Euthanasia For The Old, Weak, And Unwanted (politicians, program, Florida)

[chasingclouds]

Originally Posted by msconnie73

I know it seems that republicans are about cutting services but I strongly feel that the services government agencies provide is at times substandard and wasteful in terms of overhead costs. I used to work in a governmental office and was appalled at the waste I've observed there in my small office.

I belive that government should continue helping those in need but to trim the waste so that more of our tax dollars are funding the actual program and not bureaucracy. Many tax payers are tired of governmental waste and would welcome a more effeciently-run system. I don't mind my tax dollars being used to help those in need, but I don't trust the government in running those programs as they have proven to be inept at managing those programs.

Take social security for example: The government does nothing but raid the funds that are supposed to go towards SS benefits. How does this help those who will be retiring 20 years from now? I have had a personal bad experience with SS after my mother had passed away so I really do not have a strong trust of government. This was during Clinton's presidency years so GWB can't be blamed.

Well gwb did raid ss, and he wanted us to put it in the market, if we had it would be gone now after the crash. I do think they need to be more efficient like you said but like GWB cut the WIC programs down and some other services to women and children and abortions numbers went way up from previous years in numbers. They went back down again after the morning after pill was made legal. I talk to some repubs in my area, and some believe totally no services for people at all!! I just cant get my head around that.

God bless Connie, I have to sleep now see you later.

[okie333]

Originally Posted by Jihadist

Our society is far too concerned about the "sanctity of life." There are so many people who are simply a drain on our economy. The elderly, prisoners, the mentally disabled and unwanted children are the main offenders as they contribute nothing to the world financially and yet eat up billions of dollars each year. The elderly are utterly useless; prisoners cause the crime; the mentally disabled are actually allowed to breed, and so, make the human race genetically inferior; and unwanted children grow up to be criminals among other low-lifes. What we need is to start a mass eugenics movement, so that we may purge our pure society from such undesirables. After all, science has proven that everything in existence is based on the material and its laws. Evolution is the law of life--we therefore, should not spend so much time and effort protecting those who cannot protect themselves. The weak die off and the strong live on...it is the law of nature, the only absolute source for our moral codes. We are simply material beings who live and die...it's just the way things are, so why concern ourselves with life so much? Therefore, do you support euthanasia, abortion and sterilization of the non-contributors of society? If not, please offer logically justification for your claims.

you seem pretty useless, why don't you go first

why don't you just come out and say what you really feel, you want the jews to be uthanized. go back home jihadist. How usefull are you?

[okie333]

Originally Posted by Jihadist

That's hilarious. The program must've got confused, because if you click on the quotation, it links to your post. Ha! and you blame it on me. I didn't alter your quote!
BTW, I never said was a liberal or conservative. I said I support Obama.
Also, it's funny how you've offended Connie so many times, but have yet to take any of that back. Even she has been hurt by what you've said, and the lies you've spread.

umm yes anyone is capable of altering a persons quote.

you should be imbarrassed because it is pretty obvious to anyone reading your posts. you should try harder next time

[Luiso]

We have become a blind lemming society where instead of the unreal corporate greed , unreal politican corruption , the unreal money wasted in foreign aid in corrupt gvmts ,etc,etc we blame the elderly for the audacity to want some of THEIR MONEY back which they have paid all their lives into the system

Thus I wouldnt doubt some imbeciles might see this as an answer .

[saganista]

A Few Points of Order...

-- The Illinois BAIPA did not have "unilateral" (whatever that means) support. It was in fact defeated in 2001, 2002, and 2003. It eventually passed unanimously in 2005 after having been rewritten to conform to federal law. The original proposals would all have redefined the status of pre-viable fetuses...those that had no chance of survival at all. No outcome would have changed as the result of those laws. The cost and inconvenience of an abortion would have increased, and a legal basis for subsequent challenge to any abortion would have been created. It would have been extremely unlikely that any of those bills would have survived a court challenge. Right-to-life groups try to escape these facts by noting that, in facing a third straight year of defeat, their forces in 2003 offered a last-minute amendment to bring one section of the bill into conformance with the federal law that had been passed in 2002. Both the committee and Obama (who chaired it) voted to pass that amendment, then voted again to kill the bill.

