Dutch to set guidelines for euthanasia of babies

[Mr. P]

so doctor assisted termination of life is ok with you if the patient is determined to be terminal?

It's their business, their choice not mine..I just think there should be the option.

 

[MissileMan]

so doctor assisted termination of life is ok with you if the patient is determined to be terminal?

And if the patient, or in the case of children, the parents agree, yes.

 

[MissileMan]

No, just that you think terminal illness must be present in order to ok euthanasia? I guess we could argue we are all terminal? Slippery slopes.

You keep saying slippery slope like you believe doctors get into the medical profession so they can kill people. Euthanasia would be a tool of last resort, but one that doctors and patients should have available to them.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Doesn't the Dutch law only allow euthanasia if three or more doctors agree that the child's illness will make it unable to lead a happy, comfortable life? They have to get the parents' permission too I believe.

 

[Annie]

You keep saying slippery slope like you believe doctors get into the medical profession so they can kill people. Euthanasia would be a tool of last resort, but one that doctors and patients should have available to them.

No I believe that the decreased respect for life has led to an ever enlarging circle of what is considered 'compassionate' to various groups to further their agendas. Once 1st trimester abortions were ok. Then just about any, with the clucking of 'the sooner the better'. Then it was 'partial birth.' Now we are entering 'after birth, with terminal illness.' Surely it doesn't take a genius to see that the next logical step would be 'inconveinence' or 'undesirable.'

 

[Hobbit]

I seem to remember a bunch of pro-life people 10-15 years ago saying that if they kept loosening these abortion laws, eventually, there'd be post-birth abortions (which they viewed as equally despicable). I alse seem to remember all the pro-choice advocates saying, "You're crazy. We'd never do that."

 

[Mr. P]

It’s amazing how you folks ALWAYS connect everything to abortion.

 

[Abbey Normal]

What was that thread about 'slippery slopes'?

That was exactly my thought too, Kathianne.

 

[MissileMan]

No I believe that the decreased respect for life has led to an ever enlarging circle of what is considered 'compassionate' to various groups to further their agendas. Once 1st trimester abortions were ok. Then just about any, with the clucking of 'the sooner the better'. Then it was 'partial birth.' Now we are entering 'after birth, with terminal illness.' Surely it doesn't take a genius to see that the next logical step would be 'inconveinence' or 'undesirable.'

That's an argument of last resort for someone who has no valid argument. Killing a baby post-birth for convenience would not be a logical step it would be murder. Euthanasia and abortion are two separate issues. Euthanasia is never a form of abortion, but abortion performed because of a catastrophic birth defect could be considered a form of pre-birth euthanasia.

 

[Gunny]

That's an argument of last resort for someone who has no valid argument. Killing a baby post-birth for convenience would not be a logical step it would be murder. Euthanasia and abortion are two separate issues. Euthanasia is never a form of abortion, but abortion performed because of a catastrophic birth defect could be considered a form of pre-birth euthanasia.

Looking at possible consequences of actions is an "argument of last resort?" I would call it responsible behavior, myself. Do the math ....

It started with 1st term abortions and was never going to go beyond that. Then it was first and second term, and not going to go beyond that. Now they are taking it past birth. The next logical step in this progression IS selective euthenasia for the purpose of convenience.

And let me help you out with your semantics problem. Regardless how you try to sanitize the words, the act is murder.

 

[MissileMan]

Looking at possible consequences of actions is an "argument of last resort?" I would call it responsible behavior, myself. Do the math ....

It started with 1st term abortions and was never going to go beyond that. Then it was first and second term, and not going to go beyond that. Now they are taking it past birth. The next logical step in this progression IS selective euthenasia for the purpose of convenience.

And let me help you out with your semantics problem. Regardless how you try to sanitize the words, the act is murder.

And I suppose when my father died at 53, my grandmother, who was 75 at the time had a miscarriage?

Euthanasia and abortion are not the same thing.

"Don't get stuck on stupid!"

 

[Gunny]

And I suppose when my father died at 53, my grandmother, who was 75 at the time had a miscarriage?

Euthanasia and abortion are not the same thing.

"Don't get stuck on stupid!"

Don't get stuck on literalism to suit you. Within the context of the topic, euthenizing babies and abortion are the same action which brings about the same result.

Only when you remove the context of the argument and define the words literally do they have separate meanings.

 

[MissileMan]

Don't get stuck on literalism to suit you. Within the context of the topic, euthenizing babies and abortion are the same action which brings about the same result.

Only when you remove the context of the argument and define the words literally do they have separate meanings.

An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. Once the baby is born, you can't have an abortion. I'm up for an argument, but at least argue with reason.

 

[Gunny]

An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. Once the baby is born, you can't have an abortion. I'm up for an argument, but at least argue with reason.

Again, your literalism ignores the consequences of the action. Euthenizing babies and/or aborting fetuses murders children.

The comprehension problem here is your refusal to address the latter for what it is.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Again, your literalism ignores the consequences of the action. Euthenizing babies and/or aborting fetuses murders children.

The comprehension problem here is your refusal to address the latter for what it is.

Exaclty, Gunny.

 

[MissileMan]

Again, your literalism ignores the consequences of the action. Euthenizing babies and/or aborting fetuses murders children.

The comprehension problem here is your refusal to address the latter for what it is.

First of all, the thread was started to discuss a new Dutch law that will allow doctors and parents to euthanize a terminally ill child. Someone else decided to toss in the totally UNRELATED topic of abortion and you climbed right up on the bandwagon.

Which would you like to discuss, abortion or euthanasia?

 

[Gunny]

First of all, the thread was started to discuss a new Dutch law that will allow doctors and parents to euthanize a terminally ill child. Someone else decided to toss in the totally UNRELATED topic of abortion and you climbed right up on the bandwagon.

Which would you like to discuss, abortion or euthanasia?

Well, yeah, I can see your point. This is the very first thread I've ever seen evolve into something else.

Abortion and euthenizing children are pretty much the same topic. I can see where you would want to attempt to separate the two and sanitize them; otherwise, you would not have much of an argument.

In both instances, a child's life is snuffed out so the parent(s) won't be inconvenienced with the consequence of their action.

 

[MissileMan]

In both instances, a child's life is snuffed out so the parent(s) won't be inconvenienced with the consequence of their action.

This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever seen you write.

Abortion may well sometimes be an act of selfishness, but euthanasia is an act of mercy and compassion.

 

[Gunny]

This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever seen you write.

Abortion may well sometimes be an act of selfishness, but euthanasia is an act of mercy and compassion.

Stupid, huh? Tsk tsk .... and here I'm trying to be polite.

While abortion has a place where medical necessity is concerned, it has turned into an act of convenience rather than the last resort it was sold as. The result of an abortion is a life being taken.

Your "mercy and compassion" argument is nothing more than whitewash/sanitizing state-sanctioned, selective murder of those deemed unworthy of living.

 

[Annie]

That's an argument of last resort for someone who has no valid argument. Killing a baby post-birth for convenience would not be a logical step it would be murder. Euthanasia and abortion are two separate issues. Euthanasia is never a form of abortion, but abortion performed because of a catastrophic birth defect could be considered a form of pre-birth euthanasia.

Wrong, it would be called 'compassionate euthanasia." Heck, it already is by you and others.