Charlie Gard has passed

[Coyote]

What people don't realize is that this isn't about socialized medicine. The child is being used to rail against socialized medicine. The parents had the money raised to treat the child. What stopped them is a law that essentially states that if the doctors and parents are in conflict the courts must consider the child first. That's where the problem. Even if there weren't socialized medicine the parents would have still faced the same legal obstacle.

I feel for them, it's highly unlikely the treatment would have had any affect, and the courts were faced with trying to determine whether That was worth the possible suffering he might have undergone.

There are no villains here, it's just a horrible disease and two parents desperate to try anything to save their child and doctors not wanting to cause further suffering

Just like you all use shooting victims to rail against gun rights.

Be careful you might fall of that pedestal

I don't. Stereotype much?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What people don't realize is that this isn't about socialized medicine. The child is being used to rail against socialized medicine. The parents had the money raised to treat the child. What stopped them is a law that essentially states that if the doctors and parents are in conflict the courts must consider the child first. That's where the problem. Even if there weren't socialized medicine the parents would have still faced the same legal obstacle.

I feel for them, it's highly unlikely the treatment would have had any affect, and the courts were faced with trying to determine whether That was worth the possible suffering he might have undergone.

There are no villains here, it's just a horrible disease and two parents desperate to try anything to save their child and doctors not wanting to cause further suffering

Just like you all use shooting victims to rail against gun rights.

Be careful you might fall of that pedestal

I don't. Stereotype much?

I didn't do anything YOU just didn't do so you know what you can do with your hypocrisy

 

[Coyote]

Sometimes there is a fine line between parental rights and child abuse.

 

[Coyote]

What people don't realize is that this isn't about socialized medicine. The child is being used to rail against socialized medicine. The parents had the money raised to treat the child. What stopped them is a law that essentially states that if the doctors and parents are in conflict the courts must consider the child first. That's where the problem. Even if there weren't socialized medicine the parents would have still faced the same legal obstacle.

I feel for them, it's highly unlikely the treatment would have had any affect, and the courts were faced with trying to determine whether That was worth the possible suffering he might have undergone.

There are no villains here, it's just a horrible disease and two parents desperate to try anything to save their child and doctors not wanting to cause further suffering

Just like you all use shooting victims to rail against gun rights.

Be careful you might fall of that pedestal

I don't. Stereotype much?

I didn't do anything YOU just didn't do so you know what you can do with your hypocrisy

The same thing you can do with yours?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What people don't realize is that this isn't about socialized medicine. The child is being used to rail against socialized medicine. The parents had the money raised to treat the child. What stopped them is a law that essentially states that if the doctors and parents are in conflict the courts must consider the child first. That's where the problem. Even if there weren't socialized medicine the parents would have still faced the same legal obstacle.

I feel for them, it's highly unlikely the treatment would have had any affect, and the courts were faced with trying to determine whether That was worth the possible suffering he might have undergone.

There are no villains here, it's just a horrible disease and two parents desperate to try anything to save their child and doctors not wanting to cause further suffering

Just like you all use shooting victims to rail against gun rights.

Be careful you might fall of that pedestal

I don't. Stereotype much?

I didn't do anything YOU just didn't do so you know what you can do with your hypocrisy

The same thing you can do with yours?

I'm not the one who called you out for stereotyping so how the hell does that make me a hypocrite?

Christ

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Man. You try hard sometimes. Don't worry, bro. You are so cool that all of us love you. You don't have to appease the idiots.

That baby had a terminal illness which resulted in his life being one of unending suffering. Nothing could have saved him. His passing may be the best thing that ever happened to him.

Thank you for proving koshergrl's assessment. That didn't take long.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Man. You try hard sometimes. Don't worry, bro. You are so cool that all of us love you. You don't have to appease the idiots.

That baby had a terminal illness which resulted in his life being one of unending suffering. Nothing could have saved him. His passing may be the best thing that ever happened to him.

Thank you for proving koshergrl's assessment. That didn't take long.

I HATE to defend lone but I have not seen anyone celebrating this poor child's death.
Take your emotional goggles off and reread the posts.

I have no doubt that EVERYONE on this site feels pity & sadness for the parents & the child.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You idiot. Do you know how many people there are who DIE in the US from shit that Brits never die from because they have universal health care? Try learning.

Totally false. Making it worse is that you know it is false.

Go on. Tell me what I know.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

This is a day of celebration among the death cultists! Baby killers, rejoice!

The globalists are happy that the human waste as they see it won't be draining their coffers. I'm sure they get a bit of a kick about sending people to their deaths, too.

 

[HenryBHough]

Nationalized Health Care kills.

We knew that but, sadly, I guess we do need an occasional reminder.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I HATE to defend lone but I have not seen anyone celebrating this poor child's death

He JUST DID in the post I responded to.

"The baby is BETTER OFF DEAD."

That is celebrating his death.

That is a libturd denying a parent the chance to seek help.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I HATE to defend lone but I have not seen anyone celebrating this poor child's death

He JUST DID in the post I responded to.

"The baby is BETTER OFF DEAD."

That is celebrating his death.

That is a libturd denying a parent the chance to seek help.

