you're the one that lashed out with your rude comments and then KTHX. just following suit. you can add me on MSN if you want to continue with your witty, unhelpful comments.

i did suffer until i was stable, not fully developed. just because i suffered doesn't mean i should have died. i'm not suffering anymore, i'm living a full and healthy life that i love very much. not everyone that was supposed to die is going to suffer forever. until they're old enough to decide if they're suffering so much that they don't want to go through with that surgery that would make them live a little longer, nobody has any right to take that treatment away from them. there's plenty of time to change their minds. there's plenty of time to decide they don't want to suffer. give them a chance and stop being ignorant about this. read some of the posts that PARENTS made. their decision to have kids is their own. it's their choice to take on the burden, healthy or not. it's not your burden and not your business.

Not my business indeed.

either way, I just posted my opinion and didn't expect for people to be all hateful about it. I defended my opinion, not lashed out. My word choices tend to be a bit.. "hateful" sounding apparently.

Whatever, I have stuff to do, alright? You guys can keep talking about how cold-hearted and mean people who don't think like you are.

Also; Miach, I would love to straighten things out with you on MSN but it seems you are not online.

And what's so bad about thinking the way I do? I don't go out of my way to hurt anyone and all that, and you guys are blowing what I said out of proportion. I never said that disabled can't contribute, just many do not.

you said the same thing a couple of pages ago. and you're still here. they are hateful. they are below the belt. you can't expect everyone to agree with your opinions. you can't expect to always be right. you can't expect to post in the DEBATE forum, as i've already said, and not get a DEBATE.

hey, I wasn't trying to insult anyone. How about we just straighten it on msn, as you said (Except you made it sound like I was awful and trying to hurt everyone).

I don't want to start something, I really don't. I was just stating my opinion, I wasn't trying to say everyone else was wrong and I was right.

I think it's terrible, i think it's very sad that young children are born with all these problems they have to live with. But we're basically breeding disease and it's overpopulating the country, using up our resources and making the human race weaker as a Geno type. But the capacity for humans to feel empathy and compassion will keep scientists trying to find cures/preventitave medicines thus furthering our problem.

It's beautiful that many of these children are born into loving families ad are raised being able to do so many thing they wouldn't have been years ago. But it's not doing anything for the survival of the race and planet. As mean as that sounds...

I work with children so i see a few that have disabilities or genetic deformaties, and when i work with them i dont look at them and go "you're the reason why the human race is getting weaker and going to die of dehydration when our water runs out" to me they're children, beautiful and often capable children ^^

but strength of the genetics if what will keep the race alive, that's why the world runs on the survival method. You survive, or you feed others so they can survive...

touchy subject... mmm :nods:

@Kris: I don't think that's what the threadmaker is trying to say, although that is what their suggestion could lead to. Eventually it could even lead to being forced to obtain a license to have children based on your family's health history. (aka eugenics)

on another note: I also think that alot of the time it's human compassion and selfishness that drives this movement of the able helping the disabled to survive. The child often doesn't get to have a choice ( and the 7 year old that had brain cancer and said she just wanted to live and die without surgery was ridiculed by the media because her paren't were honest, told her what the surgeries were and how many she'd need and she chose to live and play while she could...)

so the parents selfishness and love for their child often drives the to choose a life of struggle and multiple painful surgeries because they want to be with their child.

I'm not saying that they "should die" or that they should live... I'm just saying that it's a personal choice, a choice that a parent has to make for their baby, and i think it's often very different when you have a baby with a disability or illness because genetically the human parent is meant to protect and ensure the survival of the predecessor.

Originally Posted by Miach

i was born three months premature, i was supposed to die. i'm not suffering. not suffering at all.

kthx

omg you too???? to anyone who cares, i was born 3 months premature, and would have died if not for all the modern medicine and machines and all that. therefor, i am very grateful to modern medicine. i know i SHOULD have died, but i didn't. i needed heart surgery and all that, so personally i do not think that modern medicine is a waste. i'm not suffering either. i think it would have been cruel to just "put me out of my misery" frome the freakin' getgo when they didn't know if i would suffer in the future. just to save money. how is that right, in ANY way?

I'm still being misenterpreted. <_<

I'm talking about something LIFE-THREATENING THAT WILL KILL YOU VERY QUICKLY IF IT IS NOT FIXED.

Jesus, I'm not some fucking Nazi, people. I'm not all for this 'superior race' shit that seems to be pinned on my argument.

for anyone interested, Xrabbite and i made up. we're friends now. :P

explain again, please, pkero. why you want to kill babies with life threatening diseases. we can start this debate on a fresh foot.

