Alfie Evans...what happens when the left dehumanizes children

[Cecilie1200]

There is a lot of hard choices in life and the hardest one is when you have to leave a child because of death.
Some never want to give up, while others don't want to see suffering continue.

And you think the fact that it's "the hardest choice" means that it should be made by the government, rather than by the child's parents?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Isn't it dehumanizing to use a terminally ill child to score political points?

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

Child Euthanasia (German: Kinder-Euthanasie) was the name given to the organised murder of severely mentally and physically handicapped children and young people up to 16 years old during the Nazi era in over 30 so-called special children's wards. At least 5,000 children were victims of this programme, which was a precursor to the subsequent murder of children in the concentration camps.

It's already done through insurance dumping of patients, so don't even go there since it can happen in a capitalistic society also.

Let me see if I have this straight.

A socialist government tells a child's parents, "You are not allowed to get your child treatment or palliative care, even if you pay for it yourself", and that's "God's will".

A capitalist government tells people, "You can get any care you want, but you have to pay for it yourselves", and that's "euthanasia", and apparently "eeeevil".

Am I understanding your position correctly?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Isn't it dehumanizing to use a terminally ill child to score political points?

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

Child Euthanasia (German: Kinder-Euthanasie) was the name given to the organised murder of severely mentally and physically handicapped children and young people up to 16 years old during the Nazi era in over 30 so-called special children's wards. At least 5,000 children were victims of this programme, which was a precursor to the subsequent murder of children in the concentration camps.

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

But I notice that you have no rebuttal other than "you said Nazi, so you're wrong".

 

[Cecilie1200]

Isn't it dehumanizing to use a terminally ill child to score political points?

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

Child Euthanasia (German: Kinder-Euthanasie) was the name given to the organised murder of severely mentally and physically handicapped children and young people up to 16 years old during the Nazi era in over 30 so-called special children's wards. At least 5,000 children were victims of this programme, which was a precursor to the subsequent murder of children in the concentration camps.

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

Really, what's the difference between the UK court rulings and the Nazi policies? Both deemed the child a financial liability and unproductive member of society and euthanized them.

HUGE differences. Do you really need me to go into it? If so, I will.

Uh, was there something about being ASKED what the differences were that left you confused about whether or not you were being asked?

 

[Coyote]

Isn't it dehumanizing to use a terminally ill child to score political points?

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

Child Euthanasia (German: Kinder-Euthanasie) was the name given to the organised murder of severely mentally and physically handicapped children and young people up to 16 years old during the Nazi era in over 30 so-called special children's wards. At least 5,000 children were victims of this programme, which was a precursor to the subsequent murder of children in the concentration camps.

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

Really, what's the difference between the UK court rulings and the Nazi policies? Both deemed the child a financial liability and unproductive member of society and euthanized them.

HUGE differences. Do you really need me to go into it? If so, I will.

Uh, was there something about being ASKED what the differences were that left you confused about whether or not you were being asked?

Are you yet another ignorant person who isn’t familiar with Nazi atrocities? I suggest you talk to one of the remaining survivors and ask them if this situation is comparable.

 

[Coyote]

Isn't it dehumanizing to use a terminally ill child to score political points?

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

Child Euthanasia (German: Kinder-Euthanasie) was the name given to the organised murder of severely mentally and physically handicapped children and young people up to 16 years old during the Nazi era in over 30 so-called special children's wards. At least 5,000 children were victims of this programme, which was a precursor to the subsequent murder of children in the concentration camps.

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

But I notice that you have no rebuttal other than "you said Nazi, so you're wrong".

There is no further rebuttal needed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

Really, what's the difference between the UK court rulings and the Nazi policies? Both deemed the child a financial liability and unproductive member of society and euthanized them.

HUGE differences. Do you really need me to go into it? If so, I will.

Please do.

The Nazi's slaughtered some 2/3 of Europe's Jewish population.

Jews and many others were herded into concentration camps where they were effectively put to death in gas chambers, starved, or forced into inhumane "medical" experiments.

They were all deemed subhuman.

That's the short of it.

Alfie Evans, the child you are using to score political points has been gravely ill for most of his young life. Doctors, specialists and his parents have been unable to halt the progressive brain damage. MRI's a year earlier revealed 70% of his brain destroyed. More recent MRI's revealed further destruction. He was kept alive on life support and his doctors - medical specialists noted no brain activity between seizures.

His parents, understandably, do not want to accept that there is nothing that can be done for their child. British law states that in a conflict like this the courts provide an advocate that looks out for the child's best interests (and no they don't always side with the medical profession). They determined that it was time to cut off life support. Agree or disagree - brain damage of this type - which despite the best efforts of the medical profession - does not regenerate. This is hardly similar to the Nazi's and by making that claim you are slapping the real victims in the face.

Ahhh, so the Nazis weren't evil until they had ramped up to killing lots of people? What's the target number of victims at which it becomes evil? Just for future reference.

As for your pseudo-compassionate blather about "child's best interests", you lost the argument at the point where the government has the right to overrule the parents and decide the child should die immediately. Anything else is so much horseshit being piled on to hide the truth.

Tell me something. Do YOU have a living will or power of attorney that specifies who you want making your medical decisions if you cannot? Or do you just assume that whenever the state decides you're a nuisance - oh, excuse me, decides it's in your best interests to die, already - is good enough for you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

Really, what's the difference between the UK court rulings and the Nazi policies? Both deemed the child a financial liability and unproductive member of society and euthanized them.

