Baby Charlie Hurd passed away today

[PoliticalChic]

Like it or not, a human life has an economic value, and there will always be times when it is appropriate to stop the efforts to artificially extend the term of a life and let nature take its course. Although this particular little kid had funding in place, spending it to extend his value-less life would be a travesty. Take that money and do a couple thousand immunizations, or feed the hungry, or find shelter for some homeless people.

No expense or sacrifice is too great for the people who don't have to pay it.

The sad thing is that you are serious in what you say. You suggest that even if the parents had the funds to treat the child you suggest the money would be better spent on “a couple thousand immunizations, or feed the hungry, or find shelter for some homeless people.”

Since the money was donated what gives you or anyone else the right to tell the parents how to spend it? Now I am going to ask you a question: If your child was suffering from a terminal illness but there was some hope that the child could be saved and you had the funds to pay all costs would you do everything in your power to save the child or would you prefer to donate the money to charity? I already know the answer you hypocritical numb-skull.

In a just and fair world, the parents would have been allowed to try any course of treatment that held out the smallest glimmer of hope for their child. Even a one-in-a -million chance of survival is far better than certain death, especially when someone you love is at risk.

Now let me tell you something that I know about you: during your lifetime you have acquired possessions you didn't really need to meet your basic survival needs; during your lifetime you spent money on things simply because they gave you pleasure; during your lifetime, you often ate and drank more than you really needed to; and during all this lifetime of excess and waste you didn't give a royal damn about the unimmunized, the hungry and the homeless. You were unwilling to give up non-essential pleasures to help the unimmunized, the hungry and the homeless, yet in your self-righteous arrogance you condemn parents who preferred to save the life of their child than to assist others who are not facing death.

I sincerely hope no one you love ever suffers from a life-threatening illness with little chance of survival; however, if it happens I also hope that you are given every opportunity under the sun to explore any treatment options available even those which are untested as long as they offer some promise of success.

"...what gives you or anyone else the right to tell the parents how to spend it?"


Hegel?
Marx?
Rousseau?

1. ...the German philosopher Hegel said, “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest” (Ralf Dahrendorf, Society and Democracy in Germany).
2. The attitude of the FDR government can be seen in these words of A.B. “Happy” Chandler, a former Kentucky governor: “[A]ll of us owe the government; we owe it for everything we have—and that is the basis of obligation—and the government can take everything we have if the government needs it. . . . The government can assert its right to have all the taxes it needs for any purpose, either now or at any time in the future."Folsom and Folsom, "FDR Goes To War."
   
   3. "Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz" ("The community comes before the individual") concretizes the collectivist belief that individuals have no rights and that "the greater good" is the only standard of value. Under such a system, man is not an end to himself, only a tool to be sacrificed for the Führer, autocrat or ruling mob."
   Sipsey Street Irregulars: The lie before the crime. "Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz" ("The community comes before the individual")