Angus Reid finds that 41% of people believe that murder is a socially acceptable means of dealing with the problems life throws at us and those who depend on us.
Naturally, a strongly principled Liberal supporter desperately calls for some policy...any policy.
* Gallup Review Compares Support for Capital Punishment Among Countries - An examination of recent Gallup surveys in the United States, Great Britain, and Canada found that Americans are more supportive of the death penalty than are either Britons or Canadians. An October 2005 poll of Americans measured support for the death penalty at 64%, a figure that was significantly higher than the 44% support measured in Canada and the 49% support found in Great Britain during December 2005 polls. Support for the death penalty recently declined in both Great Britain and Canada, but remained the same in the U.S. as in 2003. (Nevertheless, American support for the death penalty is equal to its lowest level in 27 years.) In all three nations, support for capital punishment was lowest among those who were 18-29 years old. (Gallup Poll press release, "Death Penalty Gets Less Support From Britons, Canadians Than Americans," February 20, 2006).
I can't wait for SteveV's endorsement of capital punishment for the truly useless in society.
Please don't link to me. Now I have to clean up my blog after all your riff raff visits.
Such an unhappy, bitter thing? Why?
Remarkable(sarc)...the guy who claims to speak for us complains when he hears our opinions????
I support people's right to select baby murder, senior murder, and termination of suffering murder as a solution to problems, provided they're willing to call it that.
If you feel it's morally wrong, don't do it yourself.
I take issue with people telling me what I can't with my own body because of their religious beliefs. If I want to end my own life, that's my decision. It may be a stupid one, but I should have the ability to make that decision myself. Provided it's not done in haste, or by coercion, I'm okay with people making that decision on their own.
I also take issue with the extreme measures that are used to keep some people alive, measures we wouldn't take for our pets, because it would be inhumane to put them through that level of suffering.
If you're so freaked out by people dying, go to the third world & save all the people dying there, and leave me alone. I hear Haiti is a great spot right now.
These stories are a joke because they don't explain the role that media brainwashing takes in forming public opinion on issues.
I take issue with people telling me what I can't with my own body because of their religious beliefs. If I want to end my own life, that's my decision.
Fine with me, but if someone helps you it's still murder.
Adune, my religious beliefs allow you to have your freedoms.
It's a power construct. We can kill the sick because they won't fight back. What "brave" people we are!
-- Edited by lance --
Sorry, Joe. Let's try and keep this one on topic. Check out Vit's excellent Reader Tips threads as they are there for you to give everyone a heads up on what you think is important.
Cheers,
lance
Don't know this Steve V character on the 'Far and Wide' blog. Judging from his response to a couple of well-reasoned posts opposing his suggestion, I don't want to know him. Rather than respond to the points made, he simply responds that the posters are "irrational" and a "waste of time".
Typical liberal inability to argue on logic, and instead resorts to emotion and personal attacks.
" 41% of people believe that murder is a socially acceptable means of dealing with the problems.."
I don't like abortion or assisted suicide but I do think we should be able to kill people who bother us. I'm pretty sure with the right lawyer The Charter would agree too.
Why would 59% of Canadians be against captial punishment for murders, etc. when every year thousands of innoncent babies are murdered and not a word.....
While in Mexico at a bullfight many Canadians are so shocked at the cruelty to the poor bull...these are the same people who know that thousands of unborn children are killed each year and they dont say a word...
Here is a word for these misguided people....get your priorties straight....bulls veres babies...murderers verus babies. They are truly blind and becasue of their ignorance they will follow anything and anybody...natural selection, I guess...
Who the heck is "Steve V" ????
Stop the world, I want to get off!
Provided it's not done in haste, or by coercion, I'm okay with people making that decision on their own.
~Adune
So?
Why should you put shackles on people who are OK making their own decision to end your life, Adune.
Really, if it's OK for them it's OK with me.
Abortion and euthanasia haven't been put to a vote, why should killing you, Adune, be any different?
Of course you get a say in it, if you have a gun handy.
I guess you don't see the big picture about why such things as abortion and euthanasia destabilize society in general and threaten the security of us all.
Did you know that Hitler's T-4 Program(Abortion, Sterilization, and Euthanasia) provided the recruitment pool for staffing his Death Camps?
Yup, the euthanasia aspect started out with the terminally ill and incurably insane, which they propagandized as "Useless Mouths" because there was a shortage of food brought on by the Great Depression(similar to what our own Great Recession will become) and economically punishing Versailles Treaty(which had an economic impact similar to what Cap and Trade will have), and then the T-4 Program began to just euthanize people who were simply diagnosed as insane by Doctors.
