Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-18-2006, 06:08 PM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: I can hold my breath longer than the Boob
Posts: 10,311
Default Re: The bill of rights

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Add:

Ammendment X:

Whereas human life is a gift from God that is held sacred, its protection from natural conception to natural death shall not be abridged either by law or by failure of the government to protect same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow I am confused.

[/ QUOTE ]



Very simple. It means that the lives of unborn children should not be allowed to be killed by judicial fiat, nor those of sickly elderly persons whose families think they would be better off dead. Plus although I think the death penalty is appropriate in some very limited cases, I am OK with it being banned entirely as long as abortion and euthanasia are as well.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-18-2006, 11:00 PM
New001 New001 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gogogogo, Madagascar
Posts: 6,914
Default Re: The bill of rights

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Add:

Ammendment X:

Whereas human life is a gift from God that is held sacred, its protection from natural conception to natural death shall not be abridged either by law or by failure of the government to protect same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow I am confused.

[/ QUOTE ]



Very simple. It means that the lives of unborn children should not be allowed to be killed by judicial fiat, nor those of sickly elderly persons whose families think they would be better off dead. Plus although I think the death penalty is appropriate in some very limited cases, I am OK with it being banned entirely as long as abortion and euthanasia are as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
This might seem like I'm just poking at this (I'm not), but I'm curious. Do you think the government should pay to keep any child, or other person for that matter, alive until they die naturally?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-19-2006, 12:12 AM
Stu Pidasso Stu Pidasso is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Spokane
Posts: 3,109
Default Re: The bill of rights

[ QUOTE ]
This might seem like I'm just poking at this (I'm not), but I'm curious. Do you think the government should pay to keep any child, or other person for that matter, alive until they die naturally?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the family does not have the means to provide ordinary care to the child then the responsibility falls upon the state. Neither the family nor the state are required to provide extraordinary care to keep a child alive.

The question is what is considered ordinary or extraordinary care. Certainly providing food and water is ordinary care. How about providing food and water through a feeding tube. In 2005, I would consider that ordinary care, but not in 1805.

Stu
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-19-2006, 12:22 AM
aheravi aheravi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Party at the Moon Tower
Posts: 1,717
Default Re: The bill of rights

[ QUOTE ]
Add:

Ammendment X:

Whereas human life is a gift from God that is held sacred, its protection from natural conception to natural death shall not be abridged either by law or by failure of the government to protect same.


[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you just succeed in banning the death penalty?
Way to go!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.