Mother gives birth to a baby with Anencephaly.

[Orpheus]

I see no reason to keep this thing alive for terribly long.

 

 

 

It has no function of being able to tell it exists pretty much. Death will claim it soon enough anyway. That mother is downright insane though, thinking her impotent god will help her. I can understand her carrying it for nine months and wanting to keep it for as long as possible, but this is going to end in pain for her. This is an issue of morals though, and we still haven't defined "life" yet. It doesn't matter, the child won't live to do anything. All this so-called god is, is nothing more than a figment of someone's imagination that someone thinks they'll be protected by.

 

 

 

Still, do this for me, every one of you: Define life.

[WookieeMania12]

I see no reason to keep this thing alive for terribly long.

 

 

 

It has no function of being able to tell it exists pretty much. Death will claim it soon enough anyway. That mother is downright insane though, thinking her impotent god will help her. I can understand her carrying it for nine months and wanting to keep it for as long as possible, but this is going to end in pain for her. This is an issue of morals though, and we still haven't defined "life" yet. It doesn't matter, the child won't live to do anything. All this so-called god is, is nothing more than a figment of someone's imagination that someone thinks they'll be protected by.

 

 

 

Thats pretty moronic to say the mom's crazy just because she believes God will help her.

[Orpheus]

I see no reason to keep this thing alive for terribly long.

 

 

 

It has no function of being able to tell it exists pretty much. Death will claim it soon enough anyway. That mother is downright insane though, thinking her impotent god will help her. I can understand her carrying it for nine months and wanting to keep it for as long as possible, but this is going to end in pain for her. This is an issue of morals though, and we still haven't defined "life" yet. It doesn't matter, the child won't live to do anything. All this so-called god is, is nothing more than a figment of someone's imagination that someone thinks they'll be protected by.

 

 

 

Thats pretty moronic to say the mom's crazy just because she believes God will help her.

 

 

 

She can think what she wants, but it's going to be one hell of a slap in the face when she comes to the dark realization that her god won't help her. I'm not capitalizing god either because he's not important, that so-called religion is nothing more than a cult.

 

 

 

That being said, I still support what the churches do, namely charities for the less fortunate. I just criticize them for their beliefs.

 

 

 

I'll expand to those who say that we should kill those with disabilities(err, what is implied): I, have Aspergers, which is a mild form of autism, yet I function effectively in society, and am taking college classes and passing relatively well. Just because I have a disability, should I be exterminated?

[RSBDavid]

Think of the medical bills to keep it alive :shock:

[jemathonical]

Half the people in this topic are heartless.

[Riku3220]

Half the people in this topic are heartless.

 

Atleast we're not brainless :twss:

 

 

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[baalboy5]

Half the people in this topic are heartless.

 

Not heartless, just that they think too logical. They believe what is fact is what she should follow by.

 

HELLO, SHE A CHRISTIAN.

[SnWRifleman]

Kill it.

 

 

 

That went way too far..

 

 

 

Good thing the mom is giving the baby as much life as she can. I hope it can live a good life, even though she won't have a lot of advantages of the real world.

 

It will have NO advantages, it is completely senseless, it will never see, it will never think, it will never move by choice.

 

It CANNOT live a good life, since it cannot tell what happiness is, or sadness, or anger.

 

It might as well be a potato.

 

 

 

My sister is autistic and even though she is delayed in many things, its great seeing her alive and trying to live the best life she can. Anyone saying that we should kill developmentally delayed people just because they won't live much longer really makes me [bleep] pissed. It feels like nobody wants to give developmentally delayed people a chance and instead wants to "put them out of their misery".

 

You don't seem to get this so I'll put it in caps for you.

 

 

 

THIS BABY DOES NOT HAVE A CHANCE AT ANYTHING!!!

 

 

 

Your sister has feelings, emotions, and thoughts. This baby is just like a vegetable. I don't see why she is torturing herself with the illusion of the baby being "alive". The baby is breathing, and nothing more. She covered up the rest of his skull that is just like a flat balloon. It really is sad that she has convinced herself that the baby is "advanced" and is already able to sit up and coo. The baby is involuntarily doing those and has no idea he/she is doing it.

[SnWRifleman]

I see no reason to keep this thing alive for terribly long.

 

 

 

It has no function of being able to tell it exists pretty much. Death will claim it soon enough anyway. That mother is downright insane though, thinking her impotent god will help her. I can understand her carrying it for nine months and wanting to keep it for as long as possible, but this is going to end in pain for her. This is an issue of morals though, and we still haven't defined "life" yet. It doesn't matter, the child won't live to do anything. All this so-called god is, is nothing more than a figment of someone's imagination that someone thinks they'll be protected by.