"What?" "You disagree with Herr Hitler's policies?" "You must be INSANE!"
(next stop, a "Holiday Camp" known as Belsen)
Regardless of one's opinion on the subject, I can't imagine a political adviser who would be sufficiently desperate or stupid as to urge their party to get into this issue. Perhaps it would be better to talk about the economy or job creation. I realize those topics are hopelessly mundane to the great liberal thinkers of our age, but voters seem interested.
Curious George is curious to know if every inmate that is on and passed thru death row was actually guilty.
remember when DNA evidence hit the streets and a schwack of prison inmates got sprung because it contradicted the flawed evidenciary and judicial system?
details details details.
Oh piss off,dying with dignity already exists as anyone who has had a friend,family member,etc with a painfull late stage terminal illness knows.Keep the government out of my life ,or death.Fu*kin always amazed how the family pet can be put down to alleviate suffering but when some existing not to be talked about political BS talking points come to the fore .....
If I were on the way to becoming a vegetable I would like the choice to decide to live or die
I would not want the gov't to have a say over this, just as I would not want to have to ask permission to have childern
Kate, um, no. 41% support helping people die who want to. That's not murder because no one's rights are being violated. If you were half the Rand fan you claim to be, you'd understand this. ARC explains it best.
http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=9654
And what the Hell is an "unborn child"? You're either unborn OR a child. The latter is human and has rights while the former doesn't and thus can't be murdered, just terminated. Also, ARC/TAS.
Please promote this, Steve V, as I hope it will be a wedge, like Iggy on Canadian tax dollars paying for foreign abortions, that will finally force the Roman Catholic vote from the LPC forever. And remember to give the boot to LPC candidates in rural Canada who are house n*gger papists, too. You don't want them hurting party purity even from the backbenches.
BTW, the mainstream euthanasia movement makes it pretty clear that the government would be deciding who gets life-saving treatment and who should be allowed the privilege of being born not the "I'll decide how I die, on my own" view of euthanasia that the polled thought they were agreeing to. BTW, maybe you can give Peter Singer a job in the Liberal (Coalition?) government?
I have always wondered why Liberals/Progressives are so anti death penalty when they are so pro abortion.
I mean, what's the difference . . .both are state sanctioned ways to end life.
Ok a little off topic but
Geert Wilders is now on trial in the Netherlands for making a movie. Total publication ban and he is not allowed to bring in any witnesses to help his defense. This man could of been the next prim-minister.Instead facing two years in prison for freedom of speech. truly the end of freedom of speech, and no media is covering it.
Cytotoxic -- toxic, for sure -- Kate didn't post this comment. Check again.
"You're either unborn OR a child."
How ignorant can you get. Unborn and child are not mutually exclusive, otherwise why do over 100,000 women have abortions in Canada every year -- and over 1,000,000 a year in the U.S.A.?
If what is unborn isn't a child, a baby, a human being, why would they feel the need for an abortion? The second the sperm penetrates the ovum, there is a human being present in the woman's womb. Granted, it's a very tiny human being but it is a human being nonetheless.
That's a fact. That's Science 101. Read Bernard Nathanson sometime. He's an American doctor who, as a younger man, was strongly pro-choice and actually performed an abortion on a woman who had become pregnant by him. He gained national attention when he became a media darling by becoming one of the founding members of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, now known as NARAL Pro-Choice America. He worked with Betty Friedan and others for the legalization of abortion and helped usher in the Roe v Wade decision. He was also the director of the Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health (CRASH), New York's largest abortion clinic. Nathanson has written that he was responsible for more than 75,000 abortions throughout his pro-choice career.
With the advent of sophisticated imaging techniques, he realized that the "embryo," "zygot" whose humanity he had always denied was, in fact, a fascinating human being in the early stages of development.
Check out http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08072904.html where Dr. Nathanson exposes the lies of the American Pro-Abortion Movement, lies that you, Cytotoxic, seem to have swallowed hook, line, and sinker.
to Fred @7:45 - the difference is that conservatives tend to prefer ending the lives of those who have shown themselves unworthy of it by their actions (usually including ending the lives worthwhile citizens). The progressives prefer ending the lives of those who are an inconvenience or rely on the charity/goodwill of others (whether the others want the "inconvenience" removed or not in the euthanasia field) while those.
The two fields disagree on the power of education too: progressives want to try to reform criminals while disposing of those who are a blank slate, conservatives would rather try to educate those who are just coming into life and dispose of those who have failed the test too many times of whether someone is worthy to be in our society.
whoops, an extra "while those" at the end of the paragraph when I was debating whether to go for a second paragraph. Mea culpa.
