Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbe who wrote (15100)	11/17/1998 5:38:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I say unfortunately, because the word itself implies that the advocacy of "voluntary" suicide could easily slip over into the advocacy of "mercy killing", which does not involve consent. You are correct. The right to die might well turn into the duty to die -- a nightmarish thought that could very well become a reality, given today's money-hungry HMOs and their dominance of the "health care business". It remains to be seen whether the pro-life movement advocates would be as tough on the HMOs when this particular issue needs to be resolved. My gut says that they will weasel out of it. Dipy.

To: jbe who wrote (15100)	11/17/1998 5:39:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>>> In short, it confuses the issue. That did not happen by accident. It was the opponents of assisted suicide and patient consent that started using the word euthanasia as a FUD tactic. One that seems to have worked out well for them, since others are now using the word out of ignorance. Chaz

To: jbe who wrote (15100)	11/17/1998 6:25:00 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<"voluntary" suicide >> Sorry to nit pick but isn't all suicide voluntary? I think the word you want is assisted? Need to keep the idea of euthanasia and assisted suicide separate.

To: jbe who wrote (15100)	11/17/1998 9:05:00 PM
From: Big D	Respond to of 67261

jbe, Your clarification on the misunderstood use of "euthanasia" is as they say "The hounds are on the scent". The key word in your commentary is "slip" into advocacy. My point is that the same rationalization of advocating abortion can, in time, slip over into judging who should be permitted to live if their support is too burdensome to the system. This is not a hallow threat, just research the demographics of the aging population vis-a- vis the working population that must support them decades from now. Our present day "poor choicers" want to hide/ignore this on rushing problem. If they are young enough and smart enough to think about it, they would realize that's it's in their best interest to enlarge the working base to support them in their later years. Poetic justice just might boomerang on the "poor choice" crowd in the future.