killing disabled newborns is acceptable

No, she said that after it is born, after it is taken home, it is a child. It's a poorly constructed sentence, and you could claim it is unclear what its status is between those two events. But she clarifies this:

So how do you interpret the quote just above? You take some akward sentence, take its worst possible meaning (a ridiculous one at that), and then claim I'm the one spinning.

 

Back to the OP.

Why is it that we want to keep grand parents alive in comas to see their grandkids, but we easily forget that someone wants to kill the grandkids?

Killing babies is just wrong . . . changing the topic does not make sense to me.

 

You seem to be avoiding the question I asked. Would you be willing to actively kill such a person?

This has nothing to do with pleasing me. Red herring. I said nothing about pleasing me. This has to do with whether it is biblical or not.

 

If you want to post a new OP . . . go for it.

Children being murdered is the topic that you continue to move away from . . .

Personally, I state again that I am against murderers killing infants and or embryos . . .

 

Boxer stated that she is against the law preventing partial-birth abortion.

. . . .

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031021-112742-9765r.htm

 

So you are retracting this lie?

 

You keep posting that sentence as proof of your claim even though it is nothing more than a poor choice of words. Hint: "when you bring your baby home, it is a person" means "by the time you bring your baby home, it is a person". It is not the same as "before you bring your baby home, it is not a person".

This is made clearer when you read the whole interview, but why bother when you can just claim that she supports the killing of babies.

 

My post had her comment that she was against banning partial birth ...

 

Revmitchell should run for political office, he sure sounds like a politician. You have repeatedly as him to admit his mistake and he continues to evade the question.

 

Her mistake was to believe that murdering God's life was politically correct . . .

The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away . . .

He gave her life and she squandered it . . . When He asks 'why?', I gotta wonder if she will get it . . . then.

 

It is a fine line.

Many times, ceasing to take in nutrition is simply part of the dying process for people.
I remember two cases that disturbed me. One because the woman was starved, the second because she was fed.

Case one: T. Shchiavo. I think most here are aware of that full story. I believe that it was very wrong. Also, if one is going to employ that method to bring about death, go full force and go for a quick euthenasia. It was wrong in any case IMO, but it was more wrong to pretend it wasn't what it was. Lethal injection would have been more humane.

Case two: I was caring for an elderly woman with alzheimer's. She was in the beginning stages and put into a care facility. She did not want to be there and refused attempts to care for her. Occasionally we could get her to take in liquid meals, but only enough to keep her alive and walking around saying "I want to go home". Eventually she became ill with a bug and the dying process began.

I've seen it a number of times. They stop eating, and it's normal and natural and part of the process.

In this case, she went down to two, maybe three more days before death. Some idiot had her taken to the hospital and given an IV and liquid nutrition because she was "dehydrated". WELL DUH

This lady who had been dying peacefully began to suffer and writhe about in the bed as her dying body struggled to work with what they'd put in her. Instead of two-three days, she lived another week, and for the first few days after the hospital visit you could tell she was very uncomfortable.


EVERY case has to be looked at individually. Nobody can say euthanasia is never over, or that it is always ok.

I believe there's a time for it.
I believe those times are extremely rare.

But they do exist.

I've watched some horrible lives, horrible deaths, and can only pray that someone would euthanize me in the same situations. I think the worst was a man with a certain type of cancer. He felt on fire, his body was rotting on the bed in pus and blood. For almost two weeks I heard that man's screams and just typing this I can see his face and hear him screaming for his mamma and begging me to help him die, his knuckles white every time I came in there as he clung to the siderails of the bed panting. There was absolutely no question of him living, it was only a matter of time how many days of torture until then.

Emotional appeal? Sure. Reality IS an emotional appeal. If you can't take reality into consideration when coming up with an idea, step away from having ideas because you're dangerous!

 

I too have watched science and technology extend suffering and horror for years beyond what would have been possible just 20 years ago.