aluF5uql89U1%40individual.net
Would you want the federal government to tell the nursing home that it
had to give food and water to its residents?
Of course not. The role of the federal government (unless they are billed
for services not provided) is to ensure the right to due process. This is a
function of the federal courts, not of Congress.
"The role of the federal government... is to ensure the right to due
process."
Do you think pre-born human life ought be ensured of a "right to due
process"?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Mindreader Mitchell: Hitler was "anti-abortion"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1141921380.312364.144060%40i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler's actions make sense given his atheism and eugenic, social
Darwinist vision
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1134145559.645139.229550%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: should govt force nursing homes to give H2O & food to residents? |
04 Apr 2007 11:18:46 PM |
|
|
In our last episode, <1175735535.211743.6050@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented broadcast on alt.politics:
On Apr 3, 10:13 pm, Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
In our last episode, <1175649934.754349.254...@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented broadcast on alt.atheism:
On Apr 3, 3:06 pm, "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@rcn.com> wrote in Re:
Legislative Privilege--The Right to Impeach, Let's Start With
Gonzales:
< > wrote in messagenews:1175609794.032367.273030@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
What would you have liked to occur in the Terri Schindler Schiavo
matter?
That the Federal government stayed out of it.
Suppose an elderly man in a nursing home suffers a stroke, rendering
him unable to place food and water into his mouth.
Suppose the nursing home staff decline to give him a feeding tube
supplying water and food.
He dies 13 days later from dehydration.
So this is completely different from the Schiavo case which had been
tried in state courts dozens of times over the course of ten years, each and
everytime with the same conclusion on the medical facts and on the law being
reached.
Who exactly reached "the same conclusion on the medical facts"?
Merely Judge Greer?
The appelate courts of the state of Florida, the Florida Supreme Court,
and the Supreme Court of the United States. There is no legal obligation
to force feed a body.
Would you applaud the decision to not supply food and water to the
nursing home resident?
Of course not if this was their own decision made without any review.
But then, once again, this is completely different from the Shiavo case.
Suppose the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the nursing home
staff's decision to not supply food and water to the nursing home
resident, and said the staff's decision was OK.
Would you applaud the staff's decision to not supply food and water to
the nursing home resident?
Of course. If it were not correct, it would have been reversed by the
trial court, or the state appeals courts, or the state supreme court,
because it could not reach the 9th Circuit if there were still recourse in
the state courts. There may be, not doubt there are, some close cases out
there. Shiavo was not even close.
The Nazi T-4 'euthanasia' program possessed "process."
Are you familiar with procedures of that program?
Obviously better than you are. To stop force-feeding a vegetative body is
not any any way comparable to killing a person with a lethal injection.
If so: do you applaud its "process"? What improvements would you
suggest, if any, to the Nazi T-4 'euthanasia' program "process"?
The fact of the matter is, medical science has now advanced to the stage
that just about any husk of what once was a human being can be forced to
continue its vegetative functions nearly indefinitely. It is highly
questionable whether this would be desirable even if resources were
unlimited, but resources are not unlimited. When the last farmer is
retrained as a nurse to force-feed one more corpse that has some signs of
metabolism, then what?
Now there may be, and is, a reasonable discussion about where the line is,
and whether it should or could be moved a little in one direction or another
in individual cases or in general. But there is a line, and denying that it
must exist somewhere accomplishes nothing and helps no one.
So is there is line? How many millions should be spent to keep kidneys
producing urine for five minutes more when they are no longer connected to a
functioning brain?
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> <http://myspace.com/larseighner>
Countdown: 656 days to go.
Chinese Terrorists:: Xuzhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Company Ltd.
Identified :: Wangdian Industrial Zone, Peixian, CN-32, China 221623
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
