Humanity is Finished

page: 1
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 07:55 PM
link   
This link here will break your heart and anyone that imagines that this is humane has a screw loose.

I think mankind is finished unless we stand up to these nutters than run our life.
How did we ever get in a position where we let them convince us that abnormal cruel behavour is actually humane.

Time to stop the madness.

www.dailymail.co.uk...




posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Money truly is the root of evil, unfortunately, our world is obsessed with it. A human life should be invaluable, instead there is a 'cost' associated with these babies. Sick.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   
This has been practiced since the beginning of time.

I'm not sure why anyone would object.

They are, as the article states, severely disabled.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
This is hypocrisy at its finest. They won't euthanize these babies in a humane and caring manner, but they'll withhold food and water, which takes way too long to kill them. Either way, the end result is the same. Why not own up to the practice of euthanasia, and do it quickly?

However, many children with abnormalities often surprise their doctors and parents with what they can acheive. I have to admit I'm torn on this issue. Once a child is born, I'd prefer to err on the side of life, and give them a chance.

Oh, but that's not cost-effective, is it?



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
This is hypocrisy at its finest. They won't euthanize these babies in a humane and caring manner, but they'll withhold food and water, which takes way too long to kill them. Either way, the end result is the same. Why not own up to the practice of euthanasia, and do it quickly?


Fully agree.


However, many children with abnormalities often surprise their doctors and parents with what they can acheive. I have to admit I'm torn on this issue. Once a child is born, I'd prefer to err on the side of life, and give them a chance.

Oh, but that's not cost-effective, is it?


I would tend to think that this only happens to the most severely impaired. At least, I truly hope that's the case. I think the reasoning may be that if they live long enough to have experiences/bonding with primary care givers, it would then be unethical/illegal, or at least unlikely for the parents to accept euthanasia.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:27 PM
link   
This happens because doctors are not allowed to euthanize in most countries. If they do they would most likely loose their jobs etc. Its sad, and shouldn't be happening but often there is probably not any other option. Until the world opens up to ideas of euthanasia for certain cases like these, this will continue to happen.

Edit - Most these babies - if kept alive would have to pretty much live in hospital, and if all of them were kept alive there would be no room in left in any neonatal wards.

My girlfriend is a Dr and has worked in many pediatric and neonatal wards, so I have heard lots of stories. It is quite disappointing when people constantly attack doctors - especially in situations like these. It honeslty must be one of the toughest jobs and so many people just take the access to hospitals and doctors for granted.
edit on 20-2-2013 by homeslice because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   
This is the most sickening thing I have ever read.

How is it legal. I am reading a CRIME. WITH MURDER. All named need to be in prison. All ministers in prison. Unless you believe in the death penalty.


MURDER the terminally ill. So you have cancer and must be tortured to death without fluids on top of what you're going through??? WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON!!!!!

And notice aside from the children, that they said, terminally ill AND elderly patients. OH, so you can decide, he's old, so lets deprive fluids. He's terminally ill, so lets deprive fluids. That baby is handicapped, so lets deprive fluids. You can legally sign papers to murder someone?????

That is not HEALTH CARE.

THAT IS MURDER.

I WANT THEM IN PRISON NOW!!!!



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Actually, allowing them to live would be quite immoral.



It just causes suffering to everyone involved.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by nomnom
 


I starred that as I believe that was irony.

Its going to take me some time to settle down from this, who in their right minds would allow this to continue in their country?



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


I trust you understand I'm not for the slow suffering of babies until their death, rather a swift, and painless euthanasia.

If you can't agree that this is the most moral thing to do, we are simply going to have to agree to disagree.

The above post to yours holds the answer. It's because euthanasia isn't allowed in some of these countries.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Make euthanasia legal and this wont happen. You cant just keep all these babies alive in hospital, there is not enough room, resources or doctors for that.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
I want to know from British members, why there are not massive protests in the streets and at the hospitals. Why?



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeslice
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Make euthanasia legal and this wont happen. You cant just keep all these babies alive in hospital, there is not enough room, resources or doctors for that.


Really? Always worked before. Build more, and hire more doctors. The more people, the more taxes, the more services.

Can't see your point.

What do you mean, make euthanasia legal? THIS IS EUTHANASIA. ITS MURDER.

Our hospitals arent overflowing, people down the ilses.

Our baby nursery, and I have seen it, is nicely populated, at times, under populated at other times, and fully staffed.

Nothing out of the ordinary.

Tax dollars AT WORK the way they should be.
edit on 20-2-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I don’t think I am getting the whole story from the article. It seems like they repeat certain things to invoke an emotional response from the reader.

It certainly seems horrible but it isn’t a balanced article in my opinion and I am reluctant to take a stance on the issue because I do not feel informed enough by this piece.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
I want to see the list of conditions that determine whether a baby stops receiving food and water. No where in that article did it mention even one specific disability or medical condition to justify this torture. Make no mistake this IS torture.

People scream "WAR CRIMINAL" and want elected leaders to stand trial for authorizing water to be poured over the face of a suspected terrorist (none of the 3 have any health problems from this), but a helpless newborn baby can be denied food and water until it dies over the course of a week or more.

This is why Government run health care is a problem. Two parents in the US were just sentenced to 80 years in prison for denying food and water to their son until he died. But a British Doctor does it and gets a pay check. The UK as a country refuses the death penalty for any crime whats-so-ever but authorizes this on it's most innocent citizens.

This is disgusting. I don't believe in Hell, but this is one of the few times I wish it did exist for the people who do this.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
Really? Always worked before. Build more, and hire more doctors. The more people, the more taxes, the more services.


Show me a single point in history where there have been enough resources in healthcare to meet your ridiculous ideal?


Can't see your point.


Because you don't live in reality.


What do you mean, make euthanasia legal? THIS IS EUTHANASIA. ITS MURDER.


No, it's not. You're only showing your ignorance here. Please refrain from telling these doctors they're murdering people. For shame. The parents are free to take the children home. They choose not to. Are you going to ask for the parents to be imprisoned as well?
edit on 20-2-2013 by nomnom because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:49 PM
link   
from the article;

"One doctor has admitted starving and dehydrating ten babies to death in the neonatal unit of one hospital alone."


this is a sad state of affairs. life has never been cheaper.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nomnom
 


We do it in Canada. In every country. There is no difference this year than 10 years ago? Except Demons are running things now?

Every been to a hospital. Are you claiming they are littering the hallways with patients?



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
In society suicide and euthanasia is acceptable however only in certain forms. Smoking is legal yet it kills however it does it over a period of time but it is completely acceptable. Doctor assisted is not acceptable the only difference seems to be the time frame. Society is strange.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by nomnom
 


We do it in Canada. In every country. There is no difference this year than 10 years ago? Except Demons are running things now?


Do what?


Every been to a hospital. Are you claiming they are littering the hallways with patients?


Yes. Yes, unless you have a lot of $$$ to afford a rich hospital.





new topics
 
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join