HUGE differences. Do you really need me to go into it? If so, I will.

Uh, was there something about being ASKED what the differences were that left you confused about whether or not you were being asked?

Are you yet another ignorant person who isn’t familiar with Nazi atrocities? I suggest you talk to one of the remaining survivors and ask them if this situation is comparable.

I'm very familiar with Nazi atrocities. That would be why I don't have to respond with "You said Nazi, so you're stupid", and then a pocketful of evasions.

You said if we "really need you to go into it", you will. And yet all I'm seeing is insults and dodges.

Get the fuck ON with it, already. Your next evasion is an admission that you have nothing and surrender.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Isn't it dehumanizing to use a terminally ill child to score political points?

This is coming to America if the left gets they're way. No. It's dehumanizing to promote the concept of "post-birth abortions" and "euthanisia" and "national health care" as all separate issues, just so when they get their way on all three issues you seem they actually all part of the same goal: Eugenics.

Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

Child Euthanasia (German: Kinder-Euthanasie) was the name given to the organised murder of severely mentally and physically handicapped children and young people up to 16 years old during the Nazi era in over 30 so-called special children's wards. At least 5,000 children were victims of this programme, which was a precursor to the subsequent murder of children in the concentration camps.

To use Nazi Germany as a comparison is the height of ignorance.

But I notice that you have no rebuttal other than "you said Nazi, so you're wrong".

There is no further rebuttal needed.

And yet you went right on to say, "Do you really need me to go into it? I will". So do so, already, and stop with this pseudo-lofty crap.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

I "unwatched" this thread and I'm still getting alerts to see the posts in this dead space of the forums. How do I prevent getting alerts to come here?

 

[JoeB131]

Let me see if I have this straight.

A socialist government tells a child's parents, "You are not allowed to get your child treatment or palliative care, even if you pay for it yourself", and that's "God's will".

A capitalist government tells people, "You can get any care you want, but you have to pay for it yourselves", and that's "euthanasia", and apparently "eeeevil".

Am I understanding your position correctly?

Um, yeah, letting children die of treatable diseases because they are poor is EVIL.

Letting doomed children die because continuing treatment won't change the outcome isn't.

Oh, and there is no "God" to have a "will".

 

[dblack]

Um, yeah, letting children die of treatable diseases because they are poor is EVIL.

So, tell me, just as a guess, how many children did you let die today? How much could you have done to save them? Why didn't you? Are you EVIL?

 

[JoeB131]

So, tell me, just as a guess, how many children did you let die today? How much could you have done to save them? Why didn't you? Are you EVIL?

I didn't.

Our awful system does, all the time. OR at least it did, pre-ACA.

 

[Penelope]

Btw, before you lbibes that laugh at jokes about aborted babies attempt to hijack th thread, let it be known that Pope Francis granted the child Italian citizenship so the child could be treated outside the UK in retaliation to the UK court rulings that Alfie was their ward and property (no longer belonged to the parents) and was too expensive to maintain for the lack of economic return that Alfie would provide (zero).

In other words, the UK's big left government simply weighs the life of a citizen as a financial asset or liability, and determined that Alfie was a liability of severe negative value with conceivable chance of being productive in the future.

But hey, as liberal comedian Michelle Wolf would jest: If you hillbillies are too stupid to post-abort your child then we'll do it for you!

Pope, others mourn death of British toddler Alfie Evans
Alfie Evans, British toddler at center of legal battle, has died
Alfie Evans’ chaplain recalled from Alder Hey
Terminally-ill British boy becomes rallying point for US conservatives

Erick Erickson, a leading conservative activist and commentator, tweeted: “The British press is not a free press or a moral press. If it were, it’d be making a really big deal about the UK killing Alfie Evans.”

In the United Kingdom, police issued warnings after staffers at the hospital where Evans is being treated have received “unprecedented personal abuse” according its chair, Sir David Henshaw.

Other American conservatives struck even more ardent notes. The former Republican congressman and radio host Joe Walsh tweeted: “Why does an American need an AR-15?’ To make sure what’s happening to #AlfieEvans never happens here. That’s why.”

You know why the UK posted ARMED police around Alfie, because they knew their citizenry was disarmed and would not be able to break through phalanx of armed officers.

Joe Walsh is correct. In any conservative part of the US (most of the US geographically) the hospital would have been stormed by armed citizens and the child would have been transported to the safety of the Vatican for health care.


How long before they apply this ruling all citizens and not just post-birth abortion age classified children?

Oh no the police and elite are scared!
Alfie Evans: police issue warning over online abuse of medical staff

We should of taken Baby Alfie here to the US, sent a jet over with a vent and nurses and doctors.

 

[dblack]

So, tell me, just as a guess, how many children did you let die today? How much could you have done to save them? Why didn't you? Are you EVIL?

I didn't.

Our awful system does, all the time. OR at least it did, pre-ACA.

Well, no - the claim of demagogues supporting government health care is that anyone who disagrees with them is in favor of "letting people die". So what's the criteria for such a ridiculous claim?

 

[Penelope]

Eugenics in the United States - Wikipedia

Tell me again of how we are a Christian nation, Britain was also a Christian nation and also Germany, all mainly Protestants.