Originally posted by KazetNagorraLots wrong in this discussion.
Wow, you took all this out of a Daily Mail story? Tell us more about this UK government's programme to slaughter babies to save money yet apparently does not seem to bother the British people.
I spent a few days in an NHS cardiac ward last month, and was let out with stents after having my life saved free of charge. I was back on this site making a mess of some games in no time at all. I thought at the time how delighted I am every day not to be a victim of the US healthcare system, where my life would have depended on the quality of my insurance policy and the decisions about my treatment would be made by accountants.
My mother in law is in hospital right now after a serious heart attack (not a great month in our family!) which has caused considerable damage. Her son has been alongside her with a detailed , formal statement that she drew up and signed some time ago setting out her preferences for medical interventions and end of life care. At first the hopital accepted that her wish was to have no medical intervention beyond pain relief. Then after a day of observation, they quietly started to feed her and provide more care because they thought that she was capable of a good enough recovery. Not the slightest suggestion that her advanced age should make her less worth saving and treating. But also every respect given to her wishes, so far as they could be established.
People die and often they do that in hospitals. They can be of any age. It is a distraction to bring in the issue of euthenasia, which is not tolerated in the UK. Quite rightly, the health service has formal procedures for dealing with death and patients and the public are entitled to a considerable say in the matter. I have mentioned that my mother in law had a written statement available which the hospital respected and took into account in all their decisions.
The Liverpool Pathway - which operates in the hospitals I have been in so recently - is nothing more perverse than a formal set of guidelines for dealing with end of life care. The whole point of having guidelines is to make it more possible for everyone to contribute their opinions. It is perfectly in order for the Mail ( a right wing rag of course) or any other source to question anything in such guidelines that they wish to question - this is a democracy and the NHS is managed in a way that is open and accountable to the public. I wonder how true this is of the way American insurance companies determine the care they will pay for and the way American hospitals deal with patients lacking insurance cover.
Eventually, every society has a responsibility to debate openly and agree upon its attitudes to end of life care as to all health issues. People who become hysterical about such discussion need to grow up. Often dying is unpleasant and I think people are too insulated from the process to understand that it is often undignified and painful and distressing. Making it less distressing is something that has to be discussed and of course that is where it is so tiresome to run into the fanatics.
Originally posted by EladarAnd why should anyone care what you happen to think "God's instructions" are, when it comes to whether executing homosexuals for being homosexuals is "acceptable" to you?
I said one country at one time, Biblical times in Israel because those were God's instructions. No other time and in no other place would that be acceptable in my point of view. So what you are saying, as usual, is hog wash.
Originally posted by sasquatch672I've travelled quite widely in the former Communist bloc. You're right about the ugliness of much Communist architecture (compare the medieval old town in Tallinn, Estonia with its Soviet concrete suburbs); but in a sense that architectural utilitarianism is a postwar phenomenon the world over. I'm not sure that the former East Berlin's "squat, featureless, barely functional buildings" are much uglier than what the capitalist West threw up around the Breitscheidplatz, or indeed, the way in which the Potsdammer Platz has been rebuilt since reunification.
A trip to Hungary and East Berlin helped inform my views on socialism, communism, and atheism. Budapest has districts that were built during the era of Soviet rule, and the differences between those parts of the city and the parts that had been built when God was worshipped could not be more different. The Soviet-era Budapest had squat, featureless, b ...[text shortened]... absence (or more accurately, the rejection) of God was tangible. So too it was in East Berlin.
Also, the best examples of Soviet Architecture - the self-conscious neoclassicism of Karl-Marx-Allee which was the heart of East Berlin and of Nyezhavizhimosty Street in Minsk - have a grandeur of their own - arid, perhaps, but still impressive.
Originally posted by EladarBump for Eladar:
I said one country at one time, Biblical times in Israel because those were God's instructions. No other time and in no other place would that be acceptable in my point of view. So what you are saying, as usual, is hog wash.
And why should anyone care what you happen to think "God's instructions" are, when it comes to whether executing homosexuals for being homosexuals is "acceptable" to you?
Originally posted by FMFIf you are using this forum to come out of the closet FMF then we get it already. Sheesh!!!!
Bump for Eladar:
And why should anyone care what you happen to think "God's instructions" are, when it comes to whether executing homosexuals for being homosexuals is "acceptable" to you?
Originally posted by joe beyserEladar once said that he would have "no problem" if he lived in a country where the government executed homosexuals for being homosexuals. He's the only regular poster on this forum who has ever openly supported such a stance, as far as I know.
If you are using this forum to come out of the closet FMF then we get it already. Sheesh!!!!
Originally posted by FMFIt has nothing to do with being anything to me. It is to God.
And why should anyone care what you happen to think "God's instructions" are, when it comes to whether executing homosexuals for being homosexuals is "acceptable" to you?
You are simply a hypocrite who believes everyone should bow down to your worldview.
Originally posted by shavixmirIt has to do with the Socialization of Medical Care.
And what's this got to do with socialism?
If everyone is going to get medical care, then you have to make cuts. Care come down to using funds efficiently. Nothing more efficient than taking a tube out and letting a person starve to death.
Originally posted by EladarHow does thinking the government should not execute homosexuals for being homosexuals make me a "hypocrite"?
It has nothing to do with being anything to me. It is to God.
You are simply a hypocrite who believes everyone should bow down to your worldview.
Originally posted by KewpieLong thoughtful post that has nothing to do with the subject? Oh yes, the stories of babies and others being starved to death are not true. The nurses quoted simply lie. I've got anecdotal evidence to prove my point.
It doesn't surprise me one bit that the long, factual and thoughtful post at the top of this page has been ignored by all the barrow-pushers.