|
|
#22
12-28-2006, 06:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
In fact it serves an even clearer illustration of why the statement I quoted was fallacious; oxygen is toxic at high levels, so let's ban oxygen. [/ QUOTE ] Untrue. Oxygen is necessary for our life in smaller concentrations but toxic in larger ones so it isn't inherently bad. Too much oxygen is. As for these babies, even one is a burden. 500,000 is just a big enough burden that it becomes infeasible to care for them. 
|
|
#23
12-28-2006, 06:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
These babies serve no purpose. [ QUOTE ] The exact argument used by Hitler to justify his program of euthanasia. Welcome back! [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] That's an emotional argument. Since nearly everyone associates Hitler with evil they associate everything about him with evil. Not everything he came up with was a bad idea. Euthanizing those who can do nothing but detract from society would be a good thing for society as a whole. It's too arbitrary to figure out who can and can't do what though so this could never be put into action by even the most pragmatic of societies. These babies can serve no purpose except to burden those who care for them. No one is willing to take care of them privately. Nothing in this world has a right to life. In this world the weak die off, why should these babies be any different? Edit: I was wrong in my first post about the point of David's question.
|
|
#24
12-28-2006, 07:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
it seems to be ridiculously easy to disprove this point [/ QUOTE ] "..a government Of the people, For the people and BY the people.." Go ahead and disprove it. leaponthis
|
|
#25
12-28-2006, 07:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
Well, I'm a citizen. But I sure as heck didn't join some kind of big government-run commune like you just described. [/ QUOTE ] Oh, yes you did. "..a governement Of the people, For the people, and By the people..." Lincoln knew what that meant. Maybe you need to think about it and decide what your role in this "commune" really is. leaponthis.
|
|
#26
12-28-2006, 07:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
Why did you choose to defend your point with a completely unrelated quote?
You originally said that the government is here to provide for every individual. This is completely untrue and isn't worth going into if you can't see that. Just look at your quote with different emphasis, "of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, and for the PEOPLE."
|
|
#27
12-28-2006, 07:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, and for the PEOPLE." [/ QUOTE ] Your post works just fine. The government of the U.S. is the PEOPLE. If you believe that the lives of these babies are not protected under the laws of this country then you need a lesson in Civil Rights. And by protected I mean that under our laws they will be provided the life sustaining necessities until they are able to provide for themselves. Regardless of whether Sklansky or anyone else on this forum classifies them are a burden. For in fact they are not burdens they are citizens. leaponthis
|
|
#28
12-28-2006, 08:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
You have a serious misunderstanding of what Civil Rights are.
From Wikipedia on Civil Rights [ QUOTE ] Examples of civil rights and liberties include the right to get redress if injured by another, the right to privacy, the right of peaceful protest, the right to a fair investigation and trial if suspected of a crime, and more generally-based constitutional rights such as the right to vote, the right to personal freedom, the right to freedom of movement and the right of equal protection. [/ QUOTE ] Nowhere in there does it suggest that people have a right to live. [ QUOTE ] The government of the U.S. is the PEOPLE [/ QUOTE ] And if the people don't want to pay for the care of these babies then the government doesn't do it. David said in the OP ~if NO ONE will take care of them, should the government do it? If NO ONE will take care of them using private time or private money then this would suggest that the PEOPLE don't want them to be taken care of. You argue that the government is there to serve the people so it should not take care of the babies either.
|
|
#29
12-28-2006, 08:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Well, I'm a citizen. But I sure as heck didn't join some kind of big government-run commune like you just described. [/ QUOTE ] Oh, yes you did. "..a governement Of the people, For the people, and By the people..." Lincoln knew what that meant. Maybe you need to think about it and decide what your role in this "commune" really is. leaponthis. [/ QUOTE ] Let me rephrase. I didn't join voluntarily. Everyone has the right to just be left alone. Government's sole source of power is from the people. People don't have the right to force other people to provide for another's needs. Whether it's one or 100,000. Obviously, if there were only a few of these babies, private charities could and would care for them. With my support. My role/obligation in society (not commune, since I'm not a communist) is to live and let live, not to try to force others to do what I think they should.
|
|
#30
12-28-2006, 08:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Politics-Ethics Question
[ QUOTE ]
It is the baby's "right" as a citizen to be taken care of. [/ QUOTE ] Really? Where's he derive this right from?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
