Severely retarded girl undergoes surgery to keep her in childlike state

Why do you want to control how people spend their money? =\/

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Bradylama

All of the major religions also regard souls as transcendental manifestations of the self that exist beyond physical boundaries. I.E., it's impossible to "eradicate" a soul, unless there's some kind of soul devouring monster or device. Assuming this girl does have a soul, killing her would free it from being trapped in a meaningless existence.

This is an interesting assumtion, though, because unless cycles of life and death operate based on reincarnation, the soul is considered to exist eternally aside from any supernatural intervention (pissed off god). Therefore, what difference is there in forty years compared to eternity? Aside from, of course, the potential for the negative development of the soul.

Don't some religions consider suffering as a necessary part of life and suicide as one of the worst offenses one can commit?

Those who can't contribute to society, such as this girl, also take on parasitic qualities when people determine their value. They act as resource drains without giving anything back either through wealth or the abstract.[/quote]

Apparently the parents get enjoyment out of her.

Also, any argument for why we shouldn't kill all pets? They're a resource drain on society as well.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

They do, but then what right do people have to dictate what one can or can't do with their life when the very nature of dualistic religions accepts the existence of free will? Calvanism is dead.

This also isn't a case where the girl can commit suicide. For all intents and purposes, she doesn't even understand that she exists. It's like pure instinct.

Why knocking the lack of free will? There's still some of us that believe in it.

I was using suicide as sort of a parallel to 'mercy killings' though I suppose I wasn't clear enough. If a religion doesn't want you to kill yourself or kill someone else, well, I can't really see where there's room to argue mercy killing is something the religion would endorse.

Quote:

Presuming that she has a soul, wouldn't forcing her to go through suffering negatively impact the development of whatever soul she may possess? Also, as a counter to the argument of divine interventionism, wherein God would make an exception for the extenuating circumstance and "improve" the soul, wouldn't killing her now achieve the same result?

Well, it would negatively impact the development of the soul unless you consider suffering as a way to build up the soul's strength. Maybe it's a way of atoning for past actions in prior lives or something.

Quote:

Are you trolling me? I've mentioned several times before that the girl provides value to her parents and family, my argument is that she has no intrinsic value society, and in the case that she would have to be taken care of by the state, it's unreasonable to demand that the general public keep her alive when she can never offer them anything.

If she provides value to her parents then isn't she providing value to society? Why shouldn't the happiness of her parents matter to the rest of society if they aren't affecting it in a negative way (Hell, you could probably argue she's benefiting society because of all the exotic treatments and products she requires. How many jobs is she providing that wouldn't be there otherwise?)?

Quote:

Pets aren't killed because we value their company, yet we also put them down in situations where we feel that they should be killed in order to end their inevitable suffering. It's inevitable that all people must suffer, but people are also capable of dealing with it and bouncing back. This girl is incapable of dealing with suffering, and never will be. It's best to just end her life now instead of forcing her through a life where all she can know is pain or comfort.

So keeping pets for company is alright because we put them down when it becomes too expensive to keep them alive? There's lots of medical techniques out there that could keep animals alive longer and in an alright condition, but since we obviously don't value a cat or dog as much as we value a human, we aren't willing to go to these extremes for them.

Hell, think about the level of money we're willing to put out on pets. Which animal do you think would be more likely to get an expensive treatment from an owner: Goldie the fish or Scrappy the puppy? Even within non-humans there's an obvious hierarchy.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.