 

 

 

Thats pretty moronic to say the mom's crazy just because she believes God will help her.

 

 

 

She can think what she wants, but it's going to be one hell of a slap in the face when she comes to the dark realization that her god won't help her. I'm not capitalizing god either because he's not important, that so-called religion is nothing more than a cult.

 

 

 

That being said, I still support what the churches do, namely charities for the less fortunate. I just criticize them for their beliefs.

 

 

 

I'll expand to those who say that we should kill those with disabilities(err, what is implied): I, have Aspergers, which is a mild form of autism, yet I function effectively in society, and am taking college classes and passing relatively well. Just because I have a disability, should I be exterminated?

 

 

 

I don't agree with you on the religion thing. BUT, you have a brain. The baby doesn't. YOU have emotions, the baby doesn't. YOU have a sense of what is going on in the world. THE BABY DOESN'T. The baby is nothing more than a shell, which is very sad a thing could happen. I don't understand why she still see's it capable of being able to function in society. I doubt it will live to become a year old, and if she does, it will be a miracle. I can only hope and pray she will get through the suffering once she finally sees that the baby is hopeless.

[fastortoise]

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed] kids while we are at it?

 

 

Yes.

 

I must say, you made me rage really hard at this. Congrats.

[SnWRifleman]

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed] kids while we are at it?

 

 

Yes.

 

I must say, you made me rage really hard at this. Congrats.

 

 

 

A mentally undeveloped child and an anencephalic child is different. The mentally undeveloped child has a BRAIN, and is CONSCIOUS, and ABLE TO FUNCTION AND MOVE. I don't support the euthanization of mentally undeveloped people, but if my baby was like that, I would put it down, maybe. It would be a hard decision to make, but in the end, it's best for the child. Especially since the child is not even as if it's living. It just moves involuntarily and doesn't even know it does. If it were alive or dead, it would basically feel the same for him. It's very sad.

[ArmadylArcher]

Can't argue with personal freedom; it's her choice not ours...she probably thinks our opinions are crap, and we already think hers are (the majority of us think she should not have kept her baby alive).

 

 

 

But I think if we have the freedom to state our opinions, then she has the freedom to state and make hers

[l0l0lpur34]

 

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed] kids while we are at it?

 

 

Yes.

 

Are you Hitler? You seem to support many of his policies.

[sohkmj1]

Think of the medical bills to keep it alive :shock:

 

:thumbup:

 

 

 

I am not going to retract my statement on the previous pages, but I will add on. My opinion has not changed, but I would like to add some points.

 

While I am neutral on whether the child should die or not, it is in fact inevitable for the child to die before she reaches a year old, unless "God" miraculously saves her.

 

If she does die in like the next month, then well, good for her. Put out of her misery.

 

She should die of natural causes like any other person deserves to die. It's not like the baby is going to cause you any harm... Okay well maybe your eyes. But she's not going to start a world war, crush the economy or legalize murder is she?

[Da_Latios]

This is stupid. Why keep alive a child who can't contribute to society, let alone think for itself?

 

 

 

Some people say "Oh, well, it's a life!". What do you think a life is? That because an organism can breathe, it is alive and worth caring so much for?

 

A life isn't really a life without emotion, or without thought. This baby isn't alive (yes, technically it is 'alive'). It can't feel anything.

 

 

 

People put so much emphasis on life and death like it's an extremely significant thing. Boo hoo someone died (please don't tell me I only don't care because I don't know anyone who's died; my grandfather was shot in the back of the head after digging his own grave, I saw a plane crash into a building, saw people burned to death in front of my eyes, and my grandmothers have cancer). It makes me rage when I see people go through so much just to try and give some insignificant person a few extra weeks of life in which they aren't going to do anything special anyway!

[obfuscator]

This is stupid. Why keep alive a child who can't contribute to society, let alone think for itself?

 

 

 

Some people say "Oh, well, it's a life!". What do you think a life is? That because an organism can breathe, it is alive and worth caring so much for?

 

A life isn't really a life without emotion, or without thought. This baby isn't alive (yes, technically it is 'alive'). It can't feel anything.

 

 

 

People put so much emphasis on life and death like it's a significant thing. It makes me rage when I see people go through so much just to try and give some insignificant person a few extra weeks of life in which they aren't going to do anything special anyway!

 

Does a murderer "do anything special"? There are many people who lead insignificant lives, making no difference to anyone whatsoever.

[Da_Latios]

Does a murderer "do anything special"?

