Cons want to bring baby Charlie to US!?

[Avatar4321]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive?

That is what you want to argue?

YES! The Left is arguing that it's in your best interest to DIE whenever things appear hopeless for you!

This is exactly why these insane moonbats, consumed with death culture, should NEVER have control of our health care!

But who should determine that? I think the gov should be the last to decide that. What happens if they say being black, Jewish, Muslim or Christian isn't good quality of life. Once you start justifying the killings it gets ugly fast

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

Liar.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Penelope]

Treatments are specific actions that have a chance of helping. "Treatment" is NOT throwing anything and everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.

And this has a chance of working. So what's your point

According to whom?

Charlie Gard has 10% chance of improvement, US doctor claims - BBC News

He's upped the odds after examining Charlie. If it's upward towards 56% you gotta go for it

Doctors from Great Ormond Street, where Charlie is hooked up to life support machines, have said the tot will die from the illness.

But Dr Hirano, 55, believes his experimental theory could give Charlie "an 11% to 56% chance of clinically meaningful improvement".

US doctor examines desperately ill Charlie Gard in last chance talks

for the record-----the fact that an examining doc-------determined that the kid MIGHT be improved
by treatment------IINDICATES that the baby is NOT BRAIN DEAD. The fact that the attending docs
prognosis is "he will die from present illness"-------DOES NOT EXCLUDE the possibility of some sort
of effective treatment. A dying infant is always a tragedy-----THEY LOOK SO GOOD (usually---
even the deformed babies somehow look FRESH AND NEW)

Leftists just view it as a late stage abortion and want to sell the parts - sad really.

Righties wouldn't have covered the kid to begin with . If you want to throw stones.

Righties would step forward and pay the expenses for this child out of their own pocket.

Lefties would reach into the righties' pockets when they weren't looking, take all of their cash and give half to the family for the child's medical care and keep the other half for administrative fees.

Somebody donated the money for the baby's care. It sure wasn't any leftist. The left wants to paint this as taxpayers supporting this experimental treatment when it is no such thing. Even if, by some magic, there was no money for Charlie Gard's treatment, the funds would still not be available to "da po' ".

It isn't this child's treatment the left objects to. It's the research and development that gave the experimental treatment. That's what costs. The left wants to stop the advancement of medical science. Maybe they can spend the money on global warming instead. The left is known for being anti science anyway.

Actually Trump wants to cut medical research funding. Price want to cut pre screening for cancer.

so?

So T is not going to spend a red cent of his money, he does whatever to get out of paying taxes, 0 tax is his goal for HIMSELF and his family and rich buddies.

 

[Penelope]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive?

That is what you want to argue?

YES! The Left is arguing that it's in your best interest to DIE whenever things appear hopeless for you!

This is exactly why these insane moonbats, consumed with death culture, should NEVER have control of our health care!

But who should determine that? I think the gov should be the last to decide that. What happens if they say being black, Jewish, Muslim or Christian isn't good quality of life. Once you start justifying the killings it gets ugly fast

Taking one off of life support is killing now? Really.

 

[Penelope]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

 

[irosie91]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive?

That is what you want to argue?

YES! The Left is arguing that it's in your best interest to DIE whenever things appear hopeless for you!

This is exactly why these insane moonbats, consumed with death culture, should NEVER have control of our health care!

But who should determine that? I think the gov should be the last to decide that. What happens if they say being black, Jewish, Muslim or Christian isn't good quality of life. Once you start justifying the killings it gets ugly fast

Taking one off of life support is killing now? Really.

yes it is------do not go around the hospital pulling plugs-------it is a CRIME

 

[easyt65]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

Liar.

Liar, hell. That's what most of you snowflakes have been arguing for / about this whole discussion.

The ACA is proof that Democrats are obsessed with seizing control / power, stripping it from others and ruling over them. The ACA, as well as Single Payer, stripped / strips Americans of more of their control and choices over their own lives and puts that power into the hands of politicians / Democrats.

The same snowflakes who support Democrats doing this have been talking about how the parents and Charlie should not even be given the opportunity to save this little boy's life by letting doctors who think they can make a difference even try.