I'm with Adune on this one 100%. It amazes me how some people are so convinced that a human life should be extended beyond all rational limits simply because we have the technology to keep pumping air through the lungs and/or painkillers to stupify a person into never-never land ad infinitum.
I watched my Dad die gasping for breath for hours on a hospital bed and I'm telling you, I ain't going that way! I can ease the suffering of my pets but not of myself or my wife should the need arise?? Screw that.
Looks like SteveV has performed blogger euthenasia, if you will, or if you prefer, assisted suicide on SDA bloggers comments on his site - he seems to have been busy "cleaning up his blog from all the riff raff" as he said he would.
Typical Liberal, wants no interference setting up the New World Order. The T4 program must be initiated.
There is nothing wrong with euthanasia or the death penalty, if it applies to the left wing progressives.
I say assisted euthanasia for all progressives that wish to end their miserable existence should be allowed. The death penalty should apply from now on to all Liberal Party members caught stealing from the Canadian people. This would include all forms of treason, as with multiculturalism and advocating the CHRC.
The Liberals have been throwing everything. Abortion...no bite. Prorogue lots of yipping but lose the arguement. Now this. I'm beginning to think that instead of trying to find a wedge issue, they would be better served by some naval gazing. Well that or try to find this base they think exists.
No offense or disresecpt catch22, but if your father died that way, in all likelihood thats how he wanted it. As greyburr has already commented "Oh piss off,dying with dignity already exists as anyone who has had a friend,family member,etc with a painfull late stage terminal illness knows.Keep the government out of my life"
Whether or not your given an injection, feeding tube or breathing equipment is removed a person will still gag and gasp for the last breath - it's a reflex - one can not hold their breath til they die even if they wanted to. Any death, short of having your head decapitated from your body, is a struggle for, or to, release the last breath-way - your gonna grasp and gasp and finally exhale that last shutter - no matter which way you go.
In a hospital or hospice setting they will literally give you as much pain killer as you want, yes, enough to kill you if you ask - no questions asked. The difference is you ask for the painkillers, not your family, nor does your doctor order an overdose without your consent.
I wholeheartedly agree with Oz who said "Yup, the euthanasia aspect started out with the terminally ill and incurably insane, which they propagandized as "Useless Mouths" because there was a shortage of food brought on by the Great Depression(similar to what our own Great Recession will become) and economically punishing Versailles Treaty(which had an economic impact similar to what Cap and Trade will have), and then the T-4 Program began to just euthanize people who were simply diagnosed as insane by Doctors.
"What?" "You disagree with Herr Hitler's policies?" "You must be INSANE!"
@batb,
Oops, it was lance. Oh well.
Calling the zygote a human being? Absurd! It's a frigging diploid cell like every other diploid cell in my body. And the fetus is not a human being any more than any other part of a woman's body like her kidneys and may be amputated as such. The fetus may approach human, but until it is unequivocally human it is no more entitled to human rights than a family pet. The true pro-life position recognizes the full sovereignty of an individual over his/her body and would not sacrifice the real life of a woman for the potential life that is a fetus.
We are one his blog
messin' wit his comments section...
(p.s. who is he? Oh, who cares.)
(p.p.s. - No-One is right, they already administer lethal doses of painkillers. That's as much as they can do and maybe then some. If you want to die you should do it yourself. That's not what doctors are for.)
(p.p.p.s. - Mr. toxic, I believe you are about to be euthanized. By batb. It will hurt.)
Anyone who thinks that euthanasia isn’t common in Canada is pretty naïve.
And maybe if those decisions are occurring between an individual and his/her caregivers, and not in the realm of public policy (or worse yet, internet blogs), that’s a good thing.
on...
Cytotoxic: "The fetus may approach human ..."
Back to school for you ... oh, wait. Our schools have drunk the same Koolaid you have.
If the fetus is not human, what does a pregnant woman have to worry about? What is she pregnant with? If she is pregnant with a non-human being or even a fetus "approaching" being human, why the need for an abortion? She should just let the non-human alone and everything will be fine, right?
That doesn't make sense; your logic is out to lunch.
"... the fetus is not a human being any more than any other part of a woman's body ..."
EXCUSE ME?
The fetus is NOT part of the woman's body. Believe me, I've got children and they are, first and foremost, individuals even in the womb and are definitely NOT my body or even "part" of my body. They're connected to me by an umbilical cord but they are completely separate from me. They have their own identity from conception, each with a unique combination of DNA from me and their father.