-- Margaret Sanger was no further into eugenics than we are today. The word has, rightly or wrongly, become associated with the Nazis, but the science underlying it continues to be reflected in modern genetic research and counseling. It should be noted, but rarely is, that Sanger's books were among the first that the Nazi's banned and burned.

[Since it was cited, I'll note that virtually everything about Sanger that is to be found on blackgenocide.com is false. This falsehood ranges from outright lies and fabrications to the more garden variety deceits of the propagandist, such as misattribution, quoting out of context, and selective use of data.]

Neither was Sanger a proponent of abortion. She called it "the wrong way," out of concern for the health of young mothers (the same reason the church had come to oppose abortion in the years after the Civil War) and for her belief that a fetus at any stage was life. To Sanger, birth control was the cure for abortion. It still is. Since Sanger's actual stance on abortion is inconvenient to latter-day fundie propagandists, they have propogated a myth of her support for abortion also, and some have bought into that myth.

-- As has been pointed out (kudos to Hesster) Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization, and abortion is a small part of their work. Neither is abortion any sort of moneymaker. Abortion services are typically provided on an ability-to-pay, sliding-scale basis, and, like all their public work, are heavily subsidized by member contributions. An average abortion for a low-income woman would cost less than having a cranky wisdom tooth removed. No financial jackpots are being struck by providers of abortion services.

[PG77]

If I have Alzheimer's then I am not me anyway. Rather than keep a shell of a human being alive and placing a heavy burden on my family, I am all for euthanasia.

[arctichomesteader]

Margaret Sanger was no further into eugenics than we are today. The word has, rightly or wrongly, become associated with the Nazis, but the science underlying it continues to be reflected in modern genetic research and counseling. It should be noted, but rarely is, that Sanger's books were among the first that the Nazi's banned and burned.

Margaret Sanger and Sterilization

She had many connections with the Nazis.

[GhostInTheShell]

Originally Posted by Jihadist

Our society is far too concerned about the "sanctity of life"...There are so many people who are simply a drain on our economy...Evolution is the law of life--we therefore, should not spend so much time and effort protecting those who cannot protect themselves...The weak die off and the strong live on...it is the law of nature, the only absolute source for our moral codes...Therefore, do you support euthanasia, abortion and sterilization of the non-contributors of society?

First, I want to say thank you for creating this thread. I wasn't going to click it at first, but I'm glad I eventually did, for it's hands down one of the most amusing threads I've read in several months.

Second, before I attempt to address your argument, I'd like you to answer the following questions truthfully if possible. Do you ever feel guilt? Do you empathize with the pain and discomfort of others?

[Frank_Carbonni]

Originally Posted by Jihadist

Our society is far too concerned about the "sanctity of life." There are so many people who are simply a drain on our economy. The elderly, prisoners, the mentally disabled and unwanted children are the main offenders as they contribute nothing to the world financially and yet eat up billions of dollars each year. The elderly are utterly useless; prisoners cause the crime; the mentally disabled are actually allowed to breed, and so, make the human race genetically inferior; and unwanted children grow up to be criminals among other low-lifes. What we need is to start a mass eugenics movement, so that we may purge our pure society from such undesirables. After all, science has proven that everything in existence is based on the material and its laws. Evolution is the law of life--we therefore, should not spend so much time and effort protecting those who cannot protect themselves. The weak die off and the strong live on...it is the law of nature, the only absolute source for our moral codes. We are simply material beings who live and die...it's just the way things are, so why concern ourselves with life so much? Therefore, do you support euthanasia, abortion and sterilization of the non-contributors of society? If not, please offer logically justification for your claims.

So your "new" ideas are basically the Nazi T-4 program and 19th Century Social Darwinism.

Do you have any ideas that are from the past 50 years or at least not evil?

[GregW]

Although we cannot punish people like jihadist for their inflammatory and morally wrong ideas we can simply ignore them and not respond to the provocation.