It's a decision that should NOT be anyone else's to make except the parents ands the doctors.

 

[Penelope]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive?

That is what you want to argue?

YES! The Left is arguing that it's in your best interest to DIE whenever things appear hopeless for you!

This is exactly why these insane moonbats, consumed with death culture, should NEVER have control of our health care!

That left you are talking about , the Dems are the reason so many uninsured people now have insurance, and the Right , your brothers, wants to take it away.

 

[irosie91]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

what gene? what is the child's diagnosis?

 

[Penelope]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

Liar.

Liar, hell. That's what most of you snowflakes have been arguing for / about this whole discussion.

The ACA is proof that Democrats are obsessed with seizing control / power, stripping it from others and ruling over them. The ACA, as well as Single Payer, stripped / strips Americans of more of their control and choices over their own lives and puts that power into the hands of politicians / Democrats.

The same snowflakes who support Democrats doing this have been talking about how the parents and Charlie should not even be given the opportunity to save this little boy's life by letting doctors who think they can make a difference even try.

It's a decision that should NOT be anyone else's to make except the parents ands the doctors.

No not true. At least people have insurance now, except for those cheapskates who would rather pay a fine.

 

[Penelope]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

what gene? what is the child's diagnosis?

Read his history and the history the parents.

 

[easyt65]

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

My father's side of the family had MS. Although it can not 'technically' be said that it is hereditary thee is almost no denying it. My grandmother had it, several aunts had it, and my father had it. Doctors told us it can skip a generation. It did.

When I 1st went into the military the doctors asked me if I wanted to have a spinal tap done (a giant needle shoved into your spine to take a sample of spinal fluid) to do a test to determine if I would have it later on. I said, 'Hell no' - why would I want to possibly hear that my DNA showed signs of potential MS and have to worry for the rest of my life I would end up getting it and be in a wheelchair?! That's a lifetime of useless worry.

There are no guarantees regarding carriers and who is going to pass on what.

 

[irosie91]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

what gene? what is the child's diagnosis?

Read his history and the history the parents.

oh-----you don't know?

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

you are talking about a MOTHER's SON------how about you quit the "BODY PART
BULL SHIT" ------there, that's a good boy

I find it hypocritical of the left to comment on child health / life issue after the PP situation.

Since PP gives free or very inexpensive birth control, pre-natal, post-natal and pediatric care, I can see why you don't like them.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Why not bury the aborted babies?

WHAT!!!! There is gold in them there dead babies!!!!!!

.....sassy.....time for your nap

That is hawt...

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

you are talking about a MOTHER's SON------how about you quit the "BODY PART
BULL SHIT" ------there, that's a good boy

I find it hypocritical of the left to comment on child health / life issue after the PP situation.

Since PP gives free or very inexpensive birth control, pre-natal, post-natal and pediatric care, I can see why you don't like them.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Why not bury the aborted babies?

WHAT!!!! There is gold in them there dead babies!!!!!!

Jimmy_Chitwood

Each family, woman makes that choice,that decision.

SassyIrishLass is, as usual, lying


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

link?

 

[irosie91]

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

My father's side of the family had MS. Although it can not 'technically' be said that it is hereditary thee is almost no denying it. My grandmother had it, several aunts had it, and my father had it. Doctors told us it can skip a generation. It did.

When I 1st went into the military the doctors asked me if I wanted to have a spinal tap done (a giant needle shoved into your spine to take a sample of spinal fluid) to do a test to determine if I would have it later on. I said, 'Hell no' - why would I want to possibly hear that my DNA showed signs of potential MS and have to worry for the rest of my life I would end up getting it and be in a wheelchair?! That's a lifetime of useless worry.

There are no guarantees regarding carriers and who is going to pass on what.

I have done thousands of spinal tops-----it's not all that bad----but I see no reason to try to
get a "might be..." from a tap-----in fact the information might not be correct

 

[Penelope]

So the parents are not acting in the Childs best interest by keeping him alive? That is what you want to argue?

Timmy and other snowflakes want to argue that what is in the best interest of the child is to have the parent's rights stripped and for some self-appointed snowflake who believes themselves to be the smartest person on the planet capable of making this decision to strip Charlie and his parents of any chance at survival. 'Just die already'.

