Originally posted by no1marauderHave you read the Ralph Nader article in the "Interesting Material Terri Schiavo case" thread ?
Actually, I'm just setting the record straight. I "call you names" that are descriptions of your extreme beliefs; you distort people's positions to a ridiculous degree by calling them "lovers of death" because they don't agree with your religiously based positions on certain social issues. You also support the denial of rights to certain in ...[text shortened]... don't play such a hypocrite and act surprised that people consider you what you are: a fanatic.
Ralph Nader expressed thoughts which were also expressed by me. Is Ralph Nader a "right wing nutcase" or "a far-right idiot" or a "religious fanatic" ?
If we take a look at who George Felos is, the attorney who helped Michael Schiavo kill his wife, and you take a look at his book "Litigation as Spiritual Practise" you'll soon find out who the real religious nutcase is.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pfeiffer200503301030.asp
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeQuit spamming; I answered the Ralph Nader article in the thread you presented it in. The short answer is that his article was filled with inaccuracies and incorrect information, so if Ralph is basing his position on what is said in that article he was misinformed.
Have you read the Ralph Nader article in the "Interesting Material Terri Schiavo case" thread ?
Ralph Nader expressed thoughts which were also expressed by me. Is Ralph Nader a "right wing nutcase" or "a far-right idiot" or a "r ...[text shortened]... http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pfeiffer200503301030.asp
EDG said that Terri had a body without cognitive thought; you stated the "experts disagreed in this case". In the context of EDG's statement, you are completely incorrect: NO EXPERT said Terri had cognitive abilities.
I couldn't care less about Mr. Felos' religious beliefs or anyone else's so long as they do not try to change the law so that other people's personal decisions have to be in line with someone's religious beliefs that they do not share. The bottom line in this case is that you and the KellyJays of the world want to make it virtually impossible for anyone's wishes to end their existence if they go into a PVS to be honored. Most people don't have Living Wills and do what Terri did: they make their wishes known to those closest to them. Even if there was a Living Will in this case, your standards of evidence would preclude it from being honored if ONE Christian bioethicist with some medical training could be dredged up to dispute that the person was in a PVS i.e. "the experts would disagree". In effect, your proposed rules of evidence and law would render our right to end our existence in an irreversible PVS a legal nullity. I regard that as an extremist and fanatical religious position clearly at odds with the philosophy of natural rights and personal freedom that this country is based on.
7 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1: " ....... so if Ralph is basing his position on what is said in that article he was misinformed."
Quit spamming; I answered the Ralph Nader article in the thread you presented it in. The short answer is that his article was filled with inaccuracies and incorrect information, so if Ralph is basing his position on what is said ...[text shortened]... natural rights and personal freedom that this country is based on.
.... he was misinformed ..... well, that is quite a refreshing change from the usual accusations of being liars, far-right nutcases and being religious bigots, you throw in your opponents faces.
By the way ...... didn't Ralph Nader wrote that article himself, maybe together with the author of that award winning book "Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America", Wesley J. Smith ? ...... no that was that other article:
Ralph Nader article: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0328-24.htm
Then how can you claim " ...... if Ralph is basing his position on what is said in that article he was misinformed."
You are again mixing things up No1. You are really confusing.
Please answer these questions in the relevant thread ( "Interesting Schiavo material" thread ) We don't want to troll, now do we ?
EDIT:
To: National Desk
Contact: Ralph Nader, 202-387-8034; Wesley Smith, 510-886-8609
WASHINGTON, March 24 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader and Wesley J. Smith, author of the award winning book "Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America" call upon the Florida Courts, Governor Jeb Bush and concerned citizens to take any legal action available to let Terri Schiavo live.
"A profound injustice is being inflicted on Terri Schiavo," Nader and Smith asserted today. "Worse, this slow death by dehydration is being imposed upon her under the color of law, in proceedings in which every benefit of the doubt-and there are many doubts in this case-has been given to her death, rather than her continued life."
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeI have never heard Ralph call people "lovers of death" or part of the "Culture of Death", so his views on this specific matter are different from yours and KellyJay's (you of course know that Ralph is a strong proponent of a woman's right to choose regarding abortion). The statements in the article are mostly factually incorrect; I said if Ralph was basing his opinion on that information he is misinformed. The article cites a joint statement Ralph signed with a far out "Culture of Death" zealot like yourself; that is rather strange company for Ralph to be in. The statement has been cited on right wing websites, but I have not been able to find a statement solely by Ralph on the usual websites he uses (I should know them; I voted for Ralph for President three times!!!). Again, if the article is a synoposis of what Ralph based his opinion on it is riddled with inaccuracies and therefore, he is making his call based on mis- or disinformation.
No1: " ....... so if Ralph is basing his position on what is said in that article he was misinformed."
.... he was misinformed ..... well, that is quite a refreshing change from the usual accusations of being liars, far-right nutcas ...[text shortened]... een given to her death, rather than her continued life."
EDIT: Correction there is an article on several of Ralph's public interest websites written by Ralph alone and reprinted at length in the other thread. Ralph has the facts and the law wrong; but he has not stated that people who hold a contrary view "love death" or are part of the "Culture of Death". Therefore, his position is not based on the same ideological underpinnings as yours and KellyJay. And hey, the guy can be wrong for a change, can't he??
Originally posted by no1marauder
I have never heard Ralph call people "lovers of death" or part of the "Culture of Death", so his views on this specific matter are different from yours and KellyJay's (you of course know that Ralph is a strong proponent of a woman's right to choose regarding abortion). The statements in the article are mostly factually incorrect; I said if ...[text shortened]... riddled with inaccuracies and therefore, he is making his call based on mis- or disinformation.
I wonder why good old Ralph made that statement together with Wesley J. Smith, author of the award winning book "Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America".