Can you say that a male child is "part of a woman's body?" A woman's body is fully female and when she carries a male child, he most certainly isn't part of her body. The same, however, can also be said of a female child: Her DNA takes from both the mother AND the father and, therefore, in no way "is part of [the] woman's body."
Your misinformed and unscientific opinion should be an embarrassment to you. I'm embarrassed for you.
Hey, Black Mamba, was I too hard on Cytotoxic?!! I didn't set out to kill him, honest, though I'd sure like to wipe out his whacko ideas on moms and babies.
What DO they teach in schools these days?
There should be separate laws for Liberal, progressives, the left or whatever you wish to call the mentally deficient politico's in our society.
Certainly abortion is morally wrong, but just think about no Jack Laytons, Warren Kensellas or Richard Warmans? The Left eats their own if you let them; they just want to drag us and our money into their delusional existence. The reason they hate guns so much is that they are afraid that they will stick it to their own head one night. Possibly one of their drugged out teens will do it for them. I say let them kill each other and their offspring all they wish, but leave the rest of us alone.
"...was I too hard on Cytotoxic?!!!"
No, I thought it went well.
"He that would live in peace and at ease
must not speak all he knows or all he sees."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Well Cytotoxic some would say that you were one egg your mother should have fried but not me. BTW that spew you left back there stinks to high heaven. A human zygote is fully human. Its stage of development does not determine its humanity. Years ago cattle producers experimented with bovine zygotes. They fertilized the eggs in vitro, implanted the result in the womb of rabbit and sent the rabbit to Australia. In Australia they removed the bovine zygotes from the rabbit and implanted them in the womb of a host cow and raised the resultant calf. According to your logic if they left the bovine zygotes in the rabbit the offspring would have been a rabbit.
It is no coincidence that the provinces with the highest average age most oppose euthanasia while the youngest most oppose capital punishment. They resist the measure more if it is most likely to happen to them.
I wonder how old Steve V is.
As it is the older people who most likely vote, I hope his campaign succeeds.
Would really like to know who this Stephen V. is, got a feeling he's either an abortionist or a liberal adviser or politician. Fact is; the right to die quickly becomes the duty to die, especially when liberals or socialists are running the show. It may be time for Christians, real Christians, to head for the catacombs.
DO NOT GO GENTLE INTO THAT GOOD NIGHT
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Dylan Thomas
p.s. euthanasia is the norm in Holland.
the scant reported scandal is it's being done to elderly and infirm who have NOT requested it or even consented beforehand.
google it.
details details details.
@batb: I am a 4th year university student in Microbiology. I understand this better than you. I'm also an Objectivist, so again I understand the issue better than you. Fetuses and embryos are not fully formed human beings, rather they are potential human beings, ergo they do not have the rights of fully formed human beings. That doesn't mean I condone the use of abortion in the final months of pregnancy, but that doesn't mean the law should be used to indulge mine or your moral dictates. The force of the state must only be used to prevent the violation of an individuals rights by another.
@Joe: Uhhh...you missed the target altogether. The term "Human Being" has a lot more to it than 46 chromosomes. By your standard, every cell in my body is a human being.
Apparently Cytotoxic is like a worm. Be self-propagates. How else to explain his belief a baby is like his kidney.
For the millionth time: it's not a baby!
At what precise moment does it become a baby, oh well-informed one? When it moves in the uterus? When its toes emerge? When the umbilical cord is snipped? When it's bar-mitzvahed?
Feel free to answer as a Microbiology student, or as an Objectivist, or just as someone very patronizing.
(Sorry, this is OT. I'll stop. The topic is Youth in Asia, people.)
What DO they teach in schools these days?
Posted by: batb at February 15, 2010 9:43 PM
Good question. Here is one answer:
John J. Dunphy, in his award winning essay, The Humanist (1983), illustrates this strategic focus, "The battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: A religion of humanity -- utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to carry humanist values into wherever they teach. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new -- the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism."
....
The first plank of the Humanist Manifesto states: "Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created." The second plank states: "Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process." Certainly, the public school system propagates the Humanist doctrine (clearly an atheistic "religion"), and thus, condemns the concept of God.
In spite of a certain, er, toxicity introduced to this thread, the real debate is not whether or not the unborn is human or not; the fundamental question is whether or not all humans have the protection of law or not. Both euthanasia and abortion are legal means to deprive certain humans of life who are deemed "unwanted" (or "unworthy") by other humans. The value of human life is directly related to the concept of origins.
cytotoxic
please mark the time when the zygote ceases to be a zygote and becomes a human or visa versa.
I believe in terms of cells , I am out numbered in my own body 10 to 1 by microbes. therefore my DNA is my marker.