|
|
Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis. |
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
|
Thread Tools |
blue |
"The main benefit of the height and weight reduction is that Ashley can be moved considerably more often, which is extremely beneficial to her health and well being. Currently, one person can carry Ashley, versus requiring two people or a hoisting harness and ropes, should she have grown larger. As a result, Ashley can continue to delight in being held in our arms and will be moved and taken on trips more frequently and will have more exposure to activities and social gatherings (for example, in the family room, backyard, swing, walks, bathtub, etc.) instead of lying down in her bed staring at TV (or the ceiling) all day long. In addition, the increase in Ashley’s movement results in better blood circulation, GI functioning (including digestion, passing gas), stretching, and motion of her joints." "Recently, a doctor suggested that Ashley will be less prone to infections as a result of her smaller size. Bedridden individuals are more susceptible to potentially fatal infections. Both the reduction in size in itself, and the increased movement and resulting blood circulation are expected to reduce the occurrence and magnitude of such infections including: 1- Skin sores: larger body weight leads to pressure skin ulceration or bed sores, providing an inlet for deadly bacterial infections (another way to look at this is that adults are more susceptible to bed sores than children). 2- Pneumonia: increased body weight increases the pressure on the chest and reduces the lungs’ ability to expand, causing fluid build up in the lungs that increases the chance for pneumonia and breathing complications. 3- Bladder infection: similarly, increased body weight causes increased pressure on the bladder outlet, resulting in urinary retention and an increased risk for bladder infections." And those are the benefits that only cover the growth attenuation aspect of it. You can whine and insult all you want, but don't pretend like there aren't any benefits to this girl. The real question is whether those benefits are appropriate in light of ethical considerations. This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it. |
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. I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body? |
I was speaking idiomatically. |
Either way, killing an animal is completely different from killing a human, no matter what kind of vegetate state they are in. You do realize this, don't you? Or would you eat human meat? EDIT: I just realized that all this discussion is off-topic. This topic isn't about euthanasia, it's about surgery to keep her childlike. I will totally stop now. What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now? |
blue |
Also, you're right about the article not mentioning pain. Besides the pain of recovering from the surgeries (which is short-term), the girl is fairly healthy--and when she IS in pain, she is able to communicate it. The whole point of the surgeries was to alleviate future pain, so the argument of why one should keep her alive when she is in such pain... Well, it doesn't make sense. I was impressed by some of your other points, as well, but you communicated them well. I'll leave them be. Most amazing jew boots
Last edited by blue; Jan 7, 2007 at 02:12 AM.
|
blue |
Fixing right now! What, you don't want my bikini-clad body? |
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. 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?
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. No offense, RR, but this is the most retarded shit you've ever said. Jam it back in, in the dark.
Last edited by Bradylama; Jan 7, 2007 at 10:59 AM.
|
And since we're talking about a specific operation which I very much doubt any tax money went into, it is really not the issue here.
If I was one of her parents, I don't know to what extend I would choose to keep her alive just because it's medically possible (there IS a point at which I would rather let someone pass on than keep them alive just to extend their suffering), but nothing I've read about this case suggests that she's in constant pain or that she is especially unhappy. And hey, they're also raising two healthy kids. That's a contribution to all our pensions, right there! There's nowhere I can't reach. |
The same thing was essentially happening during the Schiavo case. So long as Terri Schiavo was alive, the American public was poorer one more hospital bed, as were other terminally or severely ill patients. This was why evangelical interests who wanted to keep Schiavo alive even with their own money acted poorly, because they were artificially witholding resources dedicated to keeping Schiavo alive from actual "people" who needed it. This girl, of course, doesn't need complicated machinery in order to live, and so long as the parents keep her alive, she's only a drain on them and her siblings (who may or may not be living on their own I dunno). Most amazing jew boots |
This is quite surreal since this is like my cousin.
My then 21 year old aunt was involved in a horrible accident while she was 6-7 months pregnant with her first husband driving. Lets just say the husband ended up being paraquadlegic and the baby born with a brain of a 6 months old eternally. She lived to be trying to mend things herself but that year long nightmare ended pretty soon when she divorced him (his resquest) and gave up the child to the inititution. That child died at 17 with the brain still as a 6 months old. Sad... real sad. I'm not sure how she die exactly, but if surgery helps to make it better and lengthen her life... I'm not sure how the parents can wager that she'll live long enough despite of how unpredictable her brain can be or even the fact that the parents themselves will be fully capable to take care of her til the day she die years after them. I'm not saying the inititution is a better alternative, I'm not asking if they're good parents for doing what they're doing, I'm not asking how long she's capable of living or THEY to live... its just too unpredictable to assume the best of things even with the best intentions. I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body? |
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.
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. I was speaking idiomatically. |
Ultimately, however, it's up to the body public. If "society" thinks that the girl should be kept alive, then it would be politicized to the point where all nay-saying is cowed into submission by police power (taxation).
What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now? |
I think it's absolutely ridiculous that this instance exists as long as a single woman or child still gets abused within this country, but then I value human life more than animal life. Of course, when an animal gets taken away from its owner, the animal rights society tries to pass it on to a new owner. That couldn't happen in this case, I imagine. FELIPE NO |
Around here we have something called the SPCA which as far as I know is a non-profit organization that essentially does the same thing. How much government funding they receive, I couldn't possibly tell you. Also, if the Animal Planet channel is to be believed, some states and municipalities have "animal police" that respond to reports of animal cruelty, or the negligent treatment of exotic animals. I don't really watch Animal Planet that much, so I couldn't even tell you if they have any actual police power.
I'd also like to point out that animal cruelty isn't really what I was talking about, but it is pretty poignant. What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
Last edited by Bradylama; Jan 7, 2007 at 03:29 PM.
|