@Kris: I agree with the law. But I think you're missing the point entirely and trying to make me sound like a Nazi or something. Personally think a person should take an IQ test before having a child. Some people would not make fit parents.That's how we get children named Bacardi and Tequila, how we have perfectly healthy babies dying because their idiot mother wasn't smart enough to take care of her child properly. It's nothing to do with genes really. Like Pkero said, I'm not for some super race or anything. I'm talking about people who serve no use to society, live in constan pain, and who put strain on their parents. That is just my view on top of her idea of people who are in immediate danger of dying and/or living a life of agonizing pain.

I personally think that some people are worth more than others, it doesn't mean that I want to kill everyone who is $250 and not $251. That just splitting hairs and being ridiculous. I mean the people who are worth -$50. Every parent dreams of having chldren, raising them to be good people and eventually watch them leave the nest and get married and have grandchildren and so forth. A person with a child they will have to take care of the rest of their life will put a lot of strain on them, and when they get older and can no longer take care of themselves what happens to that family? The parents get put in a home where they can't see their son/daughter and their child/adult offspring gets put in some sort of institution. Then no one is happy.


Also, for the record. I'm being eliteist and Pkero is being humane. So be mad at me, not her, lol.

Originally Posted by Pkero

I'm still being misenterpreted. <_<

I'm talking about something LIFE-THREATENING THAT WILL KILL YOU VERY QUICKLY IF IT IS NOT FIXED.

Jesus, I'm not some fucking Nazi, people. I'm not all for this 'superior race' shit that seems to be pinned on my argument.

I don't think anyone is trying to call you a Nazi. If you read back to what I wrote before, it says that what you're suggesting could basically lead to government's abuse of the power. The government has enough control over us as it is and they don't need any more. I do understand what you're trying to say, but it probably wouldn't stop at that.

Originally Posted by Pkero

I'm still being misenterpreted. <_<

I'm talking about something LIFE-THREATENING THAT WILL KILL YOU VERY QUICKLY IF IT IS NOT FIXED.

Jesus, I'm not some fucking Nazi, people. I'm not all for this 'superior race' shit that seems to be pinned on my argument.

:headdesk: *sigh* ok, first off, i never said you were. and i don't think you are for all the "superior race" shit. and, by the way, it would have killed me if it wasn't very quickly fixed. i just don't think that it would be very fair to just kill off all the poor little disabled kids. they deserve a chance at life. they deserve it just as much as anyone else. that is just my opinion, though.

i think we can say it over and over again without being fully heard and agreed with. maybe it's time to agree to disagree.

It's a good debate, but I think some people are taking this all very personally. I know it's a touchy subject, but we all need to take a step back and understand that everyone has a different opinion on this subject.

i agree. i also think that everyone has said what is going to be said, since now it's just turning into repeating the same thing over and over and everyone is getting frustrated.

I actually took the time to read everything. I don't know if I understand things differently, but I think what Pkero wanted to say is that a baby that would need constant monitoring even after some surgeries [which would exclude those who were prematurely born/with a small heart defect] and would basically spend a third of their life in the hospital, wouldn't really have a life like a human should, grow up, go out with friends, walk around, marry, have kids, become a healthy elder, have grandchildren, etc. so it would be more "humane" to prevent a life of fear, surgeries and pain-killers.

Being born with icthyosis in a family that can afford a decent place for a baby with such needs, the creams, the treatments, the lifestyle, it would be the parents choice. But if that same baby was born in a poor family that can't afford giving them the best out of their life, I think it would be cruel to let them live in constant pain.

Most of the time a heart defect can be fixed with a one-digit number of surgeries, usually 1 or 2. But if it's going to be as taxing on the family as Pkero said, I don't really see the point. Though, it's their family decision whether to keep on or euthanize after all anyway. They're the ones taking the responsability, not me.


Oh and I didn't see eugenics as part of this. It was more of a moral issue, though I admit it's late and I might have missed it.

babies should need constant monitoring anyway. every little dot on their skin is VERY IMPORTANT. the way they lay in a crib is VERY IMPORTANT. the way they cry is VERY IMPORTANT and needs to be monitored.

as i said before, when the child is three or four, ask them what they want to do. it's better than deciding what to do for them before they can speak.

Originally Posted by Pkero

I'm still being misenterpreted. <_<

I'm talking about something LIFE-THREATENING THAT WILL KILL YOU VERY QUICKLY IF IT IS NOT FIXED.

Jesus, I'm not some fucking Nazi, people. I'm not all for this 'superior race' shit that seems to be pinned on my argument.

The way you word it above, I don't agree with. However, I feel that maybe that's not quite what you mean. There are many things can be life-threatening and kill you quickly if not taken care of. However, many of those things, once fixed, won't cause many problems in their life other than maybe monitoring with more frequent check ups and medication, if that. Other things may leave them with a disability of some sort, but nothing so major that they are incapable of living a full and purposeful life. While still others may be left with major disabilities, but other abilities that enable them to contribute to society in a major way.

