We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
In the materialist world of today, the utopians always fall on the side of trying to perfect life on earth. That means anything that can be done should be done. Eugenics, after all, was about “fixing” the mistakes of nature by eliminating from the breeding stock those people deemed unfit. This lack of a limiting principle means anything goes. The only check is the long hangover from the Christian era.
That’s what makes the very idea of bioethics laughable to me. From what authority do these people derive their authority? They can’t point to science as their authority for obvious reasons. God is dead so he has nothing to say on these matters. Ultimately, bioethics is just the opinion of men and the loudest voices will prevail.
If a bioethicist incites infanticide, is it reasonable to kill him? How imminent does the proposed infanticide have to be before the common law principle of self- and other defence kicks in? If a third party kills the infant under the influence of the bioethicist, is the bioethicist guiltly of premeditated murder?
Singer is German. He teaches in America because in Germany he is regarded to be an archae-Nazi of the "Life Unworthy of Life" ilk, and he could not get an academic job in Germany.
It can be argued that Singer is a mentally defective, the morals portion of his brain is missing, and so he himself might fall under his own strictures.
I assume you are referring to Peter Singer. He was born and raised in Australia. Educated there and in England. I've never heard the bit about being German or being rejected by the academic institutions there.
Some countries kill them when they are simply unwanted.
Why stop at infants?
Some countries allow and medicals actually assist in suicide due to disability. Recently there were a blind set of twin brothers who offed themselves. So it's a choice, but this is the slippery slope that devalues the gift of life. When does choice turn into
suggestion, then coercion?
Who defines "disabled" and "burden" on society ?
What about people who become disabled later in life?
I know a guy injured in a truck accident, paralyzed for the past 40 yrs, defied all the odds and though he had to recently have his legs removed, still does the book-keeping/taxes and regulatory paperwork for a few other truckers.
It amazes me the efforts that some will go through to aid a sick animal for it's quality of life - but humans are regarded as worthless pieces of garbage.
I'm all for giving people who want to end their lives the option, especially if they're suffering from chronic and incurable conditions like terminal cancer.
Better to let them die gracefully and in peace, without months of constant excruciating pain and suffering inflicted upon them by medical "professionals" for the further glory (and paychecks) of those "professionals".
Where I draw the line is applying force or coercion to get people to kill themselves (or to outright kill them without their consent).
Which is exactly what they tried to do to my mother when she was diagnosed with terminal cancer. She was scheduled for a consult with an "end of life councilor" without her consent, a title that hints at being a mental health worker specialising in preparing people mentally for their death but in fact is a doctor specialising in administering lethal cocktails of drugs in order to kill patients who've become unprofitable for the hospital to keep under treatment... Something we found out when doing a google search of the person's name which was unknown to us, after which we canceled the appointment.
Unfortunately, your experience will become much more common. Offing a patient - especially when you can do it under the guise of "dying with dignity" - is so much more cost-efficient that actually walking with a patient to the end.
I am so glad that we were able to walk with my aunt and my mother to their ends. There was a cost - which is still being paid - but there are no regrets that we were able to accompany these two women to their journey's end.
Dr. B no doubt means that God does not exist for those who enact policy and make laws and regulations, for those in power.
For them the only thing that matters is that power, the power to control people, which ultimately comes down to having power over life and death of their subjects. And thus the power to decide that people should die who're no longer profitable for the government to keep alive...
One of our offsprings was born prematurely and with complications. After the initial problems, all seemed well until wee were advised a late scan showed a "bleed" - Dr Singer's "brain hemorrhages". We were devastated. But the nurses at the local NICU were extremely encouraging: they pointed out that said offspring was very alert and sufficiently strong to flip head to watch what was going on when had been carefully positioned to watch the wall and sleep. Our prayers, we were advised, should rather be for the little guy in the next bassinet, who was really non-responsive.
Fast forward: said offspring is a university graduate, has the equivalent of the CPA. True, there are some issues arising. However, here is a kid who is contributing and will contribute to society. And, remember, we were given a "late" scan. Who can tell what the prognosis would have been had the machine been working a week earlier?