| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
JOJOsc2news
3000 Posts
On January 28 2013 00:53 nihlon wrote: [/B][PenaltyB]On January 26 2013 00:42 JOJOsc2news wrote: The right to live is the most fundamental human right. How do you justify the death penalty then?[/QUOTE] It is unjustifiable in my opinion. What makes you think I would justify the death penalty? | ||
|
StayPhrosty
Canada406 Posts
| ||
|
JOJOsc2news
3000 Posts
On January 28 2013 00:58 StayPhrosty wrote: i think the OP really should have a poll asking if we have the right to death, not the right to life. really it comes down to the elderly population's ability to decide for themself if they want to continue living, not the rest of us. Euthanasia would be a whole different discussion that warrants an entire thread for itself. For this discussion, the poll is alright even though it is not very useful in the end because it isn't exactly clear what each option entails as you can see by Barrin's comment just a few above yours. | ||
|
Hey Sean.
United Kingdom196 Posts
| ||
|
Dagan159
United States203 Posts
| ||
|
Sadist
United States7218 Posts
On January 28 2013 01:44 Dagan159 wrote: If people want these life prolonging treatments, they should be paying out of pocket. Medicare should be a flat rate, if you messed up and took shitty care of your body, then society shouldnt be liable. I hope you never have health issues in your life. If everyone in our society behaved like you the world would be a really shitty place. | ||
|
Nightfall.589
Canada766 Posts
On January 28 2013 01:44 Dagan159 wrote: If people want these life prolonging treatments, they should be paying out of pocket. Medicare should be a flat rate, if you messed up and took shitty care of your body, then society shouldnt be liable. I didn't realize we lived in a fair universe where all diseases only happen to people that did bad things. Or the obese. | ||
|
HHNitro
Great Britain7 Posts
... WHAT?!?!?! | ||
|
Blargh
United States2101 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Dagan159
United States203 Posts
On January 28 2013 02:15 Nightfall.589 wrote: I didn't realize we lived in a fair universe where all diseases only happen to people that did bad things. Or the obese. If the obesity is self inflicted (ie not diesese related) then that person is ASKING to have health issues. It is not hard to take care of yourself. Most sane people put away money in case they get sick or buy insurance. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7218 Posts
On January 28 2013 02:45 Dagan159 wrote: If the obesity is self inflicted (ie not diesese related) then that person is ASKING to have health issues. It is not hard to take care of yourself. Most sane people put away money in case they get sick or buy insurance. If you have a chronic condition its not really insurance now is it? Do you know how expensive insurance is for someone who is 70 years old? or who has a history of health problems (cancer, etc) ? lol | ||
|
ChiknAdobo
United States208 Posts
This is also the train of thought or reasoning that can lead to atrocities like the holocaust. Hitler not only killed Jews but also eliminated many of the undesirables of his time. Of course this is an extreme but we cannot forget what people are capable when given a lot of power. My personal opinion is that we as a society should work harder at taking care of our own elders. Just as they took care of us when we were younger and needed there help, when there time of need has come we should step up and return the favor. Another question to ask is why does our government need to take on the responsibility of caring for our elders? Society often sees old people as a useless burden, but 60+ years of life experience might teach us something more valuable than how to be a good producer and consumer. This is speaking to the state of the elderly in the U.S. | ||
|
Dagan159
United States203 Posts
On January 28 2013 03:13 ChiknAdobo wrote: I understand the side of the argument that elderly people can become a burden on society. The thing that scares me is when our society begins to decide what groups of people should live or not. When society determines a persons worth based on consumption and production I think that the value of human life is largely minimized. Already the elderly are extremely marginalized and forgotten, our nursing homes are a testament to that. This is also the train of thought or reasoning that can lead to atrocities like the holocaust. Hitler not only killed Jews but also eliminated many of the undesirables of his time. Of course this is an extreme but we cannot forget what people are capable when given a lot of power. My personal opinion is that we as a society should work harder at taking care of our own elders. Just as they took care of us when we were younger and needed there help, when there time of need has come we should step up and return the favor. Another question to ask is why does our government need to take on the responsibility of caring for our elders? Society often sees old people as a useless burden, but 60+ years of life experience might teach us something more valuable than how to be a good producer and consumer. This is speaking to the state of the elderly in the U.S. The government isnt decideding if people should die, its just not gonna give them free money to live. Allowing government to give this free money is in effect growing the power of government so your hitler analagy is pretty silly. I would rather an individual save the money for retirement themselves rather than everybody dumping money in a pool for the government to dish out. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7218 Posts
On January 28 2013 03:25 Dagan159 wrote: The government isnt decideding if people should die, its just not gonna give them free money to live. Allowing government to give this free money is in effect growing the power of government so your hitler analagy is pretty silly. I would rather an individual save the money for retirement themselves rather than everybody dumping money in a pool for the government to dish out. This is clearly the same thing lol. And it isnt free money. People paid into this over the course of the lifetimes (depending on their job etc) | ||
|
farvacola
United States18824 Posts
On January 28 2013 03:25 Dagan159 wrote: The government isnt decideding if people should die, its just not gonna give them free money to live. Allowing government to give this free money is in effect growing the power of government so your hitler analagy is pretty silly. I would rather an individual save the money for retirement themselves rather than everybody dumping money in a pool for the government to dish out. Except it isn't free money, and most elderly and middle aged Americans about ready to enter the most costly age in medical terms have been paying into the social safety net all along, meaning you want to effectively rob them of their lifetime contributions because of some vague fear of the government. To be frank, no one cares that you "would rather an individual save the money for retirement themselves", the reality we live in makes such a declaration rather childish and narrow. Sure, personal responsibility is a worthwhile notion, but it isn't altogether that relevant when discussing how we change the social safety net without totally fucking over an entire portion of the population that has been contributing to our society in good faith. | ||
|
kidcrash
United States620 Posts
| ||
|
Dagan159
United States203 Posts
On January 28 2013 03:29 Sadist wrote: This is clearly the same thing lol. And it isnt free money. People paid into this over the course of the lifetimes (depending on their job etc) No it is not the same thing. If a person was productive their entire life and has large reserves of money then the government has absolutely no right to say that person should not be able to spend that money to extend their life. Yes people pay into it, but if you follow the issue at all then you know that the program operates under a defeceit. The money coming out isnt covered by the money going in. So some people are getting more out of it then they put in. Hence free money. | ||
|
MountainDewJunkie
United States10341 Posts
| ||
|
decado90
United States480 Posts
You aren't alive because you're special-- you're a live because two people had sex. Your existence is just another meaningless part of the inexorable universe. Of course people shouldn't have the right to life. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18824 Posts
On January 28 2013 03:48 decado90 wrote: Their is no such thing as a right. You are entitled nothing. You aren't alive because you're special-- you're a live because two people had sex. Your existence is just another meaningless part of the inexorable universe. Of course people shouldn't have the right to life. Two people having sex can be very special. Just ask the last girl I took to wine night. | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV European League
Scarlett vs Percival
Jumy vs ArT
YoungYakov vs Shameless
uThermal vs Fjant
Nicoract vs goblin
Harstem vs Gerald
FEL
Big Brain Bouts
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
FEL
RSL Revival
FEL
BSL: ProLeague
Dewalt vs Bonyth
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