Maybe you mean things that will result in a life full of nothing but surgery after surgery, one illness to the next, in effect a life full of nothing but suffering and pain for the individual and the family around them. In those situations, I can understand where you're coming from, but can't actually say whether I would agree or not. It's a hard choice to make when it's your own child.

Originally Posted by Miach

babies should need constant monitoring anyway. every little dot on their skin is VERY IMPORTANT. the way they lay in a crib is VERY IMPORTANT. the way they cry is VERY IMPORTANT and needs to be monitored.

as i said before, when the child is three or four, ask them what they want to do. it's better than deciding what to do for them before they can speak.

I don't think asking a three or four year old child is a very wise thing to do. They don't have the capacity to even begin to make that type of decision at that age.

Beforehand I am sorry if this sounds angry or offencive.
But one should think in our modern civilization, that we wouldn't have to think like Adolf Hitler and would, instead of wanting them aborted beforehand, try and help those who have any kind of handicap.
Actually we have lots of way to help and take care of them, so I don't see why they should die.
Also if you have some kind of handicap, mostly it's not something the children inherit, since it's only stuff like Diabetes, Cancer and Alzheimer who are in that dangerzone, this excuse with the bad genes is old fashioned and plain stupid.

Originally Posted by Miach

babies should need constant monitoring anyway. every little dot on their skin is VERY IMPORTANT. the way they lay in a crib is VERY IMPORTANT. the way they cry is VERY IMPORTANT and needs to be monitored.

as i said before, when the child is three or four, ask them what they want to do. it's better than deciding what to do for them before they can speak.

Of course, but will you, as a mother, have to do that every single day for the rest of your life cause your child has a special condition that puts him/her under constant pain and frustration and could kill him/her any second? What if you die? Who will do that for your son/daughter?

And I don't think 3/4-year-olds can make a real decision and say "I want to die, mom!" o__o

Originally Posted by Kah Hilzin-Ec

Of course, but will you, as a mother, have to do that every single day for the rest of your life cause your child has a special condition that puts him/her under constant pain and frustration and could kill him/her any second? What if you die? Who will do that for your son/daughter?

And I don't think 3/4-year-olds can make a real decision and say "I want to die, mom!" o__o

that's something you decide on before you even become a parent. when you take on being a parent you're taking on EVERYTHING and ANYTHING that could possibly happen to your child. you have aunts, uncles, god parents, etc. before you die, you have to arrange all of that. it's your job as a parent.

it's better than killing an infant that has no choice. at least there would be some consent involved.

Originally Posted by Kah Hilzin-Ec

Of course, but will you, as a mother, have to do that every single day for the rest of your life cause your child has a special condition that puts him/her under constant pain and frustration and could kill him/her any second? What if you die? Who will do that for your son/daughter?

And I don't think 3/4-year-olds can make a real decision and say "I want to die, mom!" o__o

Being a mother myself, I can honestly say that I would. If I died, I know for a fact that her dad, his sister, and his parents would do the same thing I would. I do agree that most children that young really don't have the capacity to make a decision like that. Most of them don't even fully understand what death is. There have been children at around 7 or 8 that have asked to be let go though. The fact is, this society doesn't euthanize people like that. Letting a disease take someone and euthanizing them are two different matters.

Also, eugenics came in because someone was talking about destroying bad genes to better the human race.

Originally Posted by Miach

it's better than killing an infant that has no choice. at least there would be some consent involved.

As a parent you have to make all sorts of choices for your children. It's hard to find a child that likes to eat Brussel sprouts, or any other vegetable for example. You choose how they live. So that argument doesn't really convince me.

Originally Posted by PhantomLolita

Being a mother myself, I can honestly say that I would. If I died, I know for a fact that her dad, his sister, and his parents would do the same thing I would.

Well, that would be your decision. You feel you can stand it. But not all can. Nobody plans to have a kid with cancer for example. That's why they have to make the decision, whether they can give them a full life or they would only be giving the kid more time to suffer.

Originally Posted by PhantomLolita

I do agree that most children that young really don't have the capacity to make a decision like that. Most of them don't even fully understand what death is. There have been children at around 7 or 8 that have asked to be let go though. The fact is, this society doesn't euthanize people like that. Letting a disease take someone and euthanizing them are two different matters.

Of course they're different. With Euthanasia they don't feel any pain.

Originally Posted by Kah Hilzin-Ec

As a parent you have to make all sorts of choices for your children. It's hard to find a child that likes to eat Brussel sprouts, or any other vegetable for example. You choose how they live. So that argument doesn't really convince me.

the point i'm trying to get across is that there is no parent that would ask for their child to die. you would have to forcibly take the treatment away. and obviously the infant doesn't get to choose, nor does the parent. i'm not saying ask the kid if they want to die. i'm saying ask them if they want their next surgery or their next round of chemo.