 

It depends who he kills, really. If a person killed, say, the current Prime Minister, that would be a worry. But if a jobless junkie is killed, well, that's a bit more money the tax-payers get to keep, isn't it? Of course that's undone tenfold by the cost of sending the person to jail....

[IGoddessI]

If the baby has no consciousness then I don't see how it can be cruel even if it is for religious reasons, the baby obviously isn't suffering and if it were, certainly doesn't know so or feel it.

[obfuscator]

Does a murderer "do anything special"?

 

It depends who he kills, really. If a person killed, say, the current Prime Minister, that would be a worry. But if a jobless junkie is killed, well, that's a bit more money the tax-payers get to keep, isn't it? Of course that's undone tenfold by the cost of sending the person to jail....

 

 

 

So it's ok for a jobless junkie to be murdered?

[llcoolguy972]

Does a murderer "do anything special"?

 

It depends who he kills, really. If a person killed, say, the current Prime Minister, that would be a worry. But if a jobless junkie is killed, well, that's a bit more money the tax-payers get to keep, isn't it? Of course that's undone tenfold by the cost of sending the person to jail....

 

 

 

So it's ok for a jobless junkie to be murdered?

 

Quite frankly, yes. People need to realize that not all lives are equally valuable. Some lives are simply worth more than others and this baby's life is worthless. There's absolutely no way for it to contribute anything to society, so, logically, it should be euthanized.

[Seraphi]

 

If she does die in like the next month, then well, good for her. Put out of her misery.

 

 

Its not in any misery, since it can't feel anything ;)

[obfuscator]

Does a murderer "do anything special"?

 

It depends who he kills, really. If a person killed, say, the current Prime Minister, that would be a worry. But if a jobless junkie is killed, well, that's a bit more money the tax-payers get to keep, isn't it? Of course that's undone tenfold by the cost of sending the person to jail....

 

 

 

So it's ok for a jobless junkie to be murdered?

 

Quite frankly, yes. People need to realize that not all lives are equally valuable. Some lives are simply worth more than others and this baby's life is worthless. There's absolutely no way for it to contribute anything to society, so, logically, it should be euthanized.

 

 

 

Maybe not all animals are equally valuable, but I believe that humans are. I don't think we have the right to kill a human being regardless of what they may or may not be "worth".

[ThurinEthir]

 

Quite frankly, yes. People need to realize that not all lives are equally valuable. Some lives are simply worth more than others and this baby's life is worthless. There's absolutely no way for it to contribute anything to society, so, logically, it should be euthanized.

 

What does it take from society? If it contributes nothing, and takes nothing, there's no reason to keep it alive nor to kill it. And that would give the mother the final choice.

 

I suppose it does take some things. Time, from the doctors who are caring for it. Time that could be spent saving other lives, perhaps. Money? I haven't really read up on it, but I'm pretty sure the mother is supporting it by herself. I kind of doubt that money would go to any other use.

 

And really, chances are it'll be dead in a few weeks or months. After that it won't even have a chance of hurting anyone, not like it does now.

 

In her latest blog post, I love her comments about the "internet terrorists." Under demonic forces, definitely.

[llcoolguy972]

 

Quite frankly, yes. People need to realize that not all lives are equally valuable. Some lives are simply worth more than others and this baby's life is worthless. There's absolutely no way for it to contribute anything to society, so, logically, it should be euthanized.

 

What does it take from society? If it contributes nothing, and takes nothing, there's no reason to keep it alive nor to kill it. And that would give the mother the final choice.

 

I suppose it does take some things. Time, from the doctors who are caring for it. Time that could be spent saving other lives, perhaps. Money? I haven't really read up on it, but I'm pretty sure the mother is supporting it by herself. I kind of doubt that money would go to any other use.

 

And really, chances are it'll be dead in a few weeks or months. After that it won't even have a chance of hurting anyone, not like it does now.

 

In her latest blog post, I love her comments about the "internet terrorists." Under demonic forces, definitely.

 

But it doesn't take nothing, it takes resources from the doctors, the mother, the media, etc that would be used somewhere else. The child is impacting society in a negative way, which is all the more reason to euthanize it.

[WookieeMania12]

 

In her latest blog post, I love her comments about the "internet terrorists." Under demonic forces, definitely.

 

 

 

What else can you expect if people are posting that the baby should die? I'm glad the mother is sticking with her decision, at least she cares about her baby, even though it'll probably die.

 

 

 

But it doesn't take nothing, it takes resources from the doctors, the mother, the media, etc that would be used somewhere else. The child is impacting society in a negative way, which is all the more reason to euthanize it.

 

 

 

What do you mean by the baby "impacting society in a negative way"?