On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Larry Lyons <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >I think we need to get out of the business of protecting people from their > >own stupidity. > > > > >Here's a great way to save money. If you are on Medicare or Medicaid and > >you are being treated for illnesses secondary to smoking...tough shit. Ge > >beg the tobacco industry for help with your bills. > > > >When I was a medic, I cannot tell you how many medicare patients I took > care > >of who had emphysema who still smoked (and how many of them suffered > facial > >burns because they smoked while still having the oxygen cannula in their > >nose). > > > > BTW here's an interesting poster on the eugenics program of the 1930's in > germany > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/EnthanasiePropaganda.jpg > > Here's a translation of the text: > "This person suffering from hereditary defects costs the community 60,000 > Reichsmark during his lifetime. Fellow German, that is your money, too." > > What's the difference between what you advocate and what they were > advocating? > Disclaimer: I am not Scott :) a) There's a difference between someone who suffers from a hereditary "defect" (e.g. not their choice) versus somebody who willingly and knowingly does something that is detrimental to their health (e.g. smoking). b) I -really- believe that Scott's "thinning the herd" statement was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Not unlike saying, "The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" I'll also reiterate from a previous response... saying, "I don't want to pay for the consequences of somebody else's stupid and deliberate actions" is -not- the same as saying, "I want them all to die". Right now... sure. It's "A" or "B". Cause-and-effect (as you pointed out) states, "if not 'A' then 'B'". But we do often talk theoretically. Let's go back to the abortion example. I want to support a woman's right to choose, but I don't want babies to die. Or, since we can argue that a fetus is not a baby, I want to support a woman's right to choose, but I don't want to end a life". Me personally, I believe that once the little spermy thing fertilizes the egg, it's a life. Puts me in a difficult spot. I wish there was 'C' choice. But just because cause-and-effect dictate one-or-the-other, does not mean that by virtue of choosing one, that I am happy or that I -want- the alternative. By stating that I'm pro-choice, are you going to paint me with that same wide brush? Even if you don't... some would. Are they correct? Am I nazi-like? -- I have failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my life. I love my wife. And I wish you my kind of success. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:287499 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