From your perspective Wesley J. Smith is "rather strange company for Ralph to be in".
Ralph is doing something what you and a lot of others should be doing as well: Updating his knowledge about current developments in the field of medical ethics in America and criticise these developments instead of swallowing everything presented to you by the Hemlock society and its members like that religious nutcase euthanasia attorney called George Felos.
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeApparently Wesley J. Smith and Ralph are old colleagues who have written four books together on matters having nothing to do with the "Culture of Death". http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=13&isFellow=true
I wonder why good old Ralph made that statement together with Wesley J. Smith, author of the award winning book "Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America".
From your perspective Wesley J. Smith is "rather strange ...[text shortened]... t religious nutcase euthanasia attorney called George Felos.
Too bad Wes strayed away from the important work of protecting consumers and workers from the wealthy sharks who run the American corporate system to wallow with fanatics like yourself railing against the imaginary "Culture of Death". Ralph should have independently examined the facts and law of the case rather than relying on someone who wrote a book condemning pro-choice advocates like Ralph as members of a "Culture of Death".
I've never read anything by the Hemlock Society or by George Felos so I am unable to "swallow everything" presented to me by them. I've made my position clear on these matters; my belief is in human freedom and natural rights, something which you and the KellyJays of the world wish to deny if they come into conflict with your religiously based beliefs.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1: "Too bad Wes strayed away from the important work of protecting consumers and workers from the wealthy sharks who run the American corporate system ...... "
Apparently Wesley J. Smith and Ralph are old colleagues who have written four books together on matters having nothing to do with the "Culture of Death". http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=13&is ...[text shortened]... ny if they come into conflict with your religiously based beliefs.
Apparently he didn't ..... he is still doing very important work for the consumers and workers, but you fail to see it.
No1: "I've never read anything by the Hemlock Society or by George Felos so I am unable to "swallow everything" presented to me by them."
What a naive statement ! You are swallowing more than you'll ever know.
No1: "...... wish to deny if they come into conflict with your religiously based beliefs."
You know no1, my stances towards this New Ideology developed before I converted to Roman Catholicism. My ideas regarding the new Culture of Death are not based on religion but on studying the ideology of the Third Reich and its advocates. THEY were the fanatics NOT their opponents.
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou did a fine job of selectively quoting every single word of my second paragraph except the part where it expressed my belief system, which you are perfectly aware of. This is why I call you a liar, Ivanhoe; I never quote you out of context and misrepresent your views. You are far closer to Nazi ideals then I'll ever be; the Nazis believed in the predominance of the state over individuals (just like you do) while I believe in the Lockean ideal of natural rights and human freedom. Selectively quote this post to, Ivanhoe, but whether you converted to a particular religion last week or not is irrelevent; you still believe that your religious beliefs should be binding on others by law. That is anathema to the ideals of human freedom that my country was based on.
No1: "Too bad Wes strayed away from the important work of protecting consumers and workers from the wealthy sharks who run the American corporate system ...... "
Apparently he didn't ..... he is still doing very important work for the consumers and workers, but you fail to see it.
No1: "I've never read anything by the Hemlock Society or by George ...[text shortened]... e ideology of the Third Reich and its advocates. THEY were the fanatics NOT their opponents.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1, quoting is ALWAYS selective.
You did a fine job of selectively quoting every single word of my second paragraph except the part where it expressed my belief system, which you are perfectly aware of. This is why I call you a liar, Ivanhoe; I never quote you ...[text shortened]... thema to the ideals of human freedom that my country was based on.
I don't have to quote your beliefs since you've been repeating them like a broken record.
I know it is a pleasure for you to call your opponents a liar. So be it.
You never quote me out of context and you never misrepresent my views. *Blub blub*. I'm afraid I have to disagree. It is a mission impossible to correct all your "mistakes" and misrepresentations, no1.
For instance you claim I support military intervention in Syria in a conversation with Lucifershammer. Utter nonsense. You claim I support military intervention from strong countries to impose their will on small countries. Utter nonsense. You claim I believe in the predominance of the state over the individual. Utter nonsense.
It seems no1 that the labels you have in store for others firstly apply to yourself: you are a liar and you misrepresent your opponents ideas .... and not just mine. It is one of your tactics to try and crack your opponents using all kinds of namecalling and misrepresentations. Then, in case they explode, you turn to your audience and say: See, he is not trustworthy, a fanatic, etc etc. ... Are these usual lawyer tactics ? Well if they are, my trust in these people have gone down to a minimum. Very disingenuous tactics indeed.
You also accuse your opponents repeatedly of not being able to read. Again no1 please look in the mirror. Texts are for you a means to affirm your own existing prejudices.
You are one of those people who like to present American politics as "WE" against "THEM". Of course the "WE" are the good guys and the "THEY" are the bad guys.
You have noticed that the Presidential Candidate you voted for the last time, doesn't use that ridiculous dichotomy. It embarrasses you and guess what ? .... the insults and name calling start flying again over the forums.
I could go on and on about your shortcomings you project on others, but why should I ? It is a waste of time.
Originally posted by elvendreamgirlI shed a tear. Well said elven one.
Sometimes the ironies of life can be simple and yet overwhelming.
I have been watching all the press coverage of the death of Terri Schiavo and the impending death of the Pope. Schiavo was just a person like the rest of us. She was a young woman living her life when suddenly she was handed a death sentence by fate. For 15 years, her body was kept al ...[text shortened]... .
I wish that Terri Schiavo had had the same choice. I wish that everyone had the same choice.
It would be a wonderful world indeed if we were free of murder and hate and all that we must endure.
I admire you a lot. You seem to be interested in what we can be. That is really important. Especially on my "off" days.