Old and Worn Out? Why Not Suicide?

Townhall.com ^ | January 2, 2012 | Ken Connor

[Tublecane]

I don’t know what you think I know, but I am knowledgeable enough to know that what I said about Schiavo, at least, is accurate. I think many on our side forgot the particulars as soon as it left the headlines, and all they remember is that one side wanted her to die and the other didn’t. Assuming that’s fair, well, I’m the type of conservative who thinks you don’t get your desired end by any means necessary, if for no other reason than I don’t want liberals to do the same. Who cares about the law, a woman’s life is at stake!” could easily turn into, “Who cares about constitutional rights, children’s lives are at stake!” as reason for abridging gun rights.

All I said about Gonzales was that it was an immigration issue and that the president and attorney general sent in stormtroopers. I don’t know how any of that could be misinformed.

[Tublecane]

She was not executed by the state.

[lentulusgracchus]

Most of my “liberal” friends see no problem with offing a Republican or two in the alleged interests of our country.

They're not there yet. The visionary Bill Ayers told us the number would be 25,000,000 (unaudited and uncorrected for "population inflation").

But that's okay, they'll get there, once Barky points out to them that the end of the rainbow, the achievement of all their dreams together and all their future happiness, lies just beyond that mountain of corpses.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

they'll get there, once Barky points out to them that the end of the rainbow, the achievement of all their dreams together and all their future happiness, lies just beyond that mountain of corpses.

Ayers underestimated. We're at 55 million dead babies, and still counting.

[ArGee]

Neither the governor nor the president have the power or responsibility to change that by fiat.

Starving someone to death isn't murder? Terri wasn't on "life support" she was just receiving her food through a tube. Feeding someone isn't "life support" in the same way giving them an artifical heart-beat or artificial respiration is. Everyone alive needs to eat.

Don’t play stupid.

I wasn't playing stupid. It's a perfectly valid argument technique called (I think) reducto ad absurdum. And you clearly got my point. The next-of-kin argument is the wrong argument. If you want to continue your "life support" argument, that may make sense. But the next-of-kin argument is simply foolish.

[lentulusgracchus]

No, different categories.

Bill Ayers was talking about all the conservatives and entrepreneurial Hank Reardon types who weren't going to come home from the forced-labor/reeducation camps.

He wasn't including abortions.