That is a matter of opinion. I remember when my grandmother died and there was a heated debate about continuing the care.
I GUARANTEE you no one celebrated when she died. There is a level of suffering that no human should be subjected to.
You ARE looking at this through emotional goggles.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I beginning to think some do not know the definition of celebration.

Webster's, find one.

 

[Markle]

Well the .leftists got their fitst post birth legal abortion. They will claim their is precedent to abort babies up to one year of age.

Think not? It's coming.

Petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama's Science Czar, John Holdren had written in the 1970's that in order to control population, forced sterilization, forced abortion and that infants up to two years old could be "aborted".

Big Dogs Weblog » infanticide excerpt below: ...

John Holdren, a Harvard University Professor (aren’t they all), who has advocated in the past that it would be okay to abort an infant up to two years old. That’s right, kill babies. His reasoning is that until the baby can realize that there’s a tomorrow, the baby is not really human. He also has postulated that sterilants (birth control drugs) should be added to the water we drink, on the grounds that there are already too many people, and certainly too many of the wrong kind, whatever that is supposed to mean.

www.mylot.com/post/2080901/0bama-science-czar-ok-to-kill-toddlers

This is the goal of Progressives.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Well the .leftists got their fitst post birth legal abortion. They will claim their is precedent to abort babies up to one year of age.

Think not? It's coming.

Petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama's Science Czar, John Holdren had written in the 1970's that in order to control population, forced sterilization, forced abortion and that infants up to two years old could be "aborted".

Big Dogs Weblog » infanticide excerpt below: ...

John Holdren, a Harvard University Professor (aren’t they all), who has advocated in the past that it would be okay to abort an infant up to two years old. That’s right, kill babies. His reasoning is that until the baby can realize that there’s a tomorrow, the baby is not really human. He also has postulated that sterilants (birth control drugs) should be added to the water we drink, on the grounds that there are already too many people, and certainly too many of the wrong kind, whatever that is supposed to mean.

www.mylot.com/post/2080901/0bama-science-czar-ok-to-kill-toddlers

This is the goal of Progressives.

I have a newsflash for the professor, you kill a child it's not abortion, it's murder.

Sick bastard needs "aborted'

 

[koshergrl]

Sometimes there is a fine line between parental rights and child abuse.

Bullshit. There is no fine fucking line. Child abuse is when you abuse a child. When you hit, rape, imprison them.

The *fine line* that leftists imagine exists, is the line that exists between them, and other people. If you choose not to raise your children according to state dictates, then you are *abusive*. If you are not teaching your children according to current psycholunatic babble, you're "abusive". If you choose a medical treatment that they don't agree with, you've *abusive*.

In short, their enemies are almost always the ones on the *other side* of the child abuse/parenting lines. Funny how that works.

 

[koshergrl]

Well the .leftists got their fitst post birth legal abortion. They will claim their is precedent to abort babies up to one year of age.

Think not? It's coming.

Petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama's Science Czar, John Holdren had written in the 1970's that in order to control population, forced sterilization, forced abortion and that infants up to two years old could be "aborted".

Big Dogs Weblog » infanticide excerpt below: ...

John Holdren, a Harvard University Professor (aren’t they all), who has advocated in the past that it would be okay to abort an infant up to two years old. That’s right, kill babies. His reasoning is that until the baby can realize that there’s a tomorrow, the baby is not really human. He also has postulated that sterilants (birth control drugs) should be added to the water we drink, on the grounds that there are already too many people, and certainly too many of the wrong kind, whatever that is supposed to mean.

www.mylot.com/post/2080901/0bama-science-czar-ok-to-kill-toddlers

This is the goal of Progressives.

Yes it is.
That is absolutely 100 percent what they are about. It's the same thing they were about when they taught the Nazis how to be monsters.

 

[Coyote]

MEDICAL TYRANNY IS HERE, AND WE CAN’T SAY WE WEREN’T WARNED
A Minnesota mother was recently brought to court over refusing chemotherapy for her 8 year old daughter. A doctor apparently reported her to CPS. She was “…ordered into court and told if they did not work with them on a treatment plan, they would lose custody of Sarah.”




Medical Tyranny is Here, and We Can’t Say We Weren’t Warned

When does it become child abuse?

 

[Coyote]

Sometimes there is a fine line between parental rights and child abuse.

Bullshit. There is no fine fucking line. Child abuse is when you abuse a child. When you hit, rape, imprison them.

The *fine line* that leftists imagine exists, is the line that exists between them, and other people. If you choose not to raise your children according to state dictates, then you are *abusive*. If you are not teaching your children according to current psycholunatic babble, you're "abusive". If you choose a medical treatment that they don't agree with, you've *abusive*.

In short, their enemies are almost always the ones on the *other side* of the child abuse/parenting lines. Funny how that works.

What if parents deny life saving treatment for their child?

 

[koshergrl]

MEDICAL TYRANNY IS HERE, AND WE CAN’T SAY WE WEREN’T WARNED
A Minnesota mother was recently brought to court over refusing chemotherapy for her 8 year old daughter. A doctor apparently reported her to CPS. She was “…ordered into court and told if they did not work with them on a treatment plan, they would lose custody of Sarah.”




Medical Tyranny is Here, and We Can’t Say We Weren’t Warned

When does it become child abuse?

When some stupid, mentally ill statist bitch has a bad day and goes after someone.