He's just a baby - the parents haven't had him THAT long, so how strong of an attachment could they have to him. They can make another one, right, snowflakes?

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

what gene? what is the child's diagnosis?

Read his history and the history the parents.

oh-----you don't know?

How do you think genetic diseases get passed on. Read.
Who is Charlie Gard, what is the disease he suffers from and why are medical experts meeting?

 

[easyt65]

No not true. At least people have insurance now, except for those cheapskates who would rather pay a fine.

Thank you for demonstrating the arrogance of the assholes who pushed the collapsing ACA onto others!

Yes, Americans were forced by an edict-imposing govt that they would have to buy a product whether they wanted / needed it or not....

Yes Americans were lied to....

Yes Americans were stripped of their personal right to choose their own coverage thanks to a mandate imposed on them, resulting in most people losing their coverages and having to buy what Barry and the libtards insisted they get as a minimum...

Yes, people lost the plans AND DOCTORS they liked, unlike what was promised...

...but at least people have insurance now....

EXCEPT THEY DON'T. Insurance companies have pulled out of exchanges leaving some Americans without insurance now. The premiums rose so high for some they can't afford it, unlike what was promised...

But at least the Democrats got to seize more control from the American people and dictate to them what they would do, what they would buy...

Yeah, that's not 'ruling' people, snowflake.

 

[Penelope]

They are both carriers of the gene, so they really should not mate each other unless one becomes sterile.

My father's side of the family had MS. Although it can not 'technically' be said that it is hereditary thee is almost no denying it. My grandmother had it, several aunts had it, and my father had it. Doctors told us it can skip a generation. It did.

When I 1st went into the military the doctors asked me if I wanted to have a spinal tap done (a giant needle shoved into your spine to take a sample of spinal fluid) to do a test to determine if I would have it later on. I said, 'Hell no' - why would I want to possibly hear that my DNA showed signs of potential MS and have to worry for the rest of my life I would end up getting it and be in a wheelchair?! That's a lifetime of useless worry.

There are no guarantees regarding carriers and who is going to pass on what.

MS is not a genetic disease.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

And this has a chance of working. So what's your point

According to whom?

Charlie Gard has 10% chance of improvement, US doctor claims - BBC News

He's upped the odds after examining Charlie. If it's upward towards 56% you gotta go for it

Doctors from Great Ormond Street, where Charlie is hooked up to life support machines, have said the tot will die from the illness.

But Dr Hirano, 55, believes his experimental theory could give Charlie "an 11% to 56% chance of clinically meaningful improvement".

US doctor examines desperately ill Charlie Gard in last chance talks

for the record-----the fact that an examining doc-------determined that the kid MIGHT be improved
by treatment------IINDICATES that the baby is NOT BRAIN DEAD. The fact that the attending docs
prognosis is "he will die from present illness"-------DOES NOT EXCLUDE the possibility of some sort
of effective treatment. A dying infant is always a tragedy-----THEY LOOK SO GOOD (usually---
even the deformed babies somehow look FRESH AND NEW)

Righties wouldn't have covered the kid to begin with . If you want to throw stones.

Righties would step forward and pay the expenses for this child out of their own pocket.

Lefties would reach into the righties' pockets when they weren't looking, take all of their cash and give half to the family for the child's medical care and keep the other half for administrative fees.

Somebody donated the money for the baby's care. It sure wasn't any leftist. The left wants to paint this as taxpayers supporting this experimental treatment when it is no such thing. Even if, by some magic, there was no money for Charlie Gard's treatment, the funds would still not be available to "da po' ".

It isn't this child's treatment the left objects to. It's the research and development that gave the experimental treatment. That's what costs. The left wants to stop the advancement of medical science. Maybe they can spend the money on global warming instead. The left is known for being anti science anyway.

Actually Trump wants to cut medical research funding. Price want to cut pre screening for cancer.

so?

So T is not going to spend a red cent of his money, he does whatever to get out of paying taxes, 0 tax is his goal for HIMSELF and his family and rich buddies.

I try to minimize my taxes at all times.

Does that